Anyone else hankering for a return to the good ol’ days of the GOP??
(And the goobers said it was HRC that was possessed by demons…)
I remember the quaint old days when Obama wasn’t even American, and Hillary Clinton personally screwed up in Libya!
I try to be as fair as possible, and if a segment of the population here in America is conservative, pro life, anti red tape, low tax, strong military, and so on… have at it. Argue the case and win whatever votes you can on the back of it. It’s a reasonable ideological position, whether one agrees with it or not.
Unfortunately these days we are way beyond all that. The Republican Party is toxic, and not even close to being for the sort of agenda that the likes of Reagan espoused.
It is small tent, increasingly mean spirited, and detached from reality.
I still think, crazy as it sounds, it is still electable, due to voter suppression, gerrymandering, and rife misinformation. Oh, and there are genuine difficult global circumstances in light of pandemic, and now war, and it is easy, politically, to blame all that on any incumbent in the toxic world of politics.
I think the Republicans will make gains in the midterms, and probably win the next Presidential election. I hope not, but that’s what I think will happen at this point in time, as I survey the scene.
Longer term they need to reinvent themselves and broaden their tent, as they won’t have the demographics to win even crooked elections.
2 Likes
Unless he gains a lot of credit for “handling” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with sanctions and such, I struggle to see how Biden gets re-elected after making such a mess of the Afghan withdraw.
I also struggle to see how the Republicans nominate a sane centrist - which is what the country desperately needs.
1 Like
The demographics is destiny argument always seems appealing but it is fatally flawed. It is premised on assuming that coalitions are permanent and that the alignment between demographic and party stay constant. But over the period of time the demographic argument needs to come to fruition those things inevitably change. I think that is never more true than when the argument is based on the growth of a demographic (hispanic) the mainstream political establishment (white) completely misunderstands and mischaracterizes. The idea this demo will stay as reliably democratic as it ages is nuts and ignores existing divisions within the demographic.
Ezra Klein has been making a really compelling argument recently that the primary distinction in US politics is one between engaged and disengaged. The current media ecosystem, both the rampant both sidesism of the traditional media plus the social media algorithms that reward rage content, drastically tip the scales towards the current version of the GOP among the disengaged. That largely eliminates any incentive the GOP may have to actually change course, either in terms of discourse or overall approach.
2 Likes
Centrism has been redefined recently in some quarters in a way I think helps us make a lot more sense of our politics. It is now defined as something distinct from moderate, terms that are often used interchangeably. A moderate is someone who has objectively moderate views between the traditional poles. A centrist is someone who has no ideology except for wanting to split the difference on any argument. It’s an important distinction because when one party has pushed the Overton window so far towards insanity, the difference between a centrist and moderate becomes enormous.
I’d also question your take on Afghanistan. I concede the perception that they fucked it up is a political wound, my question is that idea actually based on.
3 Likes
I was certainly using centrist and moderate interchangeably - and based on your definition would amend my statement to say moderate. Not that I have much hope of anything more than increased radicalization from both parties in the next few election cycles.
I think not reacting to the realization that the previous afghan government was not viable without US presence should have altered the withdrawal plan in Afghanistan. It did not appear to. And strategically leaving the Taliban to retake the country was not in our best interests- particularly without any time/negotiation for those at great risk from the Taliban to be protected or evacuated in a much more orderly fashion.
Going back though - our presence there (like Iraq) was highly unlikely to ever end well. I’m sure part of the reason presidents of both parties had kicked that can down the road.
Downers and uppers!
2 Likes
That guy does not do irony - does not like rules and govt telling him what to do, so moves to …Belarus?!?
1 Like
You actually appear to be arguing against the decision to pull out altogether rather than arguing that the withdrawal was done poorly. This was an argument that had very little public constituency prior to the withdrawal (outside those who shill for the defense contractor industry) and it appears that the images we saw in the first days of the withdrawal has seen an upsurge in that perspective, with the arguments often intermingled (that looked bad therefore we shouldnt have left).
I have no idea if leaving is good for the long term, and it has to be a scale of years to decades we view this over, but I do know there was no longer the public or political appetite to do what was necessary to stay. The Taliban had already taken the country back, just not the small enclave around Kabul where the US troops were concentrated. It’s also important to recognize that status quo was predicated on the Taliban not advancing any further on promise of the pending US exit. Without that commitment, Kabul would have required defending, and doing that successfully would have required a considerable escalation in the troops stationed there. There was no status quo possible and it’s critical that the “we shouldn’t have left” people clearly acknowledge that and factor it into their cost of staying.
1 Like
if you believe he did it on his own volition, sure… “hey Vlad, I’m in a spot of trouble after that failed coup…where can I hide out?”
So, you advocate elsewhere for a presidential candidacy for AOC.
She is a charismatic and intelligent woman who argues for many good policies in the fields of healthcare, education and equality. She is young and inexperienced.
She needs more time in congress before running for high office. She’s also a lightning rod for Republican ire as she is everything they fear. She would be mercilessly pummeled by the media and their attack dogs.
You then state, probably correctly, that she’d lose. That would hand the presidency back to a party which is completely controlled by Trump. This is absolutely the last thing the country needs.
The next Democratic candidate will have a good chance to win the election as the Republicans are so Trumpist, and now so tainted by association with Putin, that they will be very vulnerable to attack. The Democratic candidate should be one who has a good chance of winning the coming election. Let AOC run in 32 if we’re all still here.
1 Like
I think whoever the Dems have as leader will struggle bases on what i have read on this side of the pond.
Given the relatively huge turnout for Trump, how likely is it that it wont vote for his successor?
I think Ukraine might be a useful precedent. Any US comic actors up to leading the country?
Jason Sudeikis? 
2 Likes
Well if we take the comparison seriously, it’s got to be Julia Louis Dreyfus. A comic who actually played President a la Zelenskyy - albeit I think with the most serious international incident involving Finland*
- Oh shit, on second thoughts that might be a bit too risky.
1 Like
These people don’t have genuine political positions or value sets, they just hate black people.
2 Likes
You would hope that attempting the violent overthrow of the last election and having such a bromance with the leader of the country’s greatest enemy would be enough ammunition for any half decent Dem candidate.
Trumpism is a major political force, but not a majority viewpoint as yet. Biden got 7 million more votes, and that was before the above mentioned factors.
If Trump gets back into the WH he will never leave. Surely that’s plain by now. Any semblance of democracy will be dead in the US. Are Americans ready for that?
Let’s hope not.
They love ‘strong leaders’ though