08-07-2020, 02:10 AM
(08-07-2020, 01:10 AM)Dill Wrote: LOL
I wonder if you realize how many of your posts start with this type of statement and how inherently condescending that it?
Quote:If we don't want gridlock and crazy then a Dem House, Senate and WH IS our only salvation, if that means some stable and responsible governance, finally, plus a national healthcare solution.
Your standards are entirely subjective. What you define as "stable and responsible" is not so defined by others. Solipsism springs to mind.
Quote:The bolded here is the key to continued Trump strength, even in the face of disaster--the terror before "leftism." In 2016 it was Hillary. Now it is Portland and the "deep state."
Semantic argument aside, it's an objection to the politics you define as "stable and reasonable". Not everyone thinks the same as you. Your pedantry does not alter this.
Quote:You can understand why people do something and still be totally "shocked" that they would do it.
No, because that's not what I said.
Quote:When over 80% of Republicans embrace Trumpism, that certainly is a symptom of a shift in GOP priorities. Not an aberration. You've given no account of why the rejection of diplomacy and the desire for walls and bans and harsh treatment of immigrants and fear of "lefistm/socialism" will stop when Trump leaves office. As if all the divisive, xenophobic images and deep state conspiracies won't be ready to hand for the next Republican national leader who wants to elbow moderates aside.
You clearly seem determined to ignore the central thrust of my argument, that Trump's priorities and policies are largely dependent on his presence as a political figure. Absent that, the GOP will revert to it's norm.
Quote:You seem to be arguing that mass, continued support for a Trump candidacy amidst his incompetent handling of civic unrest and a pandemic obscures the real identity of the Republican party now, to which it will magically revert once Trump is gone, And the existence of a fraction of never Trumpers somehow proves the rule rather than the exception.
No, and this utter failure to grasp my actual argument is puzzling to me. I state, quite simply, that support for Trump can be as utterly simple as opposing the Democratic party's position. Being married to the ideology of Trump is not required.
Quote:Just as you seem to be arguing that the election of Biden obscures the real radical, crazy and "borderline terrifying" identity of the Democratic party. AOC as Attorney General? Elizabeth Warren Secretary of the Treasury? Ilan Omar as Secretary of State? Because Pelosi and Biden offer little "pushback" to them in an election year?
Rather than resorting to mockery I might expect you to actually refute the point actually being made. The politics of the far left have taken deep root in the west coast, a not insignificant segment of the nation's population, at least on a majority of the state level. Perhaps if you address the point actually being made we can delve deeper into this question?
