Does the GOP even have an alternative to Trumpism?

[rdrr]

I hope for 2 things, he and family members (if they commited crimes) are convicted at the State level. This will tarnish him greatly, yet in the back of my mind with him continuing to insist he is innocent, they're just out to get me!, I wonder how many of the 70m will continue support him?

I’m afraid by virtue of being POTUS even formerly, he has a Teflon coating at the Federal level, which is tragic, a code that says Presidents are above the law and immune from responsibility for their lawlessness and willful destruction of the system they were sworn to uphold. I admit this is really a dicey subject, and a chink in our Democracy. The balance between Presidential responsibility and being subjected to politically motivated prosecution, especially when all of the powers handed to a President are based on this person being a responsible individual.

All bets are off when we elect a corrupt, nincompoop. I don’t see a good solution for this other than we reap what we sew. For a corrupt President, do we really want them able to pardon all of their henchmen in crime and walk away unscathed? This appears not to be an easy question to answer. Now that Trump is trying to turn it into a get out of jail free card, I can see the President’s pardoning ability,, as being curbed, regulated, or eliminated. Or how about a caveat that it can’t be for henchmen (associates) doing your illegal bidding, or being in league with you nefarious plans??

Back to the second thing I hope for, that although it might rob me of the pleasure of seeing him convicted, answering for his bankrupt life on the Earthly plain, the sooner he croaks the better preferably by way of a diet of saturated fat. Donald Trump, only by the virtue corruption and STUPID has a chance of further harming the US. You’ve got to ask, just how much stupid is out there in America? God, it’s a question, I might not want answered... 70m?

On the second point, I am going to try to be optimistic here. There has got to be a large percentage of that 70 million neighbors that voted for some other reason than "MAGA!" I think however that Hillary got too much shit for calling his supporters a basket of deplorables. Every day they just reinforce the original meaning of what she was trying to convey. The base is composed of every bit of ugliness that normalcy would detest.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Give it a month and Dems will be blamed.
I'm also looking forward to the next government shutdown.

Oh the good ol days of just a standard government shutdown.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

On the second point, I am going to try to be optimistic here. There has got to be a large percentage of that 70 million neighbors that voted for some other reason than "MAGA!" I think however that Hillary got too much shit for calling his supporters a basket of deplorables. Every day they just reinforce the original meaning of what she was trying to convey. The base is composed of every bit of ugliness that normalcy would detest.

Actually, I have thought that since 2016.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Actually, I have thought that since 2016.

I think they are less of a basket and more of a cornicopia.

Words matter!

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I think they are less of a basket and more of a cornicopia.

Words matter!

Well, yes, words do matter, I agree, but I suspect that they may have been taking issue not with the description of the actual container, but, rather, with the noun used to describe the putrid contents of that container.

 

[User.45]

I don't know if their unemployed or business losing base is happy with their economic assistance obstruction.

(I honestly thought the abysmal COVID response would be sufficient to destroy a party. I don't believe that anymore)

 

[Huntn]

(I honestly thought the abysmal COVID response would be sufficient to destroy a party. I don't believe that anymore)

Cult, Koolaid, & Trump is the only game in town because of their base. They no longer want “normal”.

 

[Edd]

(I honestly thought the abysmal COVID response would be sufficient to destroy a party. I don't believe that anymore)

COVID response = anti-freedom. See how easy that is? Wait, I’ll do it again.

Health care = anti-freedom

Infrastructure = anti-freedom

taxes = anti-freedom

gun control = anti-freedom

Being a right wing commentator has got to be the easiest job ever. You don’t have to make any sense. Bonus points for being a racist. No preparation necessary. Are the Dems for it? Then you’re against it.

 

[User.45]

COVID response = anti-freedom. See how easy that is? Wait, I’ll do it again.

Health care = anti-freedom

Infrastructure = anti-freedom

taxes = anti-freedom

gun control = anti-freedom

Being a right wing commentator has got to be the easiest job ever. You don’t have to make any sense. Bonus points for being a racist. No preparation necessary. Are the Dems for it? Then you’re against it.

And this bugs the hell out of me. These people have such fucking lazy stances, and they want to sell their laziness as a virtue while calling others lazy. I'll bring up libertarians again. It's all talk no action. They suddenly forget how to libertarian when it's actually hard: like when a fucking governmental action is needed, you know, in pandemic wartime.

 

[Zoidberg]

Actually, I have thought that since 2016.

It wasn't the only thing, though. There were many more gaffes. To me the quote that struck me the most, is when she said that they would put a lot of coal miners out of business. Within its original context, this is what she actually said:

So for example, I’m the only candidate which has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country. Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right, Tim?

But then she added:
And we’re going to make it clear that we don’t want to forget those people. Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories.

Now we’ve got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don’t want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on.

You'd expect someone who'd been in politics her whole life would know better than to say things like that that can be so easily taken out of context and turned against you.

To use a saying so dear to Americans, with Hillary Clinton the Democrats brought a knife to a gunfight.

 

[Zoidberg]

And this bugs the hell out of me. These people have such fucking lazy stances, and they want to sell their laziness as a virtue while calling others lazy. I'll bring up libertarians again. It's all talk no action. They suddenly forget how to libertarian when it's actually hard: like when a fucking governmental action is needed, you know, in pandemic wartime.

Keep in mind we all base your decisions on the information we receive. With Facebook and the multitude of alt-right outlets that have popped up in the last 8 years that have made it so easy to push out perfectly targeted agitprop and have diluted the meaning of journalism, from their standpoint, Trumpists are also taking a very logical decision in their support for fascism, and the same goes for libertarians. From the moment they get up to the moment they go to sleep, they are exposed to as much disinformation as they can take.

They are using the freedom of press we enjoy in Western countries against ourselves, and they are winning. As long as people like Murdoch and his talking heads are not held accountable for what they have been doing for decades, they will keep gaining ground. And don't get me started on RT and their satellite outlets, I'm tired of explaining that to my friends.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

It wasn't the only thing, though. There were many more gaffes. To me the quote that struck me the most, is when she said that they would put a lot of coal miners out of business. Within its original context, this is what she actually said:



You'd expect someone who'd been in politics her whole life would know better than to say things like that that can be so easily taken out of context and turned against you.

To use a saying so dear to Americans, with Hillary Clinton the Democrats brought a knife to a gunfight.

To me, that is not a gaffe, it is simply stating the obvious, although perhaps it might have been phrased slightly more diplomatically.

However, I do think that Secretary Clinton was held to a far higher standard of conduct, language, and behaviour than any of her opponents - the old classic double standard as it is routinely applied to women - and judged far more harshly whenever she failed to meet it.

 

[Zoidberg]

To me, that is not a gaffe, it is simply stating the obvious, although perhaps it might have been phrased slightly more diplomatically.

However, I do think that Secretary Clinton was held to a far higher standard of conduct, language, and behaviour than any of her opponents - the old classic double standard as it is routinely applied to women - and judged far more harshly whenever she failed to meet it.

It's a gaffe, in the sense that she should have known better and phrased things differently. People are not ready for nuance. Everything they say will be used against them. The democrats campaigned in 2016 like they were campaigning in 2008 before Facebook was a thing, and didn't fully realise how damaging Facebook was until it was too late.

We should also consider how counterproductive the current primaries are set up (and this is not unique to the US, we have the same thing in the UK): they are designed like a long form game show. Because of how long they drag on, how polarising they get and how publicised they are, they basically ensure that by the time they have a candidate, almost everyone even within the party hates them. Had Sanders won, the propaganda machine would have flipped the switched the other way and the message would have pushed Clinton as the best option.

In contrast, the Republicans were more cynical and toed the party line: the minute Trump got elected, they all left aside their differences and fully embraced him as their god emperor.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

It's a gaffe, in the sense that she should have known better and phrased things differently. People are not ready for nuance. Everything they say will be used against them. The democrats campaigned in 2016 like they were campaigning in 2008 before Facebook was a thing, and didn't fully realise how damaging Facebook was until it was too late.

We should also consider how counterproductive the current primaries are set up (and this is not unique to the US, we have the same thing in the UK): they are designed like a long form game show. Because of how long they drag on, how polarising they get and how publicised they are, they basically ensure that by the time they have a candidate, almost everyone even within the party hates everyone them. Had Sanders won, the propaganda machine would have flipped the switched the other way and the message would have pushed Clinton as the best option.

In contrast, the Republicans were more cynical and toed the party line: the minute Trump got elected, they all left aside their differences and fully embraced him as their god emperor.

Given what - for, I will not write "who", as, at this stage, I'm not entirely sure that Mr Trump is human, rather, I think it entirely possible that he could have been hatched - the US electorate have already actually voted into office - namely, the egregious Mr Trump - I think that you are expecting - or, demanding - too high a standard from someone who is human, giving rise to a situation where every syllable has to be watched.

The perfection of Pericles is not what the US system can deliver - as anyone who emerges victorious as president will have had to have built countless coalitions, and the construction of coalitions means that you must cultivate the arcane arts and skills of how to compromise, that is, compromise policies and principles, both.

Besides, for that matter, it is a long time since the US could consider - and hope for - someone such as Pericles, perhaps around two hundred and fifty years, for Lincoln was an accident, and anyway, Pericles himself came to a bad end, as his own people and elites turned against him, and he was exiled. Perfection comes at a high political and personal price.

Personally, I think that Secretary Clinton would have made an excellent president; she was highly intelligent, experienced, qualified, and a fairly decent human being, and, moreover, by the dismal standards of US politics, was not particularly corrupt.

 

[dogslobber]

I think some have mentally bunkered their sane thoughts as being contrary to Trump makes you a target. In some ways, Trump is using the Communist China play book to control dissenters who speak out against the party line. Those who criticize the Communist gov't are attacked by those overseas who are zealots like Trump voters. Suppression and fear is rife in Republican politician minds.

 

[Eraserhead]

I think some have mentally bunkered their sane thoughts as being contrary to Trump makes you a target. In some ways, Trump is using the Communist China play book to control dissenters who speak out against the party line. Those who criticize the Communist gov't are attacked by those overseas who are zealots like Trump voters. Suppression and fear is rife in Republican politician minds.

The communist party in China is at least (mostly) competent which helps.

 

[Huntn]

The communist party in China is at least (mostly) competent which helps.

Welcome Almighty Eraserhead, good to see you!

 

[Eraserhead]

It's a gaffe, in the sense that she should have known better and phrased things differently. People are not ready for nuance. Everything they say will be used against them. The democrats campaigned in 2016 like they were campaigning in 2008 before Facebook was a thing, and didn't fully realise how damaging Facebook was until it was too late.

We should also consider how counterproductive the current primaries are set up (and this is not unique to the US, we have the same thing in the UK): they are designed like a long form game show. Because of how long they drag on, how polarising they get and how publicised they are, they basically ensure that by the time they have a candidate, almost everyone even within the party hates them. Had Sanders won, the propaganda machine would have flipped the switched the other way and the message would have pushed Clinton as the best option.

In contrast, the Republicans were more cynical and toed the party line: the minute Trump got elected, they all left aside their differences and fully embraced him as their god emperor.

I think a bigger problem in 2016 was that it appeared the whole left was more concerned about gender neutral bathrooms than any issues of substance.

And while trans issues are important it’s difficult to justify putting the whole focus on an issue that affects 1/500 people. Now maybe they make up a much larger percentage in the justice system or suicides but then the issue needs suitable framing.

It’s like the defund the police stuff this time - yes America is over policed but we still want the cops to come when there’s a home invasion or whatever. Rural America could move towards a model like mountain rescue where it’s mostly volunteer led - perhaps with a man and woman leading a two officer team that works one day a week with volunteers as backup. But you’ve got to sell that sensibly - and defund the police doesn’t do that. I mean here in the UK a rural town with 10k people probably has less than 10 crimes a month. If rural America is worse that’s probably because they are arresting people for minor offences that don’t matter.

 

[SuperMatt]

I think a bigger problem in 2016 was that it appeared the whole left was more concerned about gender neutral bathrooms than any issues of substance.

And while trans issues are important it’s difficult to justify putting the whole focus on an issue that affects 1/500 people. Now maybe they make up a much larger percentage in the justice system or suicides but then the issue needs suitable framing.

It’s like the defund the police stuff this time - yes America is over policed but we still want the cops to come when there’s a home invasion or whatever. Rural America could move towards a model like mountain rescue where it’s mostly volunteer led - perhaps with a man and woman leading a two officer team that works one day a week with volunteers as backup. But you’ve got to sell that sensibly - and defund the police doesn’t do that.

It doesn’t seem to me that “defund the police” hurt the Democrats much. 80 million votes for Biden despite some states intentionally trying to prevent people that rightfully didn’t want to risk going out because of the pandemic from voting.

In some ways, a president like Biden gives great cover to progressives in the party. He got a lot of moderate voters because he didn’t support “defund” or “green new deal” or “medicare for all” which were all buzzwords the GOP was ready to use in every ad if Bernie or Liz Warren got the nomination.

Now, if the Democrats win 50 seats in the Senate, while Biden wouldn’t put forward any of the farther-left initiatives on his own, I don’t think he would veto them either. This could be a great chance for a moderate president to give top-cover for the progressives in the party.

 

[Eraserhead]

It doesn’t seem to me that “defund the police” hurt the Democrats much. 80 million votes for Biden despite some states intentionally trying to prevent people that rightfully didn’t want to risk going out because of the pandemic from voting.

In some ways, a president like Biden gives great cover to progressives in the party. He got a lot of moderate voters because he didn’t support “defund” or “green new deal” or “medicare for all” which were all buzzwords the GOP was ready to use in every ad if Bernie or Liz Warren got the nomination.

Now, if the Democrats win 50 seats in the Senate, while Biden wouldn’t put forward any of the farther-left initiatives on his own, I don’t think he would veto them either. This could be a great chance for a moderate president to give top-cover for the progressives in the party.

The republicans got 74 million votes with the worst candidate in history.

We are now the only good guys but we need to be smart about framing.