Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VIII (threadbanned users listed in OP)
Comments
-
Bernie in 2016 and 2020 showed how smoke and mirrors the support of 'young' and 'left of corporate' groups of the democratic party are.
Until we see their noisy online presence actually translate into votes outside of blue/liberal strongholds then saying she is 'loved' by them doesn't add up to much.
It's a process of reshaping the party from within and then pushing off of the new agenda, as it almost always is - that's never an overnight thing. Tea Party type candidates weren't winning purple areas off the bat either, but they pushed the republican party to the right as a whole over time which is the hymn sheet they now go off of, and were going off of when they acquired more power than any party has in a century.
The same happened with the southern strategy republicans, who started out with Barry Goldwater winning a whopping 52 electoral seats... while paving the way for Nixon and Reagan to have amongst the biggest EC wins ever seen, on top of gaining control of the Senate for the first time in 30 years, giving us the term 'Reagan democrats'.
On the subject of safe democratic strongholds, it's also easy to forget that Clinton in 1980 was only the second democrat in a century to lose the Arkansas Governor elections, and yet fast forward a few years and you have the two biggest EC wins for the democrats since FDR during the 1990s. After failing to get any of their preferred nominees to win the 1988 primaries, one of the New Democrat leaders in Al From noted "we were fine until the presidential nominating process got going in earnest, but then that process defines the party." But they kept to their guns, and did indeed change the party by 1992 and for a long time basically were the entire party, which has now come under a lot more challenge in the last few years.
In these instances the opposing party had not changed its messaging in a long while, and had become somewhat stale and appeared to be lacking in a clear, unifying agenda - that absolutely includes today's democrats. In both instances the party who had changed, ultimately had a very strong and clear agenda, and used this to target new voters in a way that was most advantageous for them. All of these movements had charismatic people who could connect with everyday Americans and who people felt strongly enough to defend (as well as attack) - the same characteristics that are attributed to Cortez more than maybe any others, and all bore increasing relevance to their eras over time.
That's not to say Cortez would be the best candidate for the Democrats to put forward today, but to compare her to Hillary Clinton in terms of how she affects and motivates (for better or for worse) each of left, right and centre voters is very wide of the mark. Hillary was not good at any of those three things - I actually think she might have been an alright president, but as a candidate she was absolutely brutal. She engendered all the hate and aggression from one side, and wasnt really liked much at all from those in the middle, while those on the left (progressive or corporatist) were never motivated enough to defend her, or champion her achievements.
They just aren't really comparable in this sense, was my point. She seems more in line with people who were building "movements for tomorrow". Whether CNN and MSNBC at that time decide to continue to accuse her supporters of being nazis (she shares the same ones as Sanders after all) in a desperate effort to scare people away from voting her though, remains to be seen.0 -
Water John wrote: »The family story told by Mary Trump discloses exactly how dysfunctional the family is;
'But one Thanksgiving, the eldest son, Fred Jr, found himself relegated to the junior end of the table with his daughter Mary. “During the course of the meal, my grandmother choked,” Mary Trump recalls. “My dad had been a volunteer ambulance driver in the late 60s and early 70s so he knew the Heimlich manoeuvre and he very gently manoeuvred her into the kitchen and gave her the Heimlich, and that basically saved her from choking.
“Nobody else moved; everybody kept eating. It was a sort of awkward, embarrassing thing that Gam [her nickname] choked.' Guardian
They fcuking well kept eating.
It's like Succession0 -
Join Date:Posts: 15005
Carfacemandog wrote: »It's a process of reshaping the party from within and then pushing off of the new agenda, as it almost always is - that's never an overnight thing. Tea Party type candidates weren't winning purple areas off the bat either, but they pushed the republican party to the right as a whole over time which is the hymn sheet they now go off of, and were going off of when they acquired more power than any party has in a century.
The same happened with the southern strategy republicans, who started out with Barry Goldwater winning a whopping 52 electoral seats... while paving the way for Nixon and Reagan to have amongst the biggest EC wins ever seen, on top of gaining control of the Senate for the first time in 30 years, giving us the term 'Reagan democrats'.
On the subject of safe democratic strongholds, it's also easy to forget that Clinton in 1980 was only the second democrat in a century to lose the Arkansas Governor elections, and yet fast forward a few years and you have the two biggest EC wins for the democrats since FDR during the 1990s. After failing to get any of their preferred nominees to win the 1988 primaries, one of the New Democrat leaders in Al From noted "we were fine until the presidential nominating process got going in earnest, but then that process defines the party." But they kept to their guns, and did indeed change the party by 1992 and for a long time basically were the entire party, which has now come under a lot more challenge in the last few years.
In these instances the opposing party had not changed its messaging in a long while, and had become somewhat stale and appeared to be lacking in a clear, unifying agenda - that absolutely includes today's democrats. In both instances the party who had changed, ultimately had a very strong and clear agenda, and used this to target new voters in a way that was most advantageous for them. All of these movements had charismatic people who could connect with everyday Americans and who people felt strongly enough to defend (as well as attack) - the same characteristics that are attributed to Cortez more than maybe any others, and all bore increasing relevance to their eras over time.
That's not to say Cortez would be the best candidate for the Democrats to put forward today, but to compare her to Hillary Clinton in terms of how she affects and motivates (for better or for worse) each of left, right and centre voters is very wide of the mark. Hillary was not good at any of those three things - I actually think she might have been an alright president, but as a candidate she was absolutely brutal. She engendered all the hate and aggression from one side, and wasnt really liked much at all from those in the middle, while those on the left (progressive or corporatist) were never motivated enough to defend her, or champion her achievements.
They just aren't really comparable in this sense, was my point. She seems more in line with people who were building "movements for tomorrow". Whether CNN and MSNBC at that time decide to continue to accuse her supporters of being nazis (she shares the same ones as Sanders after all) in a desperate effort to scare people away from voting her though, remains to be seen.
The US is really crying out for a viable third party , both the GOP and Democrats are split into 2 camps.
On the GOP side you have the (currently in control) Tea-party , Very Right wing Religious Conservative types and then a smaller cohort of more traditional Conservatives that are closer to the US Centre (which is still WAY to the right of the typical European Centre).
On the Democrat side you have a fairly significant amount of (small c) conservative , corporatist types sitting in and around that same middle albeit a bit further to the left of the GOP side. You then have the "left wing" of the Democrats with Sanders , AOC et al - in truth they are really just Democratic socialists and would be considered very much centre left in Europe.
Their electoral system simply doesn't allow for it to develop , but a party living in that broad centrist space would likely be quite successful and then the two left/right sides of the existing parties could fully embrace their views and see where their true levels of support lie.0 -
Acting Secretary for Homeland Security making the case tonight that the feds have to "proactively arrest individuals" in Portland.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/acting-dhs-sec-says-due-to-lack-of-local-law-enforcement-in-portland-feds-must-proactively-arrest-individuals/
Law and Crime blog with the dive into this
https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analysis/two-dhs-officials-apparently-just-admitted-their-troops-have-been-violating-the-constitution/
What they've admitted to in their PR is that they have no constitutional grounds for what they've done. Additional to what I linked to yesterday, a fed spokesperson said the man they abducted in put into the van was "in an area where an individual was aiming a laser at the eyes of officers." - ie. guilt by association ie. violation of 4A, per Ybarra v. Illinois 1979:[A] person’s mere propinquity to others independently suspected of criminal activity does not, without more, give rise to probable cause to search that person. Where the standard is probable cause, a search or seizure of a person must be supported by probable cause particularized with respect to that person.
The feds have since refused to admit this specific incident was an arrest. That's important, because they had no lawful grounds to do so, and they know it. Dunaway v. New York also 1979 also rendered unconstitutional any transport of detained suspects away from a scene for investigation, they must first be placed under arrest:[T]he detention of petitioner was in important respects indistinguishable from a traditional arrest. Petitioner was not questioned briefly where he was found. Instead, he was taken from a neighbor’s home to a police car, transported to a police station, and placed in an interrogation room.0 -
Law and Crime blog with the dive into this
https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analysis/two-dhs-officials-apparently-just-admitted-their-troops-have-been-violating-the-constitution/
What they've admitted to in their PR is that they have no constitutional grounds for what they've done. Additional to what I linked to yesterday, a fed spokesperson said the man they abducted in put into the van was "in an area where an individual was aiming a laser at the eyes of officers." - ie. guilt by association ie. violation of 4A, per Ybarra v. Illinois 1979:[A] person’s mere propinquity to others independently suspected of criminal activity does not, without more, give rise to probable cause to search that person. Where the standard is probable cause, a search or seizure of a person must be supported by probable cause particularized with respect to that person.
The feds have since refused to admit this specific incident was an arrest. That's important, because they had no lawful grounds to do so, and they know it. Dunaway v. New York also 1979 also rendered unconstitutional any transport of detained suspects away from a scene for investigation, they must first be placed under arrest:[T]he detention of petitioner was in important respects indistinguishable from a traditional arrest. Petitioner was not questioned briefly where he was found. Instead, he was taken from a neighbor’s home to a police car, transported to a police station, and placed in an interrogation room.
The unamusing thing is that their presence was the cause for the specific alleged criminal act of malice they gave as the reason for their action against the person detained without grounds for the detention merely because he was in the area. Wolf seems to favour police-state tactics. It may be the only way to cure that would be for judges to use their constitutional right to observe at first hand on the streets the tactics used by Wolf's team.0 -
Advertisement
-
Retr0gamer wrote: »Heard a quote before. Not all trump supporters are racist but find me a racist that isn't a trump supporter.
Erdogan
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50080737
Although I think they are friends now.
Vince McMahon maybe0 -
Carfacemandog wrote: »It's a process of reshaping the party from within and then pushing off of the new agenda, as it almost always is - that's never an overnight thing. Tea Party type candidates weren't winning purple areas off the bat either, but they pushed the republican party to the right as a whole over time which is the hymn sheet they now go off of, and were going off of when they acquired more power than any party has in a century.
The same happened with the southern strategy republicans, who started out with Barry Goldwater winning a whopping 52 electoral seats... while paving the way for Nixon and Reagan to have amongst the biggest EC wins ever seen, on top of gaining control of the Senate for the first time in 30 years, giving us the term 'Reagan democrats'.
On the subject of safe democratic strongholds, it's also easy to forget that Clinton in 1980 was only the second democrat in a century to lose the Arkansas Governor elections, and yet fast forward a few years and you have the two biggest EC wins for the democrats since FDR during the 1990s. After failing to get any of their preferred nominees to win the 1988 primaries, one of the New Democrat leaders in Al From noted "we were fine until the presidential nominating process got going in earnest, but then that process defines the party." But they kept to their guns, and did indeed change the party by 1992 and for a long time basically were the entire party, which has now come under a lot more challenge in the last few years.
In these instances the opposing party had not changed its messaging in a long while, and had become somewhat stale and appeared to be lacking in a clear, unifying agenda - that absolutely includes today's democrats. In both instances the party who had changed, ultimately had a very strong and clear agenda, and used this to target new voters in a way that was most advantageous for them. All of these movements had charismatic people who could connect with everyday Americans and who people felt strongly enough to defend (as well as attack) - the same characteristics that are attributed to Cortez more than maybe any others, and all bore increasing relevance to their eras over time.
That's not to say Cortez would be the best candidate for the Democrats to put forward today, but to compare her to Hillary Clinton in terms of how she affects and motivates (for better or for worse) each of left, right and centre voters is very wide of the mark. Hillary was not good at any of those three things - I actually think she might have been an alright president, but as a candidate she was absolutely brutal. She engendered all the hate and aggression from one side, and wasnt really liked much at all from those in the middle, while those on the left (progressive or corporatist) were never motivated enough to defend her, or champion her achievements.
They just aren't really comparable in this sense, was my point. She seems more in line with people who were building "movements for tomorrow". Whether CNN and MSNBC at that time decide to continue to accuse her supporters of being nazis (she shares the same ones as Sanders after all) in a desperate effort to scare people away from voting her though, remains to be seen.
You make a lot of good points but the fact you're still hung up on some throw away comments on those stations and their impact raises a red flag regarding how you evaluate democrat voters.
You can believe the party lacks identity but Bernie showed twice that the 'socialist' identity isn't yet resonating. As you said, it may shift over time, helped by Bernie, but there is no sign of fundamental moves in that direction. People are keen regarding the concepts but they run away once the details are discussed.
Bernie supporters, including in the media, through plenty of dirt at other candidates, especially Biden, it is part of politics. If your support falls away due to it they were never on board in the first place.0 -
ExMachina1000 wrote: »Erdogan
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50080737
Although I think they are friends now.
Vince McMahon maybe
Erdoğan is effectively a dictator so an authoritarian leader's backing is not exactly inspiring.0 -
This is the most sense Trump has ever made. Should have said all this 4 months ago.0
-
Senator Ron Wyden has a take on the federal policing activities in Portland, Oregon. Oregon senator Ron Wyden has warned the US presidential election could be held under martial law after federal police officers clashed with rioters during the 54th night of protests in his state's largest city. Speaking at Senate intelligence committee hearing on Wednesday, Mr Wyden said Portland had been "invaded by militarized law enforcement". "If the line is not drawn in the sand right now, America may be staring down the barrel of martial law in the middle of a presidential election," Mr Wyden said.
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/world/2020-election-may-be-held-under-martial-law-warns-oregon-senator/ar-BB1744t3?ocid=msedgntp
Personally Trump would want to be mindful of the fact that the U.S intelligence community and the U.S military are well prepped in ousting dictators from comfortable quarters should he try to rule by dictat before or after the Nov elections. If he tries to ride the tiger, he can be made pay the price.0 -
Advertisement
-
[Deleted User] wrote: »Erdoğan is effectively a dictator so an authoritarian leader's backing is not exactly inspiring.
Leo varadkar said during his last white house visit that Trump "had made America great again "0 -
Anything said by anybody visiting or meeting Trump, should be put in a special box. simply label it, alt reality. We all understand why people say theses things.0
-
ExMachina1000 wrote: »Leo varadkar said during his last white house visit that Trump "had made America great again "
It's a good policy to be nice to a host who likes being fawned-over.0 -
You make a lot of good points but the fact you're still hung up on some throw away comments on those stations and their impact raises a red flag regarding how you evaluate democrat voters.
You can believe the party lacks identity but Bernie showed twice that the 'socialist' identity isn't yet resonating. As you said, it may shift over time, helped by Bernie, but there is no sign of fundamental moves in that direction. People are keen regarding the concepts but they run away once the details are discussed.
Bernie supporters, including in the media, through plenty of dirt at other candidates, especially Biden, it is part of politics. If your support falls away due to it they were never on board in the first place.
Of course I'm hung up on it - it was one of the most disgraceful things I have seen in US media political coverage outside of FOX & co. Calling Sanders - a guy who lost family members to the Holocaust - and his supporters Nazi's and brownshirts is absolutely appalling for reasons that shouldn't even need to be discussed. Not only that, but I am so, so grateful that the Trump admin is such a sh*t show that they failed to capitalise on it, because it gave a serious open goal to (undeservedly) legitimise their claims of 'fake news' and 'everyone I disagree with is a racist' type stuff as well as to demotivate the "blue no matter who" movement. That slogan is so easy to make fall flat when you have major media players like Chris Matthews
and Chuck Todd doing so, the former even claiming they might prefer four more years of Trump rather than voting for Sanders had he won the primaries. If I were working for the Trump campaign and somehow avoided the temptation to just kill myself because of it, I would have been all over that immediately with Lincoln Project style ads - and if they were still working for the GOP I'm pretty certain that would have happened.
Can you point me to the major media players in support of Sanders who said similar things about Biden, though? An equivalent wouldn't be far off insinuating he murdered his own wife in the 70s, given the Nazis killed much of Sanders' family. That is how utterly, unforgivably appalling those comments were. And I'm not talking about Cenk Uygur who is only on Youtube and not even in the top 2,000 channel at that because he's not a major media player (I also have no idea if he said something like that and doubt it, just using him as an example of 'not a major media player'.
The party does lack identity, and it's an issue. Much like the GOP it has multiple factions because of the ridiculous two party system, but it does not have anyone standing out to drive a singular message from it to the masses. Biden's approach has been to do the opposite for the most part - and for this specific election I do think that is the best path to victory. Obama did a good job of this, though even his is a bit confused as Candidate Obama and President Obama were two quite different entities (in his defense, often as a result of circumstance); the former more Bernie and the latter more Biden/Clinton. There is nothing resembling the 'Rock the Vote!' and 'Hope and Change' campaigns of Bill Clinton & Obama. People are voting against a bad rather than for a good, which is both exhausting (for voters) over multiple campaigns and gives way to complacency/short term memories come future elections. If Biden wins, he has to make a huge, huge chunk of his presidency about doing this as it seems quite set that he will be one-term-only due to age. Without that, I would be hugely concerned that the Republicans will be on 60+ Senate and 250+ House seats as well as a storming victory in 2024 with someone more capable than Trump in charge. To Biden's credit, there do appear to be some early inroads towards that over the last few months - and something easily forgotten is that Biden was actually to the left of the New Democrats initially, albeit not to the distance that Sanders is.
I think if anything, the US media don't get on to the subject of details on the subject of details enough when it comes to the likes of Sanders or Cortez, in no small part because they are busy throwing out lazy 'Nazi, Communism, Venezuela' comments even in both the neutral and many of the supposedly more liberal outlets. As well as, if we're honest, a startling amount of the American electorate having the attention span of a dead hamster. But maybe we've just had different experiences on that front.0 -
Philadelphia's district attorney has said similar - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-22/philly-d-a-threatens-to-arrest-federal-agentsaloyisious wrote: »Senator Ron Wyden has a take on the federal police activities in Portland, Oregon. Oregon senator Ron Wyden has warned the US presidential election could be held under martial law after federal police officers clashed with rioters during the 54th night of protests in his state's largest city. Speaking at Senate intelligence committee hearing on Wednesday, Mr Wyden said Portland had been "invaded by militarized law enforcement". "If the line is not drawn in the sand right now, America may be staring down the barrel of martial law in the middle of a presidential election," Mr Wyden said.
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/world/2020-election-may-be-held-under-martial-law-warns-oregon-senator/ar-BB1744t3?ocid=msedgntp
Personally Trump would want to be mindful of the fact that the U.S intelligence community and the U.S military are well prepped in ousting dictators from comfortable quarters should he try to rule by dictat before or after the Nov elections. If he tries to ride the tiger, he can be made pay the price.0 -
Carfacemandog wrote: »People are voting against a bad rather than for a good, which is both exhausting (for voters) over multiple campaigns and gives way to complacency/short term memories come future elections. If Biden wins, he has to make a huge, huge chunk of his presidency about doing this as it seems quite set that he will be one-term-only due to age. Without that, I would be hugely concerned that the Republicans will be on 60+ Senate and 250+ House seats as well as a storming victory in 2024 with someone more capable than Trump in charge. To Biden's credit, there do appear to be some early inroads towards that over the last few months - and something easily forgotten is that Biden was actually to the left of the New Democrats initially, albeit not to the distance that Sanders is.
I think if anything, the US media don't get on to the subject of details on the subject of details enough when it comes to the likes of Sanders or Cortez, in no small part because they are busy throwing out lazy 'Nazi, Communism, Venezuela' comments even in both the neutral and many of the supposedly more liberal outlets. As well as, if we're honest, a startling amount of the American electorate having the attention span of a dead hamster. But maybe we've just had different experiences on that front.
I'm minded that both parties and U.S national party politics have become so bogger-down that the choice for the voters between Biden and Trump has been reduced to "one is not quite as bad as the other".
I'd also be minded for AOC to get more experienced at national politics, build up her national base more before going for higher office so she doesn't get power-mad like the incumbent and forget how nice the electorate was.0 -
Trump's prognosis on the virus at yesterdays briefing: blame the Mexicans and the protestors and cure it by flooding cities with federal police agencies with orders to take over policing matters there. Not even a epidemiologist in sight.0
-
I remember well being away with work in Castlebar on election night 2016, watching the results come in with a few colleagues over a beer and then waking at about 6.30 to discover the outcome.
We resumed our amateur analysis over breakfast and it was of course still the number one topic that night. I remember there being two main talking points, the "3am phonecall" that Hillary constantly referenced and the risk of war through a misstep.
We laughed about it, rolled our eyes lot, shook our heads some too, but not one of us there that night could have in our wildest nightmares have envisaged how catastrophically badly the Trump presidency has worked out.
Though the virus was not of America's making, it became that 3am call writ large and when it came to facing that and other tests, the Trump administration failed and failed and failed again.
If the United States survives at all (and we are looking at an existential crisis) it will take a generation or two to recover its position as a global leader and for its own people to begin to come together again. Throughout these four years, China and Russia have become a clear threat to Western unity and dominance and much of that is at Trump's door as well.
The only good thing to come out of it is, America now knows what happens when it elects the US taliban. So long as enough of swing voters are appalled enough to move Democrat, and even many Reagan Republicans, it will banish the tea party element to the margins for a long time.0 -
I remember well being away with work in Castlebar on election night 2016, watching the results come in with a few colleagues over a beer and then waking at about 6.30 to discover the outcome.
We resumed our amateur analysis over breakfast and it was of course still the number one topic that night. I remember there being two main talking points, the "3am phonecall" that Hillary constantly referenced and the risk of war through a misstep.
We laughed about it, rolled our eyes lot, shook our heads some too, but not one of us there that night could have in our wildest nightmares have envisaged how catastrophically badly the Trump presidency has worked out.
Though the virus was not of America's making, it became that 3am call writ large and when it came to facing that and other tests, the Trump administration failed and failed and failed again.
If the United States survives at all (and we are looking at an existential crisis) it will take a generation or two to recover its position as a global leader and for its own people to begin to come together again. Throughout these four years, China and Russia have become a clear threat to Western unity and dominance and much of that is at Trump's door as well.
The only good thing to come out of it is, America now knows what happens when it elects the US taliban. So long as enough of swing voters are appalled enough to move Democrat, and even many Reagan Republicans, it will banish the tea party element to the margins for a long time.
"I love the poorly educated" - Donald J Trump.
Not much more to be said really. Although I would disagree with the highlighted bit - over 40% of the US population apparently still thinks that this guy is doing a stellar job. If he gets back in again in November, that's the end of the US as a superpower and it'll likely descend into a totalitarian dictatorship regime.0 -
He's on 40.3% as of 538s aggregation. In 2017 he briefly dipped below 40 (possibly Jan 2018 as well) but that's it. After all he has done in the last 3.5 years (and especially the last 6 months) I no longer consider it an exaggeration at all to say he could run daily 'press conferences' where protesters and political opponents are publicly executed without trial and stay above about 37%."I love the poorly educated" - Donald J Trump.
Not much more to be said really. Although I would disagree with the highlighted bit - over 40% of the US population apparently still thinks that this guy is doing a stellar job. If he gets back in again in November, that's the end of the US as a superpower and it'll likely descend into a totalitarian dictatorship regime.
I am not joking nor being sarcastic. That is what the US has descended into. After the last few years, there is literally nothing that almost every remaining Trump supporter wouldn't stick with him through.
If that sounds overblown, so would the last 6 months if I told it to you last year. And so would his whole presidency had I told it to you on January 19th, 2017. But here we are, and they are still with him. And not begrudgingly either.0 -
Advertisement
-
Ah patriotism means whatever you want it to mean really. It is a great tool. You have to be patriotic and you aren't a patriot unless you od as I say. It doesn't encourage a discussion as to whether what I am saying is a good point or not which is the point.
Combining the words of Oscar Wilde and Samuel Johnson, Patriotism is the Virtue of the Vicious and the Last Refuge of the Scoundrel.. This is so often proven these days when all kinds of bullying and hate-filled behaviour is cloaked in flag-waving 'patriotism'...0 -
Portland City is run by its mayor and 4 city commissioners. https://www.portland.gov/government.
At a meeting yesterday the mayor and the three sitting commissioners [the 4th being deceased - to be replaced in 2020 elections] banned the city police from cooperating with federal law enforcement, targeting journalists and legal observers during protests.
https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/07/portland-bans-police-from-working-with-federal-law-enforcement-targeting-journalists-and-legal-observers-during-protests.html
If this practice is taken up by city governments across the U.S where Trump has previously ordered federal police agencies to move in and act against protestors acting within their constitutional rights, then the U.S may well have reverted to the chaos level before organized national and local govt was agreed to by rational adults back when that nation was founded.
The courts may well have to, without citizens prior complaint, step in and initiate action against those usurping the peoples constitutional rights by issuing cease and desist orders to the heads of the federal police agencies involved in order to bring some shape of legal semblance back to the U.S.
https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/07/oregons-attorney-general-argues-for-temporary-restraining-order-against-federal-law-enforcement.html
https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/07/beaverton-attorney-arrested-by-feds-among-mom-protesters-now-barred-from-returning.html - lawyer Mum says the federal officers who arrested and detained her overnight did not read her her rights.0 -
TomOnBoard wrote: »Combining the words of Oscar Wilde and Samuel Johnson, Patriotism is the Virtue of the Vicious and the Last Refuge of the Scoundrel.. This is so often proven these days when all kinds of bullying and hate-filled behaviour is cloaked in flag-waving 'patriotism'...
What would be the opposite of patriotism?0 -
-
-
aloyisious wrote: »Portland City is run by its mayor and 4 city commissioners. https://www.portland.gov/government.
At a meeting yesterday the mayor and the three sitting commissioners [the 4th being deceased - to be replaced in 2020 elections] banned the city police from cooperating with federal law enforcement, targeting journalists and legal observers during protests.
https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/07/portland-bans-police-from-working-with-federal-law-enforcement-targeting-journalists-and-legal-observers-during-protests.html
If this practice is taken up by city governments across the U.S where Trump has previously ordered federal police agencies to move in and act against protestors acting within their constitutional rights, then the U.S may well have reverted to the chaos level before organized national and local govt was agreed to by rational adults back when that nation was founded.
The courts may well have to, without citizens prior complaint, step in and initiate action against those usurping the peoples constitutional rights by issuing cease and desist orders to the heads of the federal police agencies involved in order to bring some shape of legal semblance back to the U.S.
https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/07/oregons-attorney-general-argues-for-temporary-restraining-order-against-federal-law-enforcement.html
https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/07/beaverton-attorney-arrested-by-feds-among-mom-protesters-now-barred-from-returning.html - lawyer Mum says the federal officers who arrested and detained her overnight did not read her her rights.
Highly ironic that its a republican president who is going to be the one to force states into pushing back against federalism.0 -
ExMachina1000 wrote: »Close. But the opposite to patriotism is treachery
Would that be defined by knowing a foreign adversary state was killing American troops and yet doing nothing?0 -
duploelabs wrote: »Would that be defined by knowing a foreign adversary state was killing American troops and yet doing nothing?
It is actually amazing just how quickly that fell out of the news cycle.0 -
Read an article yesterday in the Guardian saying that there a school of thought out there that thinks Trump could refuse to leave the White House if he loses the election. Seems a bit farfetched to me. Could he really do that?0
-
Advertisement
-
Read an article yesterday in the Guardian saying that there a school of thought out there that thinks Trump could refuse to leave the White House if he loses the election. Seems a bit farfetched to me. Could he really do that?
i think there is a real possibility of this, if he fails to be reelected, and badly loses, he ll probably behave highly irrationally, as a typical cluster b would, i also believe he may just walk away from the elections before the vote if he keeps falling in the poles, the ego of the cluster b is fragile.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement