Biden and Trump Repulse Voters as GOP Shows Signs of Becoming Normal Again
America’s experiment with strongman politics may turn out to be blessedly brief.

Is it possible to have buyers' regret on two presidents in a row? Americans seem to suffer just that when it comes to President Joe Biden and his predecessor, Donald Trump. Just as important, the Republican Party shows signs of moving on from its status in recent years as little more than Trump's cult of personality. Polls suggest that many Republicans appear ready to reclaim their party's status as a movement of ideas and policies rather than a personal vehicle.
"Roughly 7 in 10 Americans (71 percent) say they would not like to see Joe Biden run for president in 2024, while 24 percent say they would like to see him seek a second term" finds a Quinnipiac poll published July 20. "More than 6 in 10 Americans (64 percent) say they would not like to see Donald Trump run for president in 2024, while 32 percent say they would like to see him run."
"There's scant enthusiasm for a replay of either a Trump or Biden presidency. But while Trump still holds sway on his base, President Biden is underwater when it comes to support from his own party," observed Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Tim Malloy.
Of course, Americans as a whole don't pick standard-bearers for political parties, primary voters do. What's important here is that 54 percent of Democrats do not want the sitting president from their own party to run for reelection in 2024. Republicans are more enthusiastic about their once and, potentially, future leader, with only 27 percent opposing him running again. That said, when asked who they want to represent their party in the 2024 presidential race, many are willing to consider alternatives.
"Michigan GOP primary voters were asked if they would support Donald Trump or [Florida governor] Ron DeSantis to be the Republican candidate for President in 2024, with the results producing only a small modest lead for Donald Trump," according to a WDIV/Detroit News survey released this week. "45.2% said they'd vote for Trump, while 41.6% said they'd vote for DeSantis. 12.4% were undecided."
The Michigan numbers square with a June survey of New Hampshire Republicans.
"When provided with a list of Republicans who are thought by observers to be considering running for President in 2024, likely New Hampshire Republican primary voters (N=318) are split between DeSantis and Trump, with 39% preferring the Florida governor and 37% supporting the former president," note University of New Hampshire pollsters.
Unsurprisingly, Ron DeSantis strongly outpolls Trump in his home state of Florida, with 51 percent for the governor and 33 percent for the former president in a Victory Insights poll published this week.
Simultaneous eroding enthusiasm for both the current president and his predecessor (and rival) is remarkable in itself. Biden won office by defeating a controversial and mercurial cartoon-character of an opponent who delighted in making enemies. Trump is still under investigation for his role in the January 6 riot resulting from his loss. In the end, Biden led his party to victory in the contest for not only the White House, but the House of Representatives and (sort of) the Senate.
But the Democratic Party has continued to function as something resembling a normal political party, focused on policies and ideas, terrible though most of them are. Biden's bungling in office, his visible deterioration, high inflation, and general dissatisfaction with the state of the country has stripped away whatever goodwill he held when he entered office.
"A majority of 57% say that the actions of the federal government over the past six months have hurt their family when it comes to their most important concern," reported the Monmouth University Polling Institute earlier this month.
With the president's approval in the basement, it makes sense that Democrats would lose faith in their party's leader. Even before the latest numbers, 64 percent of Democrats wanted a candidate other than Biden to run for president in 2024, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll.
But the Republican Party functioned in recent years as an extension of Trump, not as a political party that picks and chooses among candidates based on policy preferences and tactical considerations.
"By double digits, 46%-27%, those surveyed say they would abandon the GOP and join the Trump party if the former president decided to create one," USA Today reported in February 2021, just one month after the Capitol riot by his disappointed supporters.
Quite clearly, Trump didn't represent the Republican Party; the party became a vehicle for the man himself, to be used or discarded as he saw fit. That's a classic cult of personality, and many loyalists remain committed. But Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis's viability in early polls suggests that's changing, and for good reason. Trump remains a deeply polarizing figure for whom many people will never vote.
"Democratic misgivings about Mr. Biden seemed to mostly melt away when presented with a choice between him and Mr. Trump: 92 percent of Democrats said they would stick with Mr. Biden," The New York Times noted, after reporting disillusion within his own party for the current president.
In contrast, while New Hampshire favored Biden over Trump by seven points in 2020, and the recent Granite State survey predicts a similar result in a rematch, it has DeSantis and Biden in a dead heat.
So far, DeSantis is the only real challenger to Trump in polls of Republican voters. But he got to this point by opposing the Biden administration on COVID-19 policy, immigration, and its efforts to define "misinformation." He's also been an effective culture warrior, battling Democrats and politicized corporations alike. That's not to say his causes are always good ones; the socially-conservative, red-meat flavor of much of his politics is tiresome for those of us who favor a hands-off government. But he's established a track record on performance and policy. At least some Republicans seem open to, once again, choosing candidates based on such factors instead of on personality.
"The share of Iowa Republicans who say they feel more allegiance to Trump than to the Republican Party has fallen from 26% in November 2021 to 21% today," the Des Moines Register reported this week. "Seventy percent now say they feel more allegiance to the Republican Party — up from 61% in 2021."
America's experiment with strongman politics may turn out to be blessedly brief. One way or another, we're likely to find out soon, since Trump says he's already decided whether to run again in 2024 and he'll tell us at his convenience. Then America will find out whether Republicans support a revived political party or a continuing cult of personality, and whether Democrats still have what it takes to battle either one.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Who the fuck writes these headlines?
Yeah, I know. Pathetic.
I made $30,030 in just 5 weeks working part-time right from my apartment. When I lost my last business I got tired right away and luckily I found this job online and with that I am able to start reaping lots right through my house. Anyone can achieve this top level career and make more money online by:-
.
Reading this article:>>>> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
I currently presently not at any point figured out like it’s far even conceivable yet one in everything about partner buddy made $27,000 best inside about a month essentially completing this smooth chance and (res-15) moreover she has provoked me to benefit. forward-thinking data on visiting following site.
.
>>>>>> https://brilliantfuture01.blogspot.com/
And who the fuck wants "normal" parties? They've had their chance.
Tuccille is a big "adults in the room" worshipper
‘Adults in the room’………
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/07/22/nolte-alleged-lee-zeldin-attacker-already-released-without-bail/
“The man accused of attacking Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) with a sharp weapon has already been released back into society.
Zeldin, the Republican nominee for governor, was campaigning in Perinton, New York, Thursday night when the suspect, identified as 43-year-old David G. Jakubonis, walked across the stage, stopped in front of Zeldin, and appeared to thrust a weapon towards Zeldin’s neck.
Zeldin blocked the first thrust. Then the suspect was tackled.
The man who tackled the alleged attacker, AMVETS National Director Joe Chenelly, described what happened to Fox News Digital.
“His fingers were like two finger holes in the blade and lunged at the congressman. And Congressman Zeldin blocked the first lunge. And then as he tried to lunge again, I grabbed him from behind and tackled him down to the ground and held him on the ground.”
Once the suspect was in custody and everything settled down, Zeldin finished his speech. Later, in a tweet, Zeldin said the alleged attacker told him “you’re done.” The Republican also predicted that due to New York’s insane bail laws, the suspect would be immediately released. “The attacker will likely be instantly released under NY’s laws,” he tweeted.”
The conversation must now turn to what we do about the democrats. They are no longer workable. They have to go. No democrat should be allowed to work in government anymore. Not if we want rule of law.
But we don't have a viable alternative party that supports the rule of law.
Nor do we have a political system designed to allow three or more parties to compete effectively. In a three way race the best that can be hoped for is for one to spoil one of the other two. Except for a very few die-hard fans, the American Presidency will always be about voters choosing the lesser of two evils. People hope and pray that in a 3-way race, the third party will align more closely with the party they oppose than the one they want to win. We will never have a parliamentary system or a real coalition of similar but distinct parties sharing power. We *might* get a ranked-choice system which would at least let the candidate with the least "negatives" win.
I really want Trump to run in 2024. There is no way he can win a general. He already lost it handily *before* he tried to steal it. The bottom third of the electorate is passionate about him despite the fact that (or even because of it) he is so patently unAmerican. He reflects their simplicity so well that he might end up acting as his own 3rd party spoiler candidate for both Republicans and Trumpists. If for some reason he loses the primary to Desantis he will destroy the idiocy which (thankfully) briefly made him king. Now that would be something to see!
You want to die, you're just too chickenshit to do it alone and want to drag everyone else down with you.
Be honest for once in your utterly worthless life, cancer.
I without a doubt have made $18k inside a calendar month thru operating clean jobs from a laptop. As I had misplaced my ultimate business, I changed into so disenchanted and thank God I searched this easy task (veg-09) accomplishing this I'm equipped to reap thousand of bucks simply from my home. All of you could really be part of this pleasant task and will gather extra cash on-line
travelling this site.
>>>>>>>>>> http://netcash94.tk
What a distorted view of reality, and in no way based on facts in evidence.
Very insightful comment. HOWEVER...
It's judgmental to say that the "bottom third of the electorate is passionate about him." What makes them the bottom third? One of the lowest points in my voting career, which extends back to Carter/Ford, was seeing a choice presented to me of Clinton and Trump. So, I voted for Johnson. His ONE vote-worthy qualification was that he wasn't Clinton or Trump.
But Trump won. And in spite of my decades of experience with the back-biting and backroom double dealing in DC, I was appalled at the relentless, vicious attacks on Trump. What, really is Trump guilty of? He's guilty of fighting back. He started none of this ugliness. It amazes me that Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, Schumer et al get away with their unprincipled, banana republic politics, but Trump gets blamed for fighting back.
Add to that, it turns out that Trump knows what he's doing. Keeping in mind that the entire democratic party, and at least half of the republican party were opposing him, he accomplished a lot. But Washington politics does not reward competence. It rewards fealty. Trump committed the unpardonable sin of being his own man.
Nancy Pelosi demands fealty. She couldn't care less about honesty and integrity. Ethics? What's ethics? If you want to get by in DC, be sure to bend down and kiss Nancy's ass. Kiss it long and often. If you go against her, she will do all she can to destroy you. When you really think about it, and I have, all of the turmoil in the Trump administration was created by Pelosi. And she created it because Trump would not bow down and kiss her ass.
Yes, I voted for Trump in 2020. Trump was never the problem, Nancy is. And she still is. And, was there massive election "manipulation" in 2020? You're damned right there was.
Trump is his own man, one who is drunk on power and will find any way he can to get it and keep it, even if it means inciting a coup attempt with his followers, pissing off our allies, wanting to get rid of NATO (So does Putin, hence the war in Ukraine). Trump has done some good, but it pales in the bad. His immigration policy going against our immigration laws, referring to illegal immigrants as gangs, rapist, and animals. Divided the country that gave us more mass shootings. Biden has low numbers because of the extensive media reports on the inflation, which we have had before and got through, high prices for gas (which is coming down, as is the shipping issue for consumer products and having two democrats, Manchin and Sinema who go against Biden's policies every step of the way. we have Progressives that blame Biden for not getting climate change or doing more. He has the Republican Senate and the two democrats that are preventing this. Biden is the oldest president in history, and frankly I am not sure I would vote for an 81 president in 2024. I, frankly, don't think he will run again, but if he does, there are no democrats that will run against him. Biden has been president for roughly a year and a half and was able to get the bipartisan infrastructure bill passed, job growth is bigger than ever, and unemployment is down to 3.6 percent, pre-pandemic levels, inflation is improving, and yet his approval is the lowest than any other president. Even if inflation becomes normal, Biden will still have low numbers. It's because of his age, not with anything he has done.
Nevis is an example of a literally worthless collection of carbon.
LOL
Yeet leftists, because cancer like Nevis destroy everything.
What a faggoty bunch of shit.
The "rule of law" is the initiation of force, threats, not reason, rights, choice. We can have rules, order, ONLY with a voluntary govt., a non-violent society/politics. Presently, no such political paradigm exists anywhere, hence, perpetual wars, social unrest, unstable economies.
Keep voting for this if you want more of the same. Otherwise, don't vote, don't support your exploitation, your enslavement. Boycott authority and self-govern with others of same mind.
Good comments.
Most people. Most of the people are centrist who want a functioning government that works but is not noticed.
Most people are going to be disappointed.
Poor JD. Hope he knows how to bake a pie, with all that cherry-picking. One out of five Republicans would dump the GOP and follow Trump. Nothing to see here!
There are some clues over the years it is not the authors of the blog post themselves.
Then show us, or forever hold your peace and leave.
Why stop with the headline? Its all pathetic.
I want to know when Reason became another wing of the democratic party ?
You must not have visited Reason for awhile. Most of their writers have been leftist masquerading as libertarians at least since Trump was elected.
Muted as useless. And dumb as a rock.
"America’s experiment with strongman politics may turn out to be blessedly brief."
Well first I thought it should be "authoritarian" rather than "strongman" because Biden is anything but strong. But his administration's authoritarian actions of the non-ending prosecution of Trump, and everyone who's effectively supported him is what I thought the headline was about. I can't think of a thing that a "strongman" despot would do, that Trump did. Whose civil rights did he violate? On the other hand, given the constant repeating of false allegations about Trump, the seeds of division created by Democrats (and some contributors to Reason), it's no wonder so many don't want him running.
I'm of the opposite opinion, that Trump has to win to remove the corruption out of the DOJ, FBI and Democrat party; otherwise, we'll get more of it. E.G., expect the FBI to investigate critics of school boards in spite of being called out for doing exactly that. Further, I expect them to engage in political frame up jobs, like the Whitmer kidnapping, and the 1/6 riot where federal agents were disguised as protesters (covered head to toe) and who initiated the brake-in of the Capitol. Where Nancy intentionally kept a minimum presence of protection, to facilitate the break in. At least that's the way I see it.
"32 percent say they would like to see him run."
That's enough to win.
It all depends on the DOJ. Even if they don't indict him, there could be a way to keep him from public office, which would be fine with me with a man who would be dictator.
Tax cuts and deregulation equals a dictator to you? I guess peace and prosperity aren't for everyone.
Leftists are literally cancer.
Live and let live is not an option.
I got to the subhead, saw the author, and gave up.
Biden a "strongman"? Unreasonable.
Biden a "strongman"? Unreasonable.
Yup. President Willie Loman. Which, just by itself or in the background of Saddam Hussein or the Civil Rights movement, would be tragic, but in the background of building back better to a New World Order and the cult of Willie Lomans who support it, is just catastrophic.
If you're new to this site and you're looking for some libertarian content, I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere. Reason has written hundreds of articles bitching about Trump and the Republicans - the ones who have been working their asses off to secure our freedoms. They bitch about Trump's tariffs, they bitch about his immigration policy, and they supported his impeachment. They constantly make "both sides" arguments. They support open borders and globalization. This is a leftist rag masquerading as a libertarian publication.
But they consistently support Mexicans, weed, and butt sex. That's what their libertarianism is about.
Don’t forget that holy grail of freedom, abortions.
They need the freedom from negative outcomes of their own choices.
Not enough butt sex.
Keep you guy's personal problems to yourselves. Gross.
Yep. More butt sex, fewer abortions.
But they consistently support Mexicans
But not the far-right Latina.
I think you're confusing libertarianism with MAGAism.
Exhibit 1 :"Trump and the Republicans - the ones who have been working their asses off to secure our freedoms." Really? No one else is going to call you out for this claim? Trump and republicans are libertarian?
Exhibit 2 "They support open borders" which is a basic libertarian plank.
Seems you're confused:
Trump, by any measure was the most libertarian POTUS we've had for at least a century.
You can whine about his mean tweets, his tariffs (bad), but other than that, well, stuff it.
"Trump, by any measure was the most libertarian POTUS we've had for at least a century." I won't argue except the "by any measure" part makes it easily disproved.
But that is a very low bar. He is nothing close to a libertarian.
"I won't argue except the "by any measure" part makes it easily disproved."
Go right ahead.
-------------------------
"But that is a very low bar. He is nothing close to a libertarian."
Here we have, folks, but one more TDS-addled asshole more than willing to throw the good away for not being perfect.
Idiots like this own Biden.
You call me a TDS-addled Biden supporter (neither are true) and an idiot (debatable). These are just insults and do not support your argument.
You blame me that Biden is president because I am not blind to the flaws in Trump. And here I thought it was the fault of the democrat's election fraud. I had no idea that suggesting the near-perfect-libertarian-Trump was flawed in 2022 would get Biden elected in 2020. Sorry everybody. I owe you one.
If you're trying to have the argument that Trump is more libertarian than Biden then we can be done now because I'm on board with that.
"You call me a TDS-addled Biden supporter (neither are true) and an idiot (debatable). These are just insults and do not support your argument."
By most examples (quite often here) those whining about Trump, regardless of their claims are TDS-addled assholes and supporters of Biden. I stand by my claim and 'insults'.
"You blame me that Biden is president because I am not blind to the flaws in Trump."
Please learn to read.
But that is a very low bar. He is nothing close to a libertarian.
to be fair, Reason ain't either.
I can see why you say that. I don't think Reason is nearly as bad as they are made out to be in the comments here. Last time I said this here, they published some blatant lefty crap that shut me up though. So... OK fair enough.
I was slow to punch on criticizing Reason. I thought they got a lot of unfair guff several years ago. Then they started becoming the caricature they were accused of being.
Then they chose to sit on the sidelines and snicker at all the major... major cultural stuff that's happened over the last few years.
Reason should have been THE leading media light in anti-lockdown rhetoric. Instead we had to rely on rando youtubers and a bunch of truckers in Ottawa.
Blame KMW. She’s all about the clicks ($). Gillespie in charge would be better, still flawed.
It's not the clicks they care about.
Thinking that, that all these evil pieces of shit are just doing what they can to profit, isn't cynical - it's still the blue pilled take.
It's not the comments that make them out to be bad, it's the bullshit they write and publish.
Being libertarian doesn’t mean supporting open borders. That’s like saying being libertarian means being pro abortion, when libertarians are fairly split on the issue.
Libertarian Utopianism might be open-borders. Libertarian pragmatism ain't. I'm just smart enough to know that libertarianism is a mostly Western liberal idea or set of ideals very specifically NOT shared by much of the rest of the world.
And the fact of the matter is almost no one really believes in open borders. You can ALWAYS get someone who claims to be for open borders to blink first. Always.
Open borders, as a pragmatic Libertarian ideal, would require that the rest of the world be somewhat more free than it is.
Are they fairly split? It seems to me to be heavily weighted to the open borders opinion although moving away from that recently.
I take your point. It's certainly not unanimous. I'll concede and soften my argument to say that Reason supporting open borders does not bolster the argument that Reason is not libertarian.
Reason supporting open borders does not make it un-libertarian. Reason supporting open borders while at the exact same time supporting the extension of welfare benefits to anyone who end-zone dives into our social construct is what makes it generally un-libertarian.
Reason supporting the right of tech companies to run themselves how the like doesn't make it un-libertarian. Reason supporting tech companies to moderate how they like while sheepishly acknowledging that they're doing the direct bidding of Democratic lawmakers makes it un-libertarian.
Reason supporting the right of people to freely associate doesn't make it un-libertarian. Reason refusing to criticize odious associations which are racist and illiberal because to Reason, they all seem like "well-meaning progressives" makes it un-libertarian.
Thanks Paul, (Diane?) for taking the time to explain your reasoning. I haven't seen Reason say the un-libertarian things you stated above. I'll keep my eyes open for it though and any citations would be welcome.
It’s definitely pretty split on abortion. I’ve seen enough polling to know that.
Open borders is anti-libertarian since it negates property rights.
Reason is plenty libertarian.
The problem is that small minds like you (and a lot of the people in the comments) see any deviation from the Republican Party platform as leftist evil incarnate, so when libertarians disagree with Republicans these tiny little minds interpret that to mean support for the evil left.
This “libertarian” publication supports imprisoning people without trial if they don’t like their politics.
Except when the run articles that say the exact opposite.
But you and your Party Faithful pretend those articles don't exist.
Really? Where are all the articles about holding J6 protesters for a year and a half without bail?
To be fair, Reason has agitated for the elimination of cash bail. So j6 is the most libertarian outcome in history.
Eliminating cash bail = prompt release for those we like, detain those we don't like until their (postponed) trial.
Link?
This is the standard method of argumentation on these comments.
Assert that someone supports xyz because they didn't say they oppose it. That or assert that someone opposes xyz because they didn't say they support it.
Then when that someone actually does say something on the subject, call them a liar when that they say disagrees with what you said about them.
That's all you have to do if you want to join the commentors here who have no ethics, no integrity, no intellectual honesty (or honesty in general), no morals, and no principles other than loyalty to their God Emperor Trump and his Republican Party.
As usual, all you can do is gaslight.
You don't even know what gaslight means.
That comment of yours is actually kinds funny because, after thinking about it, what I describe is gaslighting.
When you and your troll buddies attack someone saying "That's not what you think! I told you what you think!" that is gaslighting.
So as usual the trolls accuse others of what they are doing themselves.
Everyone’s always picking on poor pathetic sarcasmic.
The only thing pathetic here is you trolls and the lies you call arguments.
You should pack up and leave. I hear Glibertarians is accepting new members.
You mean true things that upset you when it attacks your precious democrats.
He can play victim too.
Shouldn't you be stroking ML's penis right now?
Ideas!
You sure impressed the trolls with that one! Brilliant!
Such an angry drunk. Or is it angry dry drunk today?
Sarc, you must have missed the widespread support for SloJo back in 2020 based largely on ‘Trump is mean.’ Even though several articles were published here noting that Trump is the most libertarian Prez in recent decades. They did not ‘walk the talk.’
Hmm, there’s not one bit of inconsistency about being a libertarian and criticizing Trump.
This isn't true. Criticizing the social media for colluding with Democrats, which is what Trump did, disproves your statement alone.
You talk as though free and open immigration is some kind of alien progressive notion that attached itself to libertarianism. In fact, it's the historically orthodox libertarian position. (And tariffs are taxes. You even hear some Trump Republicans openly attacking free trade as a "globalist," anti-American plot.) Until recently, it was predominantly the left pushing anti-immigration policies because powerful labor unions opposed competition from migrant workers. Pre-woke liberals believed Republican attempts to reform and streamline legal immigration were a scheme by big business interests to suppress wages and drive down labor costs.
"Roughly 7 in 10 Americans (71 percent) say they would not like to see Joe Biden run for president in 2024, while 24 percent say they would like to see him seek a second term" finds a Quinnipiac poll published July 20. "More than 6 in 10 Americans (64 percent) say they would not like to see Donald Trump run for president in 2024, while 32 percent say they would like to see him run."
My informal polling shows that 100% of respondents learned absolutely nothing between 2015 and 2022. So far, the number of respondents is 1 but is expected to grow in the run-up to 2022 and 2024.
According to Quinnipiac, De Santis did not win election as governor - the poll was off about 10%.
The biggest problem is that Trump - who is certainly a jerk - is divisive, promoting the idea that a muffler repairman is just as much a citizen as a political science professor or even a journalist. This 'leveling down' is seen as an attack on democracy and even worse an attack on expertise. He is sort of an anti-Romney.
This approach to political and social issues is attractive to Hispanics and blue collar people - you know, the ones who don't work from home - and represents a threat to all liberal arts graduates everywhere.
We all know that Democracy! succeeds only when superior people gain the authority to tell the rest of us how to live.
Don't trust wingnut.com polls showing Biden with low approval. We're currently in the best economy ever and everyone knows Presidential approval is strongly correlated with the economy.
#TemporarilyFillingInForButtplug
^^^This^^^ Lolz
GOP returning to normal equals not pushing back against any of the left's policies. Yeah, that's really what the voters want.
A GOP returning to normal would represent presenting policies and ideas, not these infantile and offensive games of "pwning the libs".
Tell me, if Republicans win back Congress in this year's elections, what will they do? Have they told you what their plans are? Do you know? Do you even care?
Are they going to increase or decrease military support for Ukraine?
Are they going to pass a nationwide abortion ban?
Are they going to impeach Biden?
Are they going to raise taxes? (At least one Team Red Senator wants to do so, after all.)
Does it even matter?
If the GOP does nothing but stop the dem agenda, then that's good enough.
This is youre reflexive defensiveness against people who don't want an opposition party that kneels to the other.
I also like how you talk about 1 red senator raising taxes as all democrats talk about ending the Trump tax cuts.
You really are a worthless leftist.
No no I get it.
If one Team Blue senator says "Ban crisis pregnancy centers!" then it is a stark reminder that Team Blue are full of authoritarian shitheads.
If one Team Red senator says "Raise taxes!" then it is just one person's ideas, says nothing about Team Red broadly, and we shouldn't read anything more into it. Let's sweep it under the rug and focus again on that one Team Blue senator saying outrageous shit.
It isnt one dem senator. It is multiple. They are calling and interfacing woth Google. This isn't some obscure set of news.
Likewise the gop actually passed tax cuts. That happened. Not one Democrat nor the party has worked to ensure the continuation of crisis centers.
Youre idiotic comparisons are getting more retarded.
It isnt one dem senator. It is multiple.
Which US Senator besides Elizabeth Warren said that crisis pregnancy centers should be BANNED?
Die, pedo.
And the dishonesty of jeff in full display. I say they are interfacing with Google to get them censored and he tries to narrow the argument to his one attempted gotcha.
Then he ignores the point the GOP did pass a tax cut even if one senator asks for it now.
Jeff is completely dishonest.
Of course he does. He is the epitome of a shitweasel. His parents didn’t give him the necessary beatings to straighten him out when he was just a fat little kid. Instead, they coddled their tubby little Humphrey.
Which US Senator besides Elizabeth Warren said that crisis pregnancy centers should be BANNED?
Dunno. But name one Donkey Senator who has condemned the violent attacks on such centers , or worse, the attempted assassinations of SCOTUS Justices.
Yes, they are vile scum.
"Are they going to increase or decrease military support for Ukraine?
No.
Are they going to pass a nationwide abortion ban?
No
Are they going to impeach Biden?
I hope so. He is knee deep in Chinese graft.
Are they going to raise taxes? (At least one Team Red Senator wants to do so, after all.)"
No. There will be inflation/recession and they will take the blame for it.
They will raise fees such as permits if they can't get income taxes raised
Do your responses reflect what they have said they would do, or what you hope they would do?
Defend the team jeff!
"Republicans now just oppose globalism and forever wars because the Democrats are in power. They don't have any real agenda that I care about besides that. I want my old Republicans back." - chemjeff
Hopefully, the GOP "returns to normal" with lessons learned from the Trump phenomenon, and the returning "normal" is decency, and intelligence, and a higher regard for blue-collar and small business interests, rather than corporatism, and military adventurism, and trying desperately to get progressive media outlets to say nice things about them.
We do not live in a country where popularity matters.
Trump won by the electoral college, he can do so again.
Can he?
Can anyone that actually gives a shit about the American people?
"We'll just blow a mild/moderate virus wildly out of proportion, flood the media with constant hysteric propaganda, forcibly close people's business by executive diktat, close off public spaces from the public, shut down schools, make everyone wear a token of submission on their faces, and mandate everyone take an experimental drug - and we'll spend trillions of taxpayer money on it! Next, we'll repeat the media propaganda effort by flooding the zone with racial strife and persecution, approve of mass rioting that lasts for weeks/months, and get all of corporate America to push race essentialism. Finally we'll censor discussion, illegally change electoral processes at the last moment, and get the courts to deny hearing any challenges. It's foolproof fortification!"
...
"What? Trump got how many more votes than he did in 2016? He's up by how much? Well shit, hold up a minute! I don't care what excuse you have to come up with, just get the observers out! Now, extend vote counting by a week. We need to... find... millions of more votes! Damn the optics, just get the entire Press to say Trump lost! We must dictate the proper result!"
"Normal" for the GOP consists of being dominated by RINOs who have no ambition but to play the Washington Generals to the Democrats' Harlem Globetrotters, while raking in some graft without having to do any heavy lifting.
Trump won in the first place because Republican voters were sick of "normal".
Trump also won because he did cow tow to the left he proved you don't have to be a sheep. and I think both Ron Desantis and Ted cruz have learned this but others like the old way of capitulation for the sake of favorable media its almost like the Republicans are the party of Cucks to the dems and Americans don't like that
If "normal Republicans" are globalists and elitists, then the populists and nationalists who unconditionally believe and back Trump are the actual "RINOs."
One of the things leftists do is lie to themselves. Loudly and often. Because they know that a lie, repeated often enough, will eventually be taken as the truth.
There are enough leftists to generate this effect--and knowing THAT, one of the first institutions they 'marched through' was the major media.
The thing is, while a lie told often enough can be taken as the truth, it never becomes the truth.
There was no 'buyer's remorse' with Trump. How could there have been? He rang in a season of prosperity --WHILE under constant vicious attack from the left.
People WANT the Trump years back.
That's what they're voting for in the primaries. That's what they'll vote for in the midterms. And that's what will cause the left to try to fortify the 2024 election in the same way they did the 2020 election.
But it won't work.
I admire your optimism.
If "Becoming Normal" means; kowtowing to the Democrats at every whim, offering only token resistance to Democratic policies and viewing 'average' citizens with disdain I'll take Not Normal thank you.
"Becoming Normal" is defined in the article. It means being a party about ideas and policy rather than a cult of personality.
"It means being a party about ideas and policy rather than a cult of personality."
You mean the cult hating a single person?
Not everyone who wants Trump to go away and give up his chokehold on Republican politics is suffering from TDS.
There are some neocon Never-Trumpers who hated his hands-off foreign policy. There are some institutionalist Never-Trumpers who hated his incivility and disruptive influence. There are some socon Never-Trumpers who hated his megalomania, depraved personal life, and lavish self-indulgence. There are also some libertarian Never-Trumpers who hate his manifest contempt for the rule of law, weaponization of trade tariffs, and habit of governing by whim rather than by a consistent set of principles. And there are some people who aren't, strictly speaking, "Never-Trumpers," but are sick to death of his personality and just want the party to move on from the hero-worshiping, populist cult it became.
"rather than a cult of personality."
But enough about Obama...
Cult of skin color to show one’s virtue.
The left regarded Obama as a god, too pure for this unjust world. The right regards Trump as God's chosen ruler anointed to save America from the left-wing globalist scourge. Both major parties have had their unhealthy candidate obsessions and cults of personality.
“Becoming normal” means favoring corporate fascism.
GOP Shows Signs of Becoming Normal Again
You mean like how the Biden regime is a Return to Normal?
That is EXACTLY what that means.
But the Democratic Party has continued to function as something resembling a normal political party, focused on policies and ideas, terrible though most of them are
Just because Tuccille doesn't like GOP policies doesn't mean they don't exist. The Parental Rights in Education Bill, one that many red states copied, has policies in it dealing with how to fix perceive problems in public schools. Wanting states to have control over abortion laws IS a policy, and the GOP is presenting those ideas. Wanting to crackdown on illegal immigration and control the borders is also a policy and idea, even if you don't like it. The GOP has ideas aimed at protecting domestic industry, but because they're talking about protective tariffs, Tuccille pretends it's not a policy.
Again, you don't have to like the ineffective or even horrible policies and ideas of the GOP, but to pretend they don't exist is living way too deep inside of your progressive bubble.
The Parental Rights in Education Bill, one that many red states copied, has policies in it dealing with how to fix perceive problems in public schools.
Yes, you are right of course. The perceived problem was that schools were too accepting of LGBTQ matters, so they are trying to smuggle in an explicitly homophobic curriculum under the guise of "fighting child sexual abuse". The implication being, of course, is that support for LGBTQ matters equals support for child sexual abuse. You are right, Team Red is not completely devoid of ideas. They have many awful ones that they are trying to implement.
Why do you want to talk to kindergartners about your sex life?
He swears he's not a pedophile, but it's a big fucking deal to him that people "teach" those youngsters the correct way.
141 teachers or principles have been arrested this year for child sex attempts or actions. Many of them espousing the same arguments jeff is making on their social media.
Huh, is that so. Well, let's do a little bit of math.
The total number of K-12 teachers in the nation is about 3.5 million.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/185012/number-of-teachers-in-elementary-and-secondary-schools-since-1955/
So taking 141/3.5 million yields 4 offenders per 100,000 teachers.
Now, is that a large number or a small number compared to the general population?
Well, there are about 859,500 people that are registered sex offenders (as of 2016).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_offender_registries_in_the_United_States
And there are about 330 million people. So, taking 859,500/330 million yields 260 sex offenders per 100,000 people.
Now of course we know many of the "sex crimes" associated with the sex offender registry are bullshit (e.g., public exposure), but even if we are very generous and say that most of those are bullshit, then that still leaves the teacher rate far below the rate of the general population.
So what was your point again, Jesse? Did you mean to imply that teachers are especially prone to commit child sex abuse or something?
Die, pedo
You used the general sex offender registry statistics of the U.S., which includes sex crimes against adults. The K-12 teacher statistics were used specifically against minors. Of course one ratio is gonna be higher when you compare a stat with ALL sex offenses vs. one that focuses on sex offenses against minors.
When will you quit displaying your dishonesty?
Those are the best statistics that I could come up with. If you have better statistics let me know.
You were the one who disingenuously challenged JesseAz's claim with some faulty statistics. I'm not going to do your job.
For the umpteenth time. The issue was never about talking to kids about "sex lives" or "graphic sex talk" or any of that. No sane person supports such things. That was the motte in the Team Red motte-and-bailey approach to this issue.
Bailey: We must stop kids from hearing about all the gay crap! Teachers are teaching kids that gays are no different than straights and we can't have that!
Motte: We must protect kids from sexual abuse! Teachers are talking to kids about "sex lives" and we can't have that!
"The issue was never about talking to kids about "sex lives" or "graphic sex talk" or any of that. No sane person supports such things."
Someone has never heard of Libs of TikTok, who posts a video by a deranged leftist advocating for such things every day or two.
Let me introduce you to Nardz and Ted, who want to literally murder progressives. We can assume that they represent the entirety of the Republican Party, right? Oh wait, no, we shouldn't assume the most extreme members are representative of the whole, should we.
So you handwave away the data points that are inconvenient for your position? Must make it easy to convince yourself that you are right?
This is how you get to the point of pleading the case for Snow White in schools just to have some sexual material to teach kids *and* convince yourself and no one else that you aren't a pedophile.
So you can’t defend the pedophilic grooming activities of leftist educators and administrators, so you have to besmirch both Nardz and myself.
Humphrey (you are totally a Humphrey), DeSantis had to get this law passed because there are so many of your fellow travelers in education that do consider it their duty to groom kindergarteners towards homosexuality and transsexualism. You’ve already gone from ‘it isn’t happening’ to ‘ok, it’s happening, but it’s rare’. In the near future I fully expect you to move further, to ‘it’s happening a lot, but that’s a good thing’.
It isn’t a good thing Humphrey. You’re a sick weirdo that doesn’t have any kids and clearly and obviously has no concern for the welfare of children. Many of us do have children, and don’t want to see any kids harmed by you pervert progressives.
You have no defense, as you always take the groomer/pedophile side of any issue where that is applicable. From advocating for pedophile illegals to come to the US, to railing against Florida’s anti grooming law. You are a malignant creature that acts as a booster for pedophile causes.
I’m sure NAMBLA is proud of you.
Collectivistjeff already moved on to "its a good thing" and "well, there's nothing you can do about it anyway" at various times just yesterday
It was always the issue you lying fuck.
That’s some nice collectivization you’ve got there Jeff.
Sex talk to children in the compulsory environment of a public school is EXACTLY what the Florida law prohibits.
Why would any "sane person" object to such a law? Are you sand, Jeff?
Why would any sane parents want their 5 year old (or 6,7,8, or 9 year old) talking to an adult about sex of any kind? Have you ever had a five year old come up and ask, "So Jeff, what kind of sex do you like, what is your sexual orientation"?
I am floored that anybody would defend such "education".
By the way, I have three kids.
The objections to the Florida law had nothing to do with the "sex talk". Once again no sane person supports teachers talking about sexual intercourse with young kids. The controversy is that the Florida law also banned ALL discussion of "sexual orientation and gender identity" in grades K-3 and severely restricted it elsewhere. Those discussions are not "sex talk". They are discussions that, for the most part, teach acceptance of LGBTQ issues. (Because there is no need to teach acceptance of heterosexuality - it is the dominant standard already!) And in a way that has nothing to do with discussions of graphic sex. THAT is the objection here.
Teachers don’t need to be talking to five year olds about sexual orientation you fatfuck groomer.
Because collectivistjeff is a pedophile who wants to groom children and create an environment where it will be socially acceptable to molest 7 year old boys.
No, no, he’s a great libertarian. As nothing is more libertarian than surrendering control of government school curriculum and allowing pedophile and tranny activist government school employees, so they can groom children from age 5.
It would be a short discussion.
Yes, parents don’t like to have their kids groomed. Surprise!
It’s only creeps like you who think that there is any connection to gays and lesbians.
Right. So it's just a big giant fucking coincidence that 99.999% of the time that the accusation of "grooming" comes up, that it concerns an LGBTQ-themed matter.
No, it's not a coincidence, they're the ones who have a need do do grooming.
Since humans are normally heterosexual, and attracted to post-pubescent members of the opposite sex, with actual alphabet soup people adding up to a couple percent of the population, (If it's gotten any higher than that recently, there's probably something to the concern about sex hormone mimicking chemicals in the environment!) heterosexuals have always had an easy time finding sex partners, they have no need to put in work manufacturing them. Which is what "grooming" is all about.
I see. So teachers are turning kids gay because they teach acceptance of LGBTQ issues. Is that your argument?
Well, you may have half a point. If by teaching acceptance of LGBTQ issues, a student *who was born gay* feels more comfortable in embracing his true identity, then I suppose the teacher did have a role in that. Of course the teacher didn't "recruit" anyone to be gay, the teacher simply gave the student permission to be who he/she really is. But you no doubt would count this anecdote of a teacher "grooming" a child to adopt "the homosexual lifestyle" or somesuch.
Sea lions in action folks.
"If by teaching acceptance of LGBTQ issues, a student *who was born gay* feels more comfortable in embracing his true identity, then I suppose the teacher did have a role in that. Of course the teacher didn't "recruit" anyone to be gay, the teacher simply gave the student permission to be who he/she really is."
Of course there is no way to know or prove which of these occurred. Not even the person themself will really know. Very few are that astute at psychological self-analysis.
"Experts" will give us your position because it's the desired outcome. But they don't know either.
Keep in mind, collectivistjeff is talking about 5, 6, 7, 8 year olds here...
I see. So teachers are turning kids gay because they teach acceptance of LGBTQ issues
No.
The teachers are sexualizing children by going beyond simply noting the LGBTQ people exist into telling children who do not have sex what they do for sex.
They make declaring oneself part of the LGBTQ community seem like the cool, smart thing to do and thereby 'turn' children LGBTQ.
This becomes 'grooming' when they suggest hiding these things from parents.
telling children who do not have sex what they do for sex.
Which teachers are having "graphic sex talk" with young kids? Where are these examples? If any teacher is having "graphic sex talk" with young kids then they should be fired. Because it is exceptionally unprofessional behavior. And it was still unprofessional behavior even before Florida Republicans passed their stupid law.
So where are these teachers talking to young kids about "graphic sex talk"? Hmm?
What I have mainly seen, are teachers who discuss something like "gender identity" and the right-wing outrage brigade wants to label it as "graphic sex talk" when it isn't.
So where are they?
Why do schools need to indoctrinate children to acceptance of LGBwhatever issues at all? Especially young children who haven’t even had the necessary neurological development to properly grasp intangible concepts.
I imagine the eventual conversation between Jeffy and a five year old boy.
Jeffy: “Say Billy, did you know that tow men can be together like mommies and daddies?”
Billy: “You’re a fag!” (Proceeds to punch Jeffy in the balls and runs away.)
Jeffy (Real name Humphrey.) then proceeds to call the police, insisting Billy be prosecuted as an adult for a hate crime.
"Born gay," meaning "'born' to engage in intimate physical relations with members of the same sex." Tell me why school teachers have a solemn responsibility to "affirm" the horniness and sexual curiosities of prepusescent children, especially being careful not to involve their parents.
Just teach my kid multiplication tables.
Cite?
The only people lumping all guys with pedophiles together are leftists like yourself. To hide the pedophilia.
He wants to normalize pedophelia.
It’s been obvious for some time now.
Homosexuality deviates from social and biological sexual norms. Pedophilia deviates from social and biological sexual norms. Homosexual men are turned off by sexually developed women. Pedophiles are turned off by sexually developed women. Yet even the suggestion of statistically significant comorbidity is too offensive for social progressives to tolerate. Nobody believes all homosexuals are attracted to children or that all pedophiles also have same-sex attraction, but it isn't ridiculous to speculate about some more-than-coincidental overlap.
Right. So it's just a big giant fucking coincidence that 99.999% of the time that the accusation of "grooming" comes up, that it concerns an LGBTQ-themed matter.
No it is not a coincidence.
This occurs because predation and grooming seem bound up with deviant sexualities and members of the LGBTQ community, believing their status as members of the community protects them, are far more open about their activities than hetero pedophiles.
So the folks openly crowing about their need to discuss their genital activities with children tend to be from the LGBTQ community.
Not a coincidence at all.
There we go. "gays = pedophiles" said explicitly
Here we see collectivistjeff jump in to again defend sexual abuse of children by calling prevention measures against it bigoted.
Right. Just like he & his ilk jump in to defend electoral fraud by calling prevention measures against it racist.
They are literally cancer, and will not stop until they have destroyed our lives.
The only way to not be a bigot is to allow Jeffy’s friends to groom them for gay sex, or maybe convince them they’re not the gender they actually are.
That’s not what he said, but ok.
No no. Just "deviant sexualities".
You lied about what Azathoth said. Just admit you were wrong.
It’s not at all a coincidence: it’s because creeps like you advocate grooming under the cover of “spreading for LGBTQIA+ people”.
THAT IS THE PROBLEM.
The perceived problem was that schools were too accepting of LGBTQ matters, so they are trying to smuggle in an explicitly homophobic curriculum
Stop saying that all gays are pedophiles. It's false, defamatory, and absolutely disgusting.
There's now a "Gays Against Grooming" group.
GAG?
He can't help it. It is how he covers for pedophilia. Even we he is given gay groups also against grooming.
https://mobile.twitter.com/againstgroomers
All gays are not pedophiles.
Teaching acceptance of LGBTQ issues is not endorsement of pedophilia.
It's the people who refer to teaching acceptance of LGBTQ issues as "grooming" who are deliberately trying to create a connection that gays = pedophiles, not me.
Pedophilia is wrong, pedo.
Sexualizing small children is wrong. There is no reason to discuss sexuality with a five year old. No matter how much you want to Humphrey.
Accepting LGBTQ ideas is far different than forcing children to not only participate but to also force kids to pick new pronouns under the guess of inclusiveness while telling them to keep it a secret from their parents. that is Criminal and needs to be stopped but here we are with LA schools actually doing that. thank god I don't have kids in school or there would be hell to pay
Jeff and sarc were defending the district yesterday
Oh look. The liar lies.
Overt had a long exanatipn over your responses yesterday. Go read it.
Or stay in self delusion like usual.
Up to you.
Explanation*
Explanation for what? I asked two questions which I never answered.
So you both are making shit up.
I had respect for Overt. No more. He's just another liar like you.
It’s not us. It’s you.
C'mon dickhole. Provide a link. Cut and paste. Show what I actually said, and then what you liars claimed I meant.
Do it, penis breath.
They just need to get Shrike on board.
The smack down yesterday wasn't enough for you.
Going to advocate for government teachers to teach social morality instead of parents again?
It doesn't matter what bullshit you pull out pf your ass to justify it, or whether it's just "teaching acceptance of homosexuality." The bottom line on it is, just like DEI curriculum, parents don't think it has any educational value, and they don't want it taught in schools. This is evidenced by the school board elections taking place all over the country, where progressive members who advocate for this stuff in curriculum are heing replaced with regular parents who want more input and control over what's happening to their kids during the school day.
Parents have the right to exercise some control over what schools are pushing into their kids' heads during the day, and these laws explicity acknowledge that right, and it doesn't matter whether you think they're idiots or not. It doesn't matter whether you think the "experts" are better qualified. Parents are asserting their rights to ignore the experts, and they don't care what you think about it.
Jeff finally admitted he wanted government schools teaching children morality and behavior. He is finally admitting his preference for indoctrination.
Jeff finally admitted he wanted government schools teaching children morality and behavior.
So do you.
Die, pedo
Show us where he said that, or shut your mouth.
Absence of your prog religion isn’t teaching values. It’s just protecting children from your’s.
"I so badly want to instruct sex ed to primary school children that I would use Snow White as sexual education material if I had to. I will ignore the inappropriate sexual power dynamics of everything up to and including sexual harassment between otherwise consenting adults if I have to. I will skin the gay rights movement alive and wear the skin as a suit if it legitimizes me. Whatever it takes." - chemjeff
Oh fuck you. This was never about "sex ed" for young kids. This was never about "graphic sex talk". This was never about graphic discussions of reproductive anatomy. These were always against the rules.
It is, and always has been, about teaching acceptance of LGBTQ issues generally, particularly discussions about gender identity. Conservatives don't like it, so they label it with a particularly vile slur of "grooming" so that it becomes associated with child sexual abuse.
This is the EXACT SAME PLAYBOOK that Team Red used for the whole CRT crap. There were topics taught in the classroom concerning race and power that conservatives didn't like, so they deliberately associated all of it with some wacko Marxist left-wing theory in order to create fear and outrage among parents that their kids are being taught this insane radical theory instead of what was actually happening.
Same thing here. Take all the discussion about LGBTQ issues, gender identity, that conservatives don't like, label it all as "grooming" so as to deliberately associate it with child sexual abuse, in order to create fear and outrage among parents that there was some type of sex abuse occurring in the classroom, instead of what was actually happening.
It is about manipulating people's emotions to create votes and power for Team Red. That is what this entire campaign is all about.
Oh fuck you.
Aw... did poor wittle pedo Jeff get his feewings hurt because somebody was being disingenuous wif his awguments?
You want good faith arguments? Make a few yourself and knock off the "I know the bill does and doesn't say but I'm going to pretend it says what it doesn't say and doesn't say what it says and then accuse everybody else of Mott-and-Bailey." dumbfuckery. Otherwise, go fuck yourself.
"The bill doesn't actually ban LGBTQ discussions from any school, but I'm so desperate to teach sex to primary school children, I'm going to pretend it does so I can defend the pedophiles that live in my head." - chemjeff
You want good faith arguments? Make a few yourself
Where mad.casual's definition of "good faith argument" is "argue in a way that accepts as valid the premises of the bad faith arguments that I habitually present".
The law bans classroom instruction of any kind on the topics of "sexual orientation and gender identity" for grades K-3.
While IN THEORY this means banning discussion of heterosexual identity, everyone knows this is absurd - are schools going to ban the use of the words "boy" and "girl"? Of course not.
And the right-wing outrage machine is activated, 99.9999% of the time, by LGBTQ-themed issues being discussed in the classroom. I have yet to hear of any parent getting outraged and upset that a teacher read a fairy tale story to a kindergarten class in which a prince and a princess fall in love.
And given that several commenters here in these very forums have outright said that they don't want schools to be teaching acceptance of LGBTQ issues at all, because it's "abnormal" and "deviant".
One doesn't have to be a rocket surgeon to put 2+2 together and understand the real goal here - to ban instruction that is accepting of LGBTQ themes. Because it's "controversial" or because it's "sex talk" or because it's "abnormal" or whatever.
FFS just read Brett Bellmore's comment above. He outright states that he thinks this is about teachers manufacturing gay sex partners among the students. Give me a fucking break.
You really are a truly malignant little pedo loving fatfuck git. Complaining about mean old republicans not letting you groom little kids or teach racial hatred and division.
no, you totally missed the point. schools should not be discussing or teaching sexuality, lqbt or otherwise. that should be left to the parents. schools should focus on teaching math, science, reading, civics, etc.
He didn't miss the point. He knows exactly what the bill says. He knows exactly what parents are saying about it. He doesn't care. He just really, really wants to teach sex to primary schoolers.
Fuck you. I don't want to teach sex to little kids. I want to teach acceptance of all people to little kids. That includes straight people as well as gay people. It is Team Red that has decided that teaching acceptance of gay people equals "teaching sex".
You don’t need to talk about sex at all. But you progs can’t help yourselves.
and that is not the government's role. again that is the parent's responsibility. the government schools should be teaching skills like math & reading. team red believes that they are capable of teaching values like acceptance and absolutely don't want nor need the government doing it.
"I don't want to teach children about sex except that they should accept gay people as normal."
Sometimes it does, indeed, help to look in the mirror.
Here is the text. Completely rational, not anti-LGB etc.
“3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third
parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur
in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-
appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in
accordance with state standards,”
What is your or anyone’s problem with this?
The left has lied all the time about this.
"to pretend they don't exist is living way too deep inside of your progressive bubble."
Yep. Saying this out loud is a tell
Libertarians my ass.
What's easier: having to argue the substance of your opponents' platform, or just declaring that it's full of HATE and therefore not worth discussing?
(And yes, the author obviously considers Republicans (but not Democrats!) his opponents.)
Different kind of dislike. Republicans may have disliked Trump’s personality but they liked his policies. Biden is a destructive imbecile who is destroying America and has handed the reins to extremists.
I doubt there is much appetite among Republicans to return to the theocratic war mongers and globalists that used to run the party during the Bush years.
But libertarians are definitely having buyer’s remorse with Reason and Cato. It’s utterly disgusting what has become of you.
It’s utterly disgusting what has become of you.
I left the GOP and started reading Reason because of forever wars and the intelligence state. Now, we have Tuccille equivocating on money laundering under the banner of war and cheering the return to normal for the Republicans. Utterly disgusting is too positive of a description.
Long march.
that's because the left are emotional creatures. they could not see the policy decisions because they could not get past mean tweets. they are incapable of any critical thought.
Out-f-my-ass pop theorizing: With so much of the GOP being populated by single issue anti-abortion people, the overturn of Roe-v-Wade may have taken the wind out of the sail for generalized authoritarianism.
Trump was pro-choice for his entire life, and then the switched in 2015 and got endorsed by Dobson. That's what turned the entire Religious Right around and had them rally around one the decidedly unChristian Trump.
But now they got their way on abortion at the national level, so the fight is now sent back to the blue states trying to keep it legal. So there's no more "at any cost" impetus to install an authoritarian president who might nominate anti-abortion judges.
Just a thought.
Hey, here's brandybuck to come along and simp for totalitarian leftism by publicizing his idiotic, witless takes.
As Jonathan Haidt studied, leftists are completely ignorant to the views of their opponents. Often using false caricatures or the most evil of explanations on their motivations.
"Often using false caricatures or the most evil of explanations on their motivations."
We see this on display almost daily here. Democrat's bad policies are because they are misguided and do not understand the consequences of their actions. while Republican's bad policies are evidence of mala fides.
They are so consistent it simply must be in the Reason Stylebook.
So you're a leftist?
Not a troll everybody!
Remember. Don't ever denigrste sarc or call him an obvious leftist for teaming up with jeff to defend the left. If you do youre the actual troll.
You'd do well to read his book as well. But we know you won't.
More false caricatures and evil explanations for my motivations!
No, what he said is accurate. You’re just very dishonest. As a severe alcoholic, it’s not surprising, Alcoholics are intrinsically dishonest.
The real question is, are you an alcoholic because you’re dishonest? Or dishonest because you’re an alcoholic?
This is seriously funny. Literally all you do is false caricatures and evil explanations for motivations. By your own definition you're a leftist because use the same tactics as them. That or you have the same dearth of morals, ethics and intellectual honesty as the people you'd cheerfully murder over politics.
But I've been pointing that fact out for years.
No, he’s just honest. You’re not, and you hate hearing the truth. If anything, you should be thanking him for being so generous with his time. He treats you better than you deserve, and you would be feel so lonely without him.
yeah.. everyone on that side always makes sure they use certain adjectives when talking about trump... in this case 'authoritarian'.
How was his presidency any more authoritarian than any other?
If anything it was authoritarian within normal parameters.
"...Just a thought."
As if, TDS-addled asshole.
You may have a point. Single-issue pro-life voters now have zero incentive to show up to the polls, while single-issue anti-gun voters have a media machine whipping them up into a frenzy.
See what happens.
Sure they do. Got to protect everyone from democrat overreach.
Inflation.
It’s the economy, stupid.
Since we're just theorizing...
Agree on your summarization of Trump. The theocrats in the GOP saw Trump as someone who would back their policy goals without worrying about any of that democracy nonsense.
Where you're off the mark is that "they got their way" and are going to fade into the background and let garden-variety politicians go back to compromising or something. Their goal wasn't and isn't "pro-life" but rather "returning the US to the (white) Christian nation is was meant to be." Trump made it possible to overturn Roe and the right to privacy. That now-dead right underpins a bunch of other conservative Christian goals like eliminating contraceptives, same-sex marriage, the right to have sex with the adult of your choice in the privacy of your own bedroom, etc. They're going to back Trump 100% if at all possible or they'll back a less damaged version of Trump, like Desantis. Florida's governor has been signaling his willingness to be a more successful, white Christian authoritarian than Trump.
Theocracies aren't democratic and the GOP has found it's authoritarian legs and is still moving purposefully in that direction. Trump was willing to be unabashedly authoritarian before anyone else but the GOP's slate of elected officials across the country are starting to look more like Trump every election. The trend is not less-authoritarian but more.
Turning America white by helping to improve the prosperity of blacks and Hispanics? So Biden is now making America ‘more diverse’ by bankrupting blacks and Latinos and destroying their lives?
Explain how that works.
I doubt he can.
I know, but it’s fun to call him out on that anyway.
Oh the authoritarianism of leaving abortion up to the states!
"America’s experiment with strongman politics may turn out to be blessedly brief."
Not sure what that's intended to convey, as Trump certainly was less of a 'strongman' POTUS than Obo.
But it is certain that TDS remains a major issue for many assholes, apparently including Tuccille.
Exactly Unlike Obama, Trump never threatened to put a boot to the neck of bitter clinger or to bring a gun to a knife fight to get his way.
I, too, long for the days of the Bushes and Cheneys, when neocons ruled the party and when Republicans simply bent over for the whims of every Democratic pet issue.
.........oh, wait. No, I don't. This author can get bent.
Not sure how you can mention strongman politics without mentioning Obama's pen and phone.
How many emergency declarations is biden up to now?
No, the on,y way to measure authoritarianism is through mean tweets.
LOL. Between this and the Roundup headliner, Reason's trolling hard today. Who says they don't read the comments.
Great example as to why I refuse to register to vote.
I've spent too long voting against the worst of two obviously evil evils.
I'll sign up when I can vote for someone.
so you have no right to complain about anything
Why does a pointless act that makes no difference at all give me a right to complain when it has absolutely no effect on the outcome?
I have 100 people in a room. I give every one of them a vote of either options 'A' or 'B'. 99 of them vote for option 'A', and only 1 votes for 'B'. The voter for option 'B' declares his vote makes no difference and decides not to vote next time.
But on the next vote, 10 people decide that maybe they were wrong about option 'A', so they vote for option 'B' this time. And on the next vote after that, the number of voters for option 'B' doubles. Then doubles again.
And all this time, the lone holdout from the first vote has been refusing to participate because it has "absolutely no effect on the outcome." But what really happened was they got off the train too early, and missed the party altogether.
Yes, the system is slow. That's by design. And yes, it resists rapid change. Also, by design. Those are features, not bugs. In politics, you have to get in for the long run. That's the only way to play it if you're going to play at all.
I don't recall seeing that exemption in the 1st Amendment.
i'm not talking about a legal right, obviously. you have no moral right to complain. your lack of participation says that you don't give a shit and therefore have no right to complain. your lack of participation says that you're ok with whatever happens. it says that you'd be happy living in a communist country or a dictatorship where no one can vote.
Did you vote for Giant Douche or for Turd Sandwich?
If you can't tell the difference between the two presidential candidates, you're not an observant person. They always come from two different parties with two radically different visions for the country. Any child could tell the difference and pick the better one.
Indeed. And that child would vote Republican, as the democrats wanted him to be killed in the womb and now seek to groom and rape him.
They both have terrible ideas.
Republicans have a lot of great ideas. It’s the follow through that is lacking.
your lack of participation says that you don't give a shit and therefore have no right to complain
If Hitler and Stalin were on the ballot, you'd vote for one of them.
Sarc stated the condition we're he would vote. Not everyone votes for lesser evils.
If you don't vote for the good guy then you're voting for the bad guy. Not voting and voting third party are the same as voting for the bad guy. Don't you pay attention?
Amd you always vote for evil.
Theres almost never a good guy vs bad guy on the ballot. It's almost always two putrid candidates on the ballot.
2020 was just two creepy, senile old men who don't give a F*** about the constitution or freedom. And we would have gotten a Perverted, senile, authoritarian either way making voting completely pointless.
Choosing between Biden and Trump was akin to choosing between Hitler and Stalin.
strawman arguments are always the best
Hey, if you wouldn't vote for one of them, you'd have no moral right to complain!
It's people who vote who have no right to complain because they consented to participating in the election and thus consent to the results of the election.
Great example as to why I refuse to register to vote.
This is a lie. You say so
I've spent too long voting against the worst of two obviously evil evils.
Here. You can't spend "too long voting against the worst of two obviously evil evils" if you're not registered to vote. Therefore you ARE registered and your first statement is a lie.
I'll sign up when I can vote for someone.
Except you've already signed up.
Make up your mind
some serious tds in this article
Amazing. It’s 2022 and we are still hearing the “TDS” talking point.
That's because it's still a valid observation. You display it too.
Oh, Laursen has it as bad as anybody ever has.
His entire identity and personality is just resentment of Trump.
There is literally nothing else in his life.
Every poll will be reset after Biden croaks and Kamala has been president for a year(ish).
In that case a virtual reality simulation of Biden would take over until the election.
Roughly 7 in 10 Americans (71 percent) say they would not like to see Joe Biden run for president in 2024
Based on his obvious cognitive problems and the state of the country.
More than 6 in 10 Americans (64 percent) say they would not like to see Donald Trump run for president in 2024
I'm in this group. The R's have a stronger bench, and while I don't want him to run, I'd consider voting for him.
I'd wipe my ass with plastic wrap before voting for either of them.
Joe Biden won in 2020 because he was the anti-Trump. He won because was and did bring back normalcy to the Presidency. His problem is that many Democrats want an agenda more left centered while many Democrats also want a centrist agenda. There is of course his age also as an issue. If the Democrats were more united and Joe Biden was younger, I don't think he have the problem he has.
Republicans need to unite behind a single candidate in 2024, much as the Democrats did in 2020 and the Republicans did in 2000. Trump has a chance in a multicandidate field, but he is a loser going one to one.
Trump versus Biden in 2024... Trump wins.
Trump won in 2020, but corrupt liars like Moderation4ever (he clearly lies with the name he chose for himself ffs) goosed the count and came up with enough bullshit to overcome an incumbent who improved his prior vote performance by 20%.
Anti Trump won, but not with legitimate votes. And, as it stands right now, WI (where m4e claims to have been a poll worker), MI, and PA have ruled their election illegal and invalid. The current administration didn't reach the 270 electoral votes needed to win.
The republic is dead.
Get revenge.
*Biden won, but not with legitimate votes
We all know Trump had more legitimate votes than Biden, but The Powers That Be have imposed a regime on this country for the purpose of destroying our lives.
Et tu, Brute?
The freedom of one American is worth more than the collective lives of every democrat. Start removing democrats until freedom is restored. We should have been scraping them off a long time ago.
Yet you have not provided a single shred of evidence to proove that's true.
No. No he doesn't. Trump lost enough centrist conservative women and right-leaning independents just from boorish behavior. People could still say that Roe was precedent and in no real risk at that time (if they were inclined to fool themselves.) But in 2024, Trump is damaged further by the Jan 6th insurrection and the overturning of Roe. So while die-hard conservatives, especially white evangelicals, will walk over hot coals for Trump, a large enough group of GOP centrists will avoid him to basically lose him the presidency in 2024--probably even if Biden is his opponent.
One aside is that if Biden is the Democratic nominee, there is an increased risk of a third party candidate siphoning enough votes to give Trump a chance. And there are enough "true believer" Democrats that would vote Green party rather than have four more years of boring Joe. I'd vote for Joe again over Trump or his mini-me, Desantis. I haven't seen a reasonable alternative to Joe rise to prominence yet, but there's still a few years left for that to happen.
Bullshit. Trump gained over 12 million votes from 2016 to 2020. Yet gets beat by a senile old swamp creature with no excitement about him, who hid in his basement for months?
Not a fucking chance.
Like all the narratives and talking points attempting to explain how the 2020 result could be arrived at legitimately, this one fails the test of basic logic.
The ‘official’ results are outright laughable. The totals are without anything close to a historical precedent, and the mathematics make absolutely no sense.
Trump underperformed among Republicans. That should be where you start looking. Why did Trump lose Republican votes that other Republican got.
Biden ‘brought back normalcy to the Presidency.’ Only if you think bankrupting the country, inviting in throngs of criminals, attempting to destroy the energy industry, and stumbling around like a brain-damaged fool is normal. Got it!
Joe Biden won in 2020 because
You were right up to that point.
Just speaking for myself here. I like Trump's performance. I like Trump's instincts. I can tolerate his puffed up ego if it means I get competence in the presidency, and somebody who refuses to sell the country (US) down the river. In other words, everything that Biden is not.
If I got to pick the Republic nominee for 2024, I would choose DeSantis. He seems to embody Trump's capabilities with less of the egotistical downside.
I would also like to pick the Democratic nominee for 2024: Joe Manchin. He seems to be the only sane Democrat remaining in the party, or maybe he is the only one remaining who is brave enough to resist the left wing insanity pervading their world.
A presidential contest of Desantis versus Manchin would be fricking awesome. I think I would be content with either one.
Manchin is unelectable outside of West Virginia. His position on climate change alone is dangerous and unsupportable. He's a fossil fuel millionaire of the "good 'ol boy" variety. He needs to go.
Fortunately for him he’s elected by West Virginians. And yes, he has a reasonable position on energy. Just because he rejects your kook climate religion doesn’t make him ‘unsupportable’.
That's what makes it a race. I think Manchin could get a fair number of Republican voters. Many conservatives would be wary of Manchin because he is a Democrat but he is without a doubt the best the Democrat party has to offer.
Manchin's position on climate change seems pretty rational to me.
Yes, Manchin is a fossil fuel millionaire but so what. Nancy Pilosi is an insider trader millionaire and she is speaker of the house. Joe Biden is an influence peddling Chinese asset and he is the president.
If he switched parties on the condition of GOO support, I would consider that a fair transaction. He’s not my cup of tea, but it would be a good move pragmatically. It might also help flip some of the more conservative WV democrat holdouts. As the democrat party is destroying that state. The democrats have openly said that they hate WV anyway. Their own voters.
That would be an amazing contest, I agree. I doubt the country is ready for it in 2024, but maybe they will be in 2028. What you're asking for is a contest between the moderates of both sides.
At the moment, the bodies of both political parties are filled with very weak-minded people, while their leaders take very extreme positions in public. This creates a pretense of governance, not actual governance. Actual governance demands making hard choices, and that is something your average pol just won't do.
DeSantis and Manchin are exceptions in that regard. They clearly have plenty of backbone, are very capable of explaining themselves, and are proposing only workable, practical solutions. We will need a whole lot more of that kind of person before either of them will have much of an impact.
So maybe 2028 is even way too soon to expect the US to have serious, adult federal governance. We may have to go a whole lot further down the spiral before we all see the light.
"[Desantis has] also been an effective culture warrior, battling Democrats and politicized corporations alike. That's not to say his causes are always good ones; the socially-conservative, red-meat flavor of much of his politics is tiresome for those of us who favor a hands-off government. But he's established a track record on performance and policy. "
How unexpectedly measured from ideological libertarians. I wonder what these good policies are. Is it helping give Florida the 13th highest Covid death count of any country in the world, except it's not a country?
At some point you guys are going to start looking silly embracing politicians who literally ban books and restrict speech as a necessary compromise to keep those Democrats out of office for the crime of not cutting taxes every five minutes.
Is it helping give Florida the 13th highest Covid death count of any country in the world, except it's not a country?
Colombia is #13 with 140,000. Florida has 77,000. It doesn't exceed any country's deaths until you reach Romania (#20).
And suggesting that all countries are bigger than states is just plain stupid.
Not as stupid as suggesting that Ron DeSantis has done anything good for Floridians.
Then stay the fuck out of Florida
So awful, Nancy Pelosi is moving there.
In this thread, Tony tries to pretend nobody caught his bald-faced lie.
Business as usual.
Then explain Florida's quick economic recovery compared to those of several blue states. Get at it.
Dude, you're wrong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thIw7uenUd0
So you're saying that Ron deSantis's covid policy of Bravehearting around for the freedom to spread disease was... good?
Check out the Cuomosexual over here who cheered on the governor as he killed old people and then tried to cover it up.
When it was HIV, people spreading the disease needed to be locked up. Now that it's COVID, spreading the disease is a civil right. So, you know, all those people in Florida died expressing a civil right! See?!
Florida deaths per day as of March 22: 76. Double the death rate of California and the highest per-day death rate in the nation by far.
Compared to other retirement states:
Florida: 76 per day
Nevada: 6.9
Arizona: 9.4
Texas: 16.9
Number one, your "statistics" are questionable. Number two, we're FREE in Florida!!!
It sounds like bullshit. Especially from him.
People shouldn’t be locked up for HIV, unless they knowingly spread it without informing their partners. Maybe.
As far as I can tell, the Democrats' descend into madness continues unabated.
The GOP IS returning to US historical normal. They threw out enforcement of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 9 years ago:
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html
They've escalated voting restrictions big time in the weeks after January 6th:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/30/politics/voter-suppression-restrictive-voting-laws/index.html
Despite the GOP's efforts in Georgia, black voter turnout reached record levels. How do you guys say such stuff with a straight face? CNN is America's Pravda bureau.
Despite the GOP's efforts in Georgia, black voter turnout reached record levels. How do you guys say such stuff with a straight face? CNN is America's Pravda bureau.
Putting unnecessary obstacles in the way of people voting can coexist with increases in turnout, since each election is going to present different motivations for each voter. The question is whether or not the turnout would have been higher if not for those obstacles. It is on those claiming voter suppression to A) show that eligible voters are actually being prevented or discouraged from voting, B) that the obstacles are unnecessary, C) that they are targeted at particular groups that tend to vote against the party implementing the obstacles, or D) some combination of all of the above.
That turnout was higher than in some previous election tells us nothing about any of those.
LOL, the GOP thinks it's becoming normal again?!? Is that why it nominated a snake oil salesman in PA and a wife abuser with multiple personality disorder in GA?
"Normal." LMAO
Amazing how leftists have to lie about their partisanship.
Fundamentally dishonest, literally cancer, clear and present danger.
Yeet leftists.
On what planet could Biden be considered a "strongman"? You've got to be shitting me. Poor Little Joey can't do anything without Mommy, may not even make it to 2024. President Trump wasn't and isn't perfect, but the man is competent and has always put America and Americans first. Looking forward to voting for President Trump again in 2024 and seeing him back in the White House in 2025.
Define 'normal'.
This rates right up there with the biggest bunch of horse shit I've ever read...
JDT: "Is it possible to have buyers' regret on two presidents in a row?"
This is hogwash! FACT: Trump got MORE votes in 2020 than 2016!
Over 12 million more.
I don't give a fuck who becomes President. I'm done with voting. It's a fixed, futile exercise where nothing ever changes and if it does its for the worst.
Strongman..,schmongman! We have a problem with the Weak Man of our system: Congress. It’s dysfunctional and way off its Constitutional rails. Look at Dobbs, a significant number of Democrats called upon Biden to do something on abortion, not Congress. Our nation is being run on Executive Orders, Executive Branch departmental rule-making, and the odd SCOTUS decision. Congress can’t even pass a real budget. Sure Trump ended in a desperate and despotic grasp to retain power, but he began as just another “outsider” promising to fix what’s broken in DC.
Yeah, legal challenges to a sham election are ‘despotic’.
The big difference is that you poll Trump voters with phone calls, but you poll Biden voters with seances.
How dumb leftards are... "We over-whelming realize Biden has destroyed EVERYTHING; but still 92% of us would re-elect our FAILURE of a Gov-God over Trump the De-Regulator..."
Biden was elected solely to not be Donald Trump. He somehow (senility, hubris?) got the idea he had a mandate to enact a radical agenda cribbed from the left wing of the left wing, despite being generally a center-left kind of guy for his entire career. (Leaving aside his idiotic ideas about the Second Amendment. That said, there's no way I would have ever voted for him.
Donald Trump is gadfly who never had any discernible political philosophy. He was a Democrat until about 5 minutes before he announced for President and, while he made some excellent policy decisions and appointed good judges, those were more by accident than design. It always seemed that Trump's policy on anything was largely a function of who talked to him last.
I won't vote for any of the possible Democratic candidates and I won't vote for Trump. We'll have to see who the Libertarians put up.
Obama signed to Executive Orders that wound up based upon Iran's foreign interference in the 2020 election as noted in a multiple Pentagon and Intelligence Agencies communications gave Trump the power to cancel the 2020 election and redo it.
Trump chose not to use Obama's EO to have the 2020 election cancelled and redone. So much for authoritarianism under Trump
Trump also had the ability to send in Federal forces during the summer of 2020 riots over the objections of governors. So much for authoritarianism under Trump
Trump did stupidly lockdown American in 2020 after taking the advice of Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci, but that was more naivety of Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci's true motives than authoritarianism.
Trump also removed hundreds of Federal business regulations allowing more freedom in the market place. So much for authoritarianism.
Trump let authoritarianism governors ride wild over people's rights when he could have quashed it. So much for Trump authoritarianism.
Finally, Trump was the first U.S. President since Carter not to get the U.S. involved in a war that didn't exist before he became President.
Yep, no doubt Trump was an out of control authoritarian tyrant.
He threatened to take american's guns away without due process, threatened to overturn the election he lost by declaring martial law, threatened a Georgia official for not "Finding" him enough votes to win Georgia, whipped up a mob in a frenzy in order to hang mike pence for not overturning the election, and encouraged his voters not to vote for the republican candates for the Georgia senate race as revenge for Republicans not trying to overturn the election for him(the same republicans he gloated he didn't need BTW.) BTW Claiming voter fraud as an excuse to ignore election results as Trump did is the hallmark of South American dictators....
He was also good friends with Kim Jong Un, Xi Jinping, Hillary Clinton and Vladimir Putin the latter of which he called a genius for launching a naked war of aggression on a peaceful neighboring country.
So yep, No doubt Trump was an out of control authoritarian tyrant.
So girl-bullying, prohibitionist, Positive Christian fascist asset-forfeiture looters are the new normal. And to this day they respond to the very idea that wholesale asset-forfeiture looting combined with institutionalized influence-peddling and murder could have anything to do with the 1929 Crash, 1987 Crash, 2008 Crash or flash crashes with the same bovine incomprehension. That sounds to me like the Gee-Oh-Pee that weaponized mysticism has inflicted on America for well over a century.
How m any times a day do you shit your diapers?
Anyone feel like refuting this guy?
Why are you always on about girlbullying Stan?
You know what repulses voters? Click bait bullshit headlines.
Wow !!! I have taken too much time reading some of the postings. I am beginning to realize how our nation has devolved to the socially dependant nation that rulers want. Wanting to address climate change was my first intention. I cant justify my statements that could satisfy even a small portion of the people responding. Addressing the diverse reasons for these opinions will need an understanding of the subject. A chore I don't have the education or time to address. With the data available, how can we make intelligent decisions. On what the causes are, much less how to fix them. Compounding our mistake's. Putting government in charge of fixing it. Think hard on this. Having the power to collect taxes, make laws and enforcing them hands the fox the keys to the hen house. All without oversight or responsibility for their results. Actions that once altered will take more assigned government powers to regulate. All to protect land and not citizen's an anathema of humankind's reason for being. The reason government needs to rid the planet of we the parasite. The reasons for climate panic are the same around the world. Power and control. providing riches to relatives and those that keep them in power with donations provided from benefits reaped from the monies directed from government spending from the citizens deep pocket. Looking closely at who sits in the seats of power, we find that most have never held a real job. Few have run a company. Singing the paycheck that the people that do the actual work must rely upon to pay bills and feed their families. These people who work harder at justifying the reason for government provide the desire for power. Of late many find it easier to create panic. Panic and crisis where people demand government protect. this demand creates an atmosphere that when they pass laws that expand their powers the people cheer them on failing to read the fine print of what they give away. " it is only a small intrusion on your rights and it protects the children" Not an exact quote but I hope you are able to understand it. Which brings us to the last step. Education. replacing basic logic and fact with postulates ever variable. Able to adapt by the corrupt courts to make prosecution easy. Yes easy that provides them with the Bargan basement tool that tells us they are doing their job by the number of convictions they have. Convictions that still will linger for a lifetime and prevent advancement because you have a felony on your record. Conversely, it provides the real criminal a path to freedom. Freedoms that promote their criminal ways and provide government the reasons for their "crisis" that keeps the cycles going. How do we change it? we vote them out. Well, no longer works. The laws passed to "protect" our voting rights, fail. Giving a path for false and illegal voters that silence a citizens voice. We can change this slow methodical taking of our rights. Removing a law must follow the same path to create it. taking power away will be met with resistance. Power once obtained, isn't easily relinquished. Government has one rule expand power. If we no longer wish to be citizens but only subjects then do nothing. Freedom isnt free. the cost has been the blood of patriots. Who shall be the first? The rewards? Death and ruin from a government designed to protect. The problem has become what it protects. Its now our choice. I have stepped up and knocked down and suffered violation of my home and family. This will be the rewards for now. time to choose. the lives we have are little more than slavery.-----------Grampa
Normal? You mean we’re back to the uniparty of neocons again?
Politics in the U.S. will not return to anything resembling normal until we only have candidates and parties that support democracy* itself above partisanship. And that is only going to happen when the base of each party demands that. If people won't accept losing elections, then we don't have a functioning democracy.
*Cue the people being pedantic insisting on America being a republic and not a democracy, as they completely miss the point and demonstrate what I mean. I've seen people around here making pithy comments about democracy being two wolf and sheep voting on what to have for dinner, talking about the Founders being skeptical of pure democracy, and so on. But as the Oxford English dictionary defines republic:
A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
A majority of the votes is what wins those elections - AKA democracy.
The problem with you; Is your complete and utter ignorance of "the people's" supreme law OVER their government (i.e. U.S. Constitution) the very definition of the USA...
Democracy is but a 'tool' of the republic. Good grief where did you learn your government? Some kind of B.S. commie-indoctrination school?
I would be interested to hear more on the Libertarian Party (and other parties) side of this. A lot of the polling out there on the L party is timed with elections (especially Presidential ones), but wonder what the ongoing pulse or potential groundswell is for the party. Would be interesting to follow if there was some kind of ongoing / updated US map of where L party folks are in office (state, county, local).
Delusional lying Reason.
According to the latest polling from Harvard Caps Harris Poll, Trump’s favorable rating is higher than any other politician in America.
The poll was taken between June 28-29 of 1,308 registered voters. (The Supreme Court aborted Roe v. Wade on June 24.)
How unpopular is he? For months, Biden’s approval ratings have languished in the mid to low 40s, with an average approval rating of 42%. A Quinnipiac poll released last week found him at a dire 33%.
Not only that but the hate for Trump is based on media lies. Russiagate, the pee tape, bountygate, find the fraud and many more.
On the other had Biden has been sugar coated, coddled and lie for when it comes to his bad abusive behavior.
Keep that in mind.
Biden:
Separation step 1: divide people into those who want a strong, active government, regardless of ideology or party, and those who want a small, passive government.
Separation step 2: let the strong government types fight over control of their new nation, while the small government types watch.
I agree except that it's ceding territory and, for a Free Hong Kong, Sri Lankan uprising, Truckers in CA, Dutch farmers, etc. an independent state from MT to FL isn't worth a whole lot. Maybe the secession happens and the states to break off from liberty are just the the Bay in CA and the City of NY and the Swamp but, otherwise, the inability to convince (e.g.) the people of more rural NY or PN of the virtues of just leaving your neighbors alone, not taking their guns away, not telling them how to farm their land, not telling them who they should and shouldn't love and why, not telling them how to raise their kids, not making them and their children pay you to do all of the above to them, would be a serious, and heartbreaking, L. If the people in rural VA or MD can't keep The Swamp in check, what chance to the people of rural WV or PA stand?
No, mass expatriation of the left. No separation. The left leaves.
The end.
The republic is dead.
Murdered by leftists, globalists, and the faux opposition (looking at people like you, Tuccille).
So yea, revenge is good.
No shit you want a strongman in power who will kill people over politics. You, Nardz and Sevo must have some really disgusting circle-jerks.
I will bet that most of the small government types are pretty well armed, thank you.
Watching is all your cuck libertarian ideology permits you to do.
Communism is cancer, fascism is chemo.
It's people like you who would report their neighbors and then watch with glee as the Stasi dragged them off to their deaths.
Keep projecting, you lying shit.
It's people like you who would report their neighbors and then watch with glee as the Stasi dragged them off to their deaths.
We don't have a 'stasi' , sarc. That kinda thing is all on your side.
Police that imprison people in their homes, that remove business owners from their shops, that tear pastors from their pulpits. That's all you and yours.
Using the force of the state to prevent people from defending themselves, their loved ones and their property. That's all your side, sarc.
And then, having that state backed force stand by while government sanctioned terrorists burn, loot, attack and kill.
That's all on your side.
Who is calling for violence on people over politics?
I'll give you a clue: it's not me.
Kill a commie for mommy!
The current DOJ/FBI isn't being weaponized against Democrats.
Correct
Where was it said that someone wanted violence? You are being dishonest.
Take a look at Nardz's comment above. He talks about censorship and electoral fraud. What's left of "politics" if you can't speak your mind, and your votes are being stolen?
You don’t have to. Your democrat friends are already don’t that.
I can spot the small government types by the range stakes in the front yard, and a wind flag hanging on the front gate post.