2024 ELECTION THREAD

How can you know they are "cis" (=non trans) if they put unusual pronouns out? do you understand the claims of gender theory? according to the left and the rules of this forum, anyone at anytime can claim to be whatever gender he wants without changing absolutely anything in his life, and that claim is to be taken literally and you are a moral monster (and banned from this forum) if you even suggest that identity isn't their true identity.

Do you understand what the people in your coalition believe and fight for?

I am taking issue with the fact that both "she" and "they" are subject pronouns. In the nominative declension, if you like. "Her" and "them" are object pronouns. In the accusative declension, if you like. So I get what "she/her" means, and I get what "they/them" means, but "she/they" sounds like an abomination, and if it's supposed to be "she/them", that doesn't even make sense to me logically.

I wouldn't use the term "lol", primarily because I'm not an angsty 14-year old, but other than that I would agree that it would be unfair to call it a shift to the right.

It has however shifted to batshit insane, and current ideological leader of the self-professed "law and order"-party is a criminal fraud, rapist and incompetent serial liar whose best quality as president was that he was often not present. And while he enjoys dinners with literal Nazi influencers and holocaust d..., GOP lumniaries in congress are busy talking about Jewish space lasers and torpedoing their own border bills.

So where the progressive liberal should go if they can’t go republicans and can’t go democrats ?
Sometimes you are just stuck with a bad hand and you have play it.
Doesn’t mean the next hand/cycle will be the same.

You can decide not playing but you still will lose the money anyway .
Mind as well cut loses to a minimum by choosing the lesser evil and presently there is a lesser evil .

Then u complain how people encapsulated you an authoritarian/ fascist .

Not all left agree like not all right are fascist .
Get the point ?

again, you are assuming that there is a practical difference between the 2 parties. there just isnt.

tHey aRe boTH nOt cOmMunIsT sO tHeY aRe ThE sAmE!

I mean is it really protectionism if it’s as a response to protectionist policies? What are you supposed to do, just let other countries target you for anticompetitive trade wars? Clinton signed into law NAFTA and opened the door to more trade with China. He was opposing cringe European protectionism.

I don’t see how giving people libertarian freedom is far left. Getting the government out of the business of regulating marriage between two people should be a libertarian viewpoint, not a left wing one. But ok, if this is a far left viewpoint in your view then what is far left or far right is completely irrelevant. We should just care what is good policy if that’s the case. But I suspect we are just using terms differently from one another.

And I think that it’s pretty asinine to say that MAGA is like Clinton on most issues. Clinton protected abortion rights. Clinton tried to protect gay troops with DADT. Clinton was in favor of broad voting rights. Clinton was in favor of affirmative action. Clinton affirmed the problems of climate change and took federal action to enforce environmental policies. Clinton believed in evolution and championed strong federal involvement in education. Clinton signed into law an assault weapons ban.

Let’s not rewrite history for the sake of political rhetoric.

Just the fact alone that they don’t deny climate change but say it’s not a big deal should disqualify them. Or their growing distrust of vaccines and hard science denial against abortion. Hell they practically want to repeal the first amendment for their Christian nationalism. They are dangerous.

This is back to your literacy issues, but she tells him many progressives feel it's better to withhold votes and asks his opinion on that as a strategy. So no whole new thing, just some old lack of reading comprehension. It's mot hard as Chomsky pins her down correctly on the math. If there are 2 candidates only that can win and you prefer 1 to the other in ranked choice voting, not voting for the candidate you prefer is equivalent to letting the worse candidate win.

This!

luciom should take notes when he claim Harris Biden and democrats moved far left since trump ?
I mean already in the 1990s republicans were calling democrats communist lol .
Since they move so far to the left , where communism is ???
Seem pretty far still ?
Why the f democrats fights with China?

While trump/republicans certainly didn’t move at all and not becoming hyper authoritarianism…near fascist .
That’s why they promote Putin , a real proof of great democratic regime, as not being a problem and even a friend with deep sympathy how Putin govern .

luciom Makes a lot of sense …

You don't use lol because you are a boomer who thinks it's wrong to use it.

Fine with me I am 40 and i use it regularly (even in real life, friends are gamers).

And again, lol at considering a dinner with someone by a very unconventional president a policy shift of a party, given it wasn't followed by any actual shift.

And the personal opinions of fringe members of a party aren't the policy platform of that party.

I am not in bad faith as you are, I don't use Ilan Omhar to define the democratic party as it is today, why do you use MTG?

Maybe I should start taking the worst possible take by any elected democratic representative and claim that's where the party is at.

Or not, because I hate do argue in bad faith and I don't need that to criticize the democratic party.

Exactly .
it might sound crazy but I think victor is even more on the left then luciom on the right because luciom clearly see a distinction between democrats and republicans …
Luciom would never vote for democrats .

What I was responding to was the point made that the Democratic party is now like the Republican party of years ago. I was saying that the Democratic party is nothing like the Republican party of years ago. What you are saying here actually supports that point. Not that you would ever admit that you are wrong.

You are also wrong here. The Republican party which helped start the EPA under Nixon, now wants to gut the EPA. They don't want to support clean energy. They want to undo regulations that hinder corporations especially in the Oil and Gas industry. The Democratic party has stayed where they started as wanting to keep the environment clean.

I do think that the Republican party has stayed in place on support for big business and for reducing taxes for the wealthy (which was put into place under Ronald Reagan). The Democratic party has not shifted left from where they were at that point either. Every Republican administration has passed tax cuts. Every Democratic administration has raised help for those in need.

Republicans have tried to limit government spending. One of the ways they are now trying to do it is to reduce Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. They wanted to do it under W Bush and under Trump (and failed both times) and the Tea Party part of the republican party (which was a far right new part of the party under Obama and is now basically the MAGA majority of the current Republican party) also tried and failed.

Democrats have always been for raising the budget so people won't go hungry like with foods stamps or free meals for kids at school. Republicans have gone far right on this and have now declined to give out Welfare to individuals in a number of red States (they do have to dole out welfare but they do it in ways that will not help black communities). They have tried to eliminate Obamacare benefits for people who aren't working.

When Roe v Wade decision came down in the 1970's the Republican party was split on abortion. Then they started losing races where the Right to Life party was getting 10% to 15% of the vote and the Republican party shifted to be the pro-life party so the Right to Life party would stop running 3rd party candidates. Democrats haven't gone anywhere on that issue. They support the right to choose as they always have. Democrats also support people who want to have babies but are financially challenged without requiring that they work. Republicans don't seem to get that forcing people to work in order to get government help means that a lot of single women can't choose to have their children. But that is the problem with getting the Right to Life party to be part of your party. The requirements that women should not be allowed to have birth control is now a factor in part of the Republican party. As is the attempt to have sex education in schools be only about abstinence (which ironically means that teenagers will have sex for the first time about a year earlier than if the sex education is about, well, sex education).

Trans issues are just an extension of homosexual issues. They didn't exist at all in any party. It isn't a move to the left for the Democratic party. Its basically just continuing to be a party that supports anyone who is being discriminated against. But now after republicans had seemed to shift a little left on gay issues, they are back to homophobia. Pretending that groomers are a real thing in schools.

This is kind of silly. Clinton's immigration bill was not intended to deport every illegal immigrant as Trump is claiming he will do (I think it was 11 million he said he would deport). It sucked in many ways and it allowed many people to be deported who previously couldn't have been. But then that is the Democratic party moving to the right under Clinton. Since clinton there was no change in Deportation. George W Bush did it in the same way Clinton did it. Obama actually increased deportation in his first two years trying to get Republican support for DACA which was never going to happen after Obamacare passed (if I remember correctly Republicans were willing to go with DACA if Obamacare was dropped) and then Obama reduced deportations dramatically. Trump did not increase deportations though. So except for building the wall (a move to the right, and pretending that Mexico would pay for it) there was basically no difference with Trump's deportations than those in the past. What was different and a shift to the right was Trump's closing of the Mexican border during Covid. Which Biden undid to bring us right back to where we were before Covid in the Trump administration. The number of immigrants on that border in the past 5 months (maybe 6 now) has been at the same level or less than in Trump's administration prior to covid.

Republicans move to the left on deficits has only to do with their need to reduce taxes. They were unable to reduce spending by say killing social security. Or eliminating/reducing welfare or food stamps. Which they tried to do. Reducing taxes which increased the deficit was not a move to the left. At all.

Nobody was pro gay marriage including Obama until Biden accidentally said it out loud. And then democrats were pro gay marriage. But I'm not clear why this is seen as a move to the left. Democrats had always been supportive of gay rights. Now about 71% of Americans are in favor of gay marriage (83% of democrats, 74% of Independents and 46% of Republicans). So that is not a radical shift to the left or a shift at all really.

This is the 3rd time you have called me a liar and I think you should be banned from this site. You do it all the time. To me and many others. You are not correct about it either. People make mistakes and are not intentionally lying (like your Covid points about Sweden).

There are many MAGA republicans who have shifted the republican party far to the right.

Here is an article that shows how far to...

"The Republican Party leans much farther right than most traditional conservative parties in Western Europe and Canada, according to an analysis of their election manifestos. It is more extreme than Britain’s Independence Party and France’s National Rally (formerly the National Front), which some consider far-right populist parties. The Democratic Party, in contrast, is positioned closer to mainstream liberal parties."

"The Democrats fall closer to mainstream left and center-left parties in other countries, like the Social Democratic Party in Germany and Britain’s Labour Party, according to their manifestos’ scores.

And the United States’ political center of gravity is to the right of other countries’, partly because of the lack of a serious left-wing party. Between 2000 and 2012, the Democratic manifestos were to the right of the median party platform. The party has moved left but is still much closer to the center than the Republicans."

Here is another article on the subject

"The GOP was once a more moderate party

Ideology is complicated to measure. By some standards, the Republican Party has moved to the left. In a poll conducted last year, 42 percent of Republicans backed same-sex unions; it’s safe to assume that number was far lower during George H.W. Bush’s presidency. In 1992, one of South Carolina’s senators was Republican Strom Thurmond, who ran a 1948 presidential campaign featuring his opposition to civil rights for blacks. Today, one of South Carolina’s senators is Republican Tim Scott, who is African-American.

But by most other measures, the GOP is far more conservative than it used to be. The General Social Survey, for example, shows self-identified Republicans moving far more toward the “extremely conservative” end of its scale (as opposed to “extremely liberal”😉 over the past several decades.1

Political scientists, using DW-Nominate scores,2 have concluded that the Republicans now in Congress are much further to the right of congressional Republicans in the 1970s and 1980s. And even anecdotally, figures like former House Speaker John Boehner, Ohio Gov. John Kasich and the late Arizona Sen. John McCain — considered solid conservatives in the George H.W. Bush era — found themselves cast as insufficiently right-wing by the party’s base in recent years.

In Bush’s era, Fox News did not exist. Deeply conservative billionaires Charles and David Koch and their allies had not created a huge network of right-wing groups that constitute basically an alternative political party. There was no tea party or House Freedom Caucus. Trump may be personally more conservative than Bush, but even if he weren’t, the forces that push a Republican president to the ideological right are stronger now than they were in the 1980s."

And finally another one whose title says...

"Four decades and counting — the GOP’s shift to the right is bigger than the Democrats’ shift left"

Donald Trump and the Republican party are shattered. All they care about is winning. Having a black person support Trump like Tim Scott or Clarence Thomas is the attempt to get black voters to vote for Trump. There are also gay people who are republicans. While gay literature is being banned and Republicans are trying to take over school boards across the country. The word gay can't even be spoken by teachers in some school districts now. Even Disney was willing to fight with De Santis in FL over this issue. Any of this doesn't mean the Republican party is moving to the left. They aren't. White Supremacists are now being overtly supported by Trump. That is fairly radical. When the KKK was active many years ago the Republican party did not overtly support them (at least not in my lifetime of 68 years).

There are now Republicans for Harris (one of whose leaders is a current mayor in Arizona) trying to get other republicans to vote for Kamala. Donald Trump has called many Republicans who disagree with him as RINO's. And they are typically just old time conservative Republicans.

Now I believe that the republican party will shift back to center some when Trump dies. But the core values instilled by Reagan like reducing taxes for the wealthy and corporations and reducing spending in all areas that don't help businesses, will not in any way shift towards the center. Similarly, the republican stance on abortion and women's rights will continue to shift towards the right including attempt to eliminate abortions in all states and attempts to eliminate the sale of abortion pills in the US and possibly attempts to eliminate IVF.

Well if your side didn’t intentionally misgender completely passing trans people like Hunter Schafer, Natalie Wynn, Blaire White, Elliot Paige, etc, or didn’t carry out insane bullying campaigns on random non-passing trans women who actually are medically transitioning but are doing it at a slow pace, then maybe we wouldn’t have to set rules like that. The excesses of the movement are partially to be blamed on the excesses of the counterreaction.

As far as the gender ideology comment I think I’ve made my position on gender abolition clear so I don’t know why you’re using it as a gotchya.

Again I do believe a correction is happening in all areas of politics as the fever dream of extremism that was the result of the covid pandemic slowly fades away.

😃

I think they just mean they want to be referred to as one or the other pronouns. I actually think there’s a place for this type of gender experimentation, and it has been done by artists and countercultural movements since the 60s and perhaps before. But putting those pronouns in their bio is obviously a cringe way of scoring oppression points if they happen to be white leftists. For some reason that and disability became a way of “evening the field” with skin color in those circles.

Because it’s always comeback to the :
We are for the freedom we like , not giving freedom for stuff we don’t like .
You know , “true republican freedom “ …

look, it's not my fault that you framed it differently the first time. you seem to have writing issues, or thinking issues.

and speaking of literacy issues or being a moron or whatever:

this all started from me asking you to provide evidence of the claims that you were making, so literally wtf are you talking about? you aren't refuting anything because i didn't claim anything, i asked some questions, which isn't at all agressive. also it's spelled aggressive, smrt guy

and btw consistently voting "lesser evil" is exactly how you get to, oh idk, say doing a genocide, and then yelling that it's a moral imperative to vote in support of it. you just get ..... well, evil.

Israel is not committing genocide so this is just an epistemic issue not a moral one.

Also let’s say they were committing genocide. If the election is between Hitler and Turbo Hitler, you absolutely should vote for Hitler.

And consistently not voting will get you a society where you no longer have to worry about voting at all.

maybe voting in a duopoly is super overrated

Depends. Maybe not being in prison for your political beliefs is overrated too. You guys seem to idolise countries that didn't have elections and locked up or executed dissidents, so I guess that's all fine and dandy for you, but you probably haven't considered that you won't always be on the "right" side of those in power if and when that happens.

Asking for evidence of something any moron should know already is a burden. You need to understand that.

Is aggressive. I can sympathize with stupidity and ignorance, but the burden to be polite is on you if you're going to ask the rest of us to cite things everyone else already understands. This isn't a remedial thread for you to catch up.

i haven't been aggressive or impolite, yet you keep with the name-calling. disturbing

i also dispute that "progressives saying trump beating clinton was a good thing" before the election is some kind of given fact that everyone knows

seems like way more of a niche lib grudge thing

Shocker. Once the citation was provided you no longer want to discuss the original subject. It's a very standard form of trolling. On the off chance you were posting in good faith I told you everyone here would agree with me, but you kept trolling for a citation you never actually cared about.

asking follow-up questions is discussing the subject, bud

you're the one who started getting all weird and dismissive and mad about it