Manifestly Unfit

[NWRatCon]

I agree with you on both and that to me means she ran a poor campaign. She overemphasized an important but not vital to everyone issue and didn't adequately address a completely vital one.

I disagree with both the premise and the conclusion. I think she ran a fine campaign. She did address those issues, forcefully and factually. Abortion is a simple issue, anything economic is not. The fact that this strong economy had no effect proves that. The population, as a whole, is economically ignorant. This was a "feels" election. People are not over Covid and its aftereffects, but they forgot who made it so bad. They're about to be reminded. No Democrat would have won, period. That will be demonstrated in post-election analysis, but the signs are already there. We're repeating the mistakes of last century, and about on the same timeline. It's not just the United States, it is happening around the world. AfD in Germany are, also, literal fascists, but they also still gained votes. This is a worldwide problem. Americans just think they're unique.

 

[Captain Adverse]

It's amazing that they still call Trump a rapist when he just won a defamation suit against ABC for them calling him a rapist...

They're thinking of the E. Jean Carroll civil case, where he was found LIABLE for alleged sexual abuse, not found "guilty" of either rape nor sexual assault.

The only penalty in a civil case are one or more civil options, like return of property, a monetary award, return of licensing, etc. Carroll was awarded $5 million.

Trump is appealing.

 

[notquiteright]

I think you're asking the wrong question. You should be asking why those voters prefer Trump 2.0 to your candidates and your policies.

They believed the lies and will have a very bad case of voters' remorse. Copresident tRump is already showing how much he lied. Suddenly grocery prices are very difficult to bring down when on the rally trail, he claimed dropping prices would be 'so easy'....

 

[NatMorton]

I disagree with the bolded.

Biden was unfit for office, yet the propaganda organs of both the MSM and the Left-controlled Social Media (this was prior to Musk buying Twitter now known as "X") turned a barely functional partisan hack, whose political history was spotted with racist political action, lies, and damn lies, into some kind of paragon of virtue compared to Trump.

Meanwhile with Trump they pushed Russian Collusion, that he said Neo-Nazi's and White Supremacists were "very fine people," and so on. When Hillary was caught with secret documents on a home computer, and then sought to destroy evidence, Director Comey of the FBI said it was no big deal. With Trump, covered by the Presidential Records Act (created after Bill Clinton was found with "secret" documents in a home desk drawer), having some classified documents in boxes at Mar-a-Lago they STILL tried to bring criminal charges against him. But with BIDEN found having boxes of classified documents acquired as a Senator he shared with an autobiographer, with no right to keep or share them, DOJ found reasons NOT to charge him.

Then there were the 51 former intelligence officials who asserted the Hunter Biden Laptop was Russian disinformation during the 2020 election. I could go on and on, but it would not matter to TDS sufferers who think Trump is either the Devil, or any number of other canards (Nazi, White Supremacist, traitor, etc., etc., etc.)

The point remains that Trump IS fit for office, as 77.3 million people recently voted to elect him to. Despite the "lawfare" created for the purpose of derailing his election, damaging his image, and possibly incarcerating him.

That's fine. For me, it's an integrity thing. He doesn't meet my minimum standard there.

 

[Kelby]

It's amazing that they still call Trump a rapist when he just won a defamation suit against ABC for them calling him a rapist...

He didn't "win" a suit, ABC settled out of court.

******s.

 

[Captain Adverse]

That's fine. For me, it's an integrity thing. He doesn't meet my minimum standard there.

I see. Well, very few people in business, politics, or other major endeavors seem to value absolute integrity.

I think it is part of the culture at that level of wealth and power, because one is always maneuvering for best positions, trying to avoid socio-political-financial pitfalls. Also trying not to be undermined.

However, I get a sense that Trump is actually trying to do the right thing. Something I've found rare in politicians but does pop up from time to time. IMO examples include people like Robert Kennedy (Sr.), and Dwight D. Eisenhauer to name a few.

I honestly believe Trump is trying to be that kind of leader.

 

[NatMorton]

I see. Well, very few people in business, politics, or other major endeavors seem to value absolute integrity.

I think it is part of the culture at that level of wealth and power, because one is always maneuvering for best positions, trying to avoid socio-political-financial pitfalls. Also trying not to be undermined.

However, I get a sense that Trump is actually trying to do the right thing. Something I've found rare in politicians but does pop up from time to time. IMO examples include people like Robert Kennedy (Sr.), and Dwight D. Eisenhauer to name a few.

I honestly believe Trump is trying to be that kind of leader.

I believe you, and it's okay that we disagree. It's the other side that sees political differences as being rooted in character flaws.

 

[jmotivator]

He didn't "win" a suit, ABC settled out of court.

******s.

LOL. Because they knew they lied. $16 million and an apology.

That is a win.

 

[Kelby]

They believed the lies and will have a very bad case of voters' remorse. Copresident tRump is already showing how much he lied. Suddenly grocery prices are very difficult to bring down when on the rally trail, he claimed dropping prices would be 'so easy'....

Maybe he'll take away the requirement for having an ID to buy them?

 

[NWRatCon]

We're repeating the mistakes of last century, and about on the same timeline. It's not just the United States, it is happening around the world. AfD in Germany are, also, literal fascists, but they also still gained votes. This is a worldwide problem. Americans just think they're unique.

The path we're on is well-trod:

"A democratic decline has taken place globally, and an increasing number of people are living in closed autocracies. The report that is now being released shows that this trend is continuing, and that the world has not been more anti-democratic in 35 years.

“The level of democracy enjoyed by the average world citizen in 2022 is back to 1986 levels. This means that 72 percent of the world's population, 5.7 billion people, live under authoritarian rule”, according to Staffan I. Lindberg, Director of the V-Dem Institute.

The democratic decline has been most dramatic in the Pacific region, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. But the number of countries in the world that are currently experiencing democratic setbacks, or autocratization, has greatly increased over the past ten years – from 13 to 42 countries between 2002–2022, which is the highest figure measured by V-Dem to date."

The world is becoming increasingly authoritarian - but there is hope

For the first time in two decades, there are more closed autocracies than liberal democracies in the world, but the future is not entirely bleak. This is shown in this year's democracy report from the Varieties of Democracy Institute (V-Dem) at the University of Gothenburg.

www.gu.se

 

[NWRatCon]

Mark Burnett? Well, at least he speaks the language. Welcome to "Royal Apprentice".

 

[notquiteright]

Maybe he'll take away the requirement for having an ID to buy them?

He'll require a Tax return so you can prove you can make the monthly payments on that carton of eggs....

 

[notquiteright]

I see. Well, very few people in business, politics, or other major endeavors seem to value absolute integrity.

I think it is part of the culture at that level of wealth and power, because one is always maneuvering for best positions, trying to avoid socio-political-financial pitfalls. Also trying not to be undermined.

However, I get a sense that Trump is actually trying to do the right thing. Something I've found rare in politicians but does pop up from time to time. IMO examples include people like Robert Kennedy (Sr.), and Dwight D. Eisenhauer to name a few.

I honestly believe Trump is trying to be that kind of leader.

Copresident Don is finishing the job the Supremes started with Citizens United. Rig the game for the rich entitled folks. Some Founders thought only the wealthy should hold positions of power and influence. Look at Copresident Elon- he issues wild ass rants, lies to Congress and the Republicants jump- but he never was elected. Money talks and Elon is loud. I don't see the wealthy too worried about 'social-political-financial pitfalls'. They float above it all and pay off investigations. Whatever did happen to Epstein's visitor's book????
FYI- its Eisenhower...

 

[weaver2]

Yet here we are. I'm telling y'all, we are in some sort of Twilight zone.

You're right it is a Twilight Zone built on the well defined psychiatric phenomena of mass hysteria.

From the Inquisition in 1233AD to Trumpism in 2020s religious/political hysteria has been a common response to stress as have the religious and political leaders willing to exploit the stress for political gain or religious power.
Probably the very best American examples are the Salem Witch trials of 1692 and the McCarthy era of American politics in the 1950s.

The colonists land takings from the native Americans created wars, massacres, raids, brutal killings on both sides and hostage takings. Religious leaders seized the opportunity to focus the fear and anxiety of the time on "witches" making them responsible for the stresses on the colonists.

In the 1950s "..... the tense atmosphere of post-WWII America, political figures found fertile ground to exploit public fears for personal and political gain. At the forefront of this opportunistic wave was Senator Joseph McCarthy, ..."

McCarthyism Explained: Politics, Fear, and Cold War Context

Explore the roots of McCarthyism in post-WWII America. Understand the blend of political ambition, societal paranoia, and Cold War dynamics that fueled this era.

socialstudieshelp.com

In almost all cases of religious and political mass hysteria the media participates in fostering the hysteria. The Salem Trials were reported and approved of by most newspapers of the day. McCarthy's witch trials were reported and supported by the media long after the extent of political, social and financial damage to innocent people was recognized.

Mass hysterias almost always emerge when people are stressed by political, social or financial changes giving minorities more access to services, rights, or wealth. The mass insanity of electing Trump is solution to the social stress and destructive political evils created by Democratic Party's policies of DEI for minorities, immigrants, legal and illegal, women and the poor.

 

[NWRatCon]

You're right it is a Twilight Zone built on the well defined psychiatric phenomena of mass hysteria.
....
Mass hysterias almost always emerge when people are stressed by political, social or financial changes giving minorities more access to services, rights, or wealth. The mass insanity of electing Trump is solution to the social stress and destructive political evils created by Democratic Party's policies of DEI for minorities, immigrants, legal and illegal, women and the poor.

Just to clarify: you're identifying the hysteria in the italics above, not your belief that these policies are destructive or evil, right? (I'm assuming, actually, based upon our history, here. I've often noted that diversity, equality and inclusion are actually the values our Constitution is based upon.)

 

[SMTA]

Yet here we are. I'm telling y'all, we are in some sort of Twilight zone.

That would be an improvement

 

[weaver2]

Just to clarify: you're identifying the hysteria in the italics above, not your belief that these policies are destructive or evil, right? (I'm assuming, actually, based upon our history, here. I've often noted that diversity, equality and inclusion are actually the values our Constitution is based upon.)

That's right, the words in italics are what conservative have been saying about Democratic policies. I too believe that the Constitution is based on the founders understanding that diversity already existed in the new country and wanted to include everyone in this new equality they were talking about ("everyone" as interpreted by 18th century standards). It's a very idealistic document and difficult to live up to.

 

[Along Came Jones]

Just to clarify: you're identifying the hysteria in the italics above, not your belief that these policies are destructive or evil, right? (I'm assuming, actually, based upon our history, here. I've often noted that diversity, equality and inclusion are actually the values our Constitution is based upon.)

Re: I've often noted that diversity, equality and inclusion are actually the values our Constitution is based upon.

How much so?

I don’t care who they are. I don’t care what color. I don’t care any of the things, who they love…I’m going to make sure you have that opportunity and right to live your life. Just don’t make your life, if it might be on the extremes or in the minority of few, make me believe that’s the norm or make me and my family believe, or my children believe, or this or that. No, I will protect you. Just don’t try to mainstream it. And the Democratic Party, the Washington Democrats, have tried to mainstream the extreme. -- Joe Manchin quoted in Joe Manchin Torches ‘Toxic’ Democratic Party in Blistering CNN Interview: They ‘Tried to Mainstream the Extreme’, Jennifer Bowers Bahney, Mediate, 12/22/2024

If this were simply the parting shot from an FDR Democrat, I would not bother much with it. But from election exit interviews to most recently the results from focus groups confirm the electorate's belief that the contemporary Democratic Party brand is too elitist and too extreme.

In a trio of focus groups, even voters who previously backed Democrats cast the party as weak and overly focused on diversity and elites, according to research by the progressive group Navigator Research.

[. . .]

The focus group research, shared first with POLITICO, represents the latest troubling pulse check for a party still sorting through the wreckage of its November losses and looking for a path to rebuild. Without a clear party leader and with losses across nearly every demographic in November, Democrats are walking into a second Trump presidency without a unified strategy to improve their electoral prospects. And while some Democrats blame Biden, others blame inflation and still others blame “losing hold of culture,” the feedback from the focus groups found Democrats’ problems are even more widespread and potentially long-lasting than a single election cycle. -- Elena Schneider, New research shows the massive hole Dems are in, Politico, 12/22/2024

What I saw in this election was a revolt which resulted in the election and subsequent pending appointments of "leadership that is manifestly unfit." You asked, "Whatever happened to "standards"? Why are we, as a society, sanguine about this condition?" According to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey better than 80% of respondents believe their politicians do not care what they think. Perhaps the plurality responsible for seating Trump and his Spanky and Our Gang cabinet believe at some level Trump and the GOP puts on a better show of at least caring what they think.

 

[NWRatCon]

Re: I've often noted that diversity, equality and inclusion are actually the values our Constitution is based upon.

How much so?
....
What I saw in this election was a revolt which resulted in the election and subsequent pending appointments of "leadership that is manifestly unfit." You asked, "Whatever happened to "standards"? Why are we, as a society, sanguine about this condition?" According to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey better than 80% of respondents believe their politicians do not care what they think. Perhaps the plurality responsible for seating Trump and his Spanky and Our Gang cabinet believe at some level Trump and the GOP puts on a better show of at least caring what they think.

Two responses:

First, while I acknowledge that many of the framers were hypocrites and racists, elitist themselves, they nonetheless created a document that was based upon inclusion, first ("we, the people"), then explicitly incorporated equality with the 14th Amendment. The philosophy that "all men are created equal" informed the preamble and the bill of rights, even if they didn't practice it themselves. Diversity, of course, was the cornerstone upon which America itself was founded - an amalgam of denizen from throughout the civilized (and uncivilized) world. The colonies were distinct communities with distinct histories, founding philosophies, a variety of religious views, and political philosophies. That diversity has existed since, expressed in everything from how the language is spoken, to food choices and cultural traditions

Second, I interpret that data entirely differently. I don't believe that most of the voters on both sides of the election believe Trump represents them or cares about them. Their reasons for voting (or not) were mostly about personal feelings and economic frustration, not policy views. Pew also consistently shows that Democratic policies are very popular, even when their politicians are not. Even Trump supporters are going to have a rude awakening. They voted for fascism while believing they were voting for something completely different. Only the most gullible or extreme MAGAns actually fell for the populist act. The reality is, apathy (and racism and misogyny) swung the election, not persuasion.

By the way, the 80% figure is accurate - because the majority of politicians who represent them really don't care what they think, only what will get them elected. The vast majority of them don't even reflect their constituents' views, as poll after poll demonstrates.

 

[NWRatCon]

By the way, the 80% figure is accurate - because the majority of politicians who represent them really don't care what they think, only what will get them elected. The vast majority of them don't even reflect their constituents' views, as poll after poll demonstrates.

I meant to add: the reality is, most - yes most - votes don't even really count, as so many Districts are so gerrymandered that the party really controls the election, not the electorate. And the parties have also manipulated the voting process to favor themselves. Coupled with the already undemocratic elements of the Constitution, accidents of geography, spending by oligarchs and corporations, and prior manipulations of apportionment, and the stark reality is that the majority of elected members of Congress don't represent their constituents or their views, and it is even worse in some State houses. Thus we have results like in North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin where minority rule prevails, and even losing parties change the rules to keep control after they lose elections.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

But lower than it should have been, statistically. In some cases (NC, GA, AZ), Republican voter suppression efforts were successful. I don't know if that would have changed the result, but given the closeness, it is possible. On that basis alone, the party should be routinely rejected.

Voter suppression sounds like a powerful talking point, except for the fact that the number of votes in those 3 states were higher in 2024 than in 2020. Yours is a position in search of facts and has been found lacking.

The counter talking point that Georgia's election processes is less restrictive than that of Delaware is a much more compelling argument against voter suppression.

 

[NWRatCon]

Voter suppression sounds like a powerful talking point, except for the fact that the number of votes in those 3 states were higher in 2024 than in 2020. Yours is a position in search of facts and has been found lacking.

The counter talking point that Georgia's election processes is less restrictive than that of Delaware is a much more compelling argument against voter suppression.

If only you knew what you were talking about or had facts to support your position...

 

[stealthycat]

Trump is, among many things

 

[AliHajiSheik]

If only you knew what you were talking about or had facts to support your position...

Here is the deal, I went to google and searched the election results for 2020 and 2024 for Georgia, North Carolina and Arizona. 3 states you picked. Rather than counter my statement that the vote counts were higher in 2024 in each state than in 2020, you went with the limp reply. Feel free to show that my statements were incorrect if you can, but you are manifestly unfit to do so.

 

[BabaVoss]

That's nice.

My larger point stands. You're making a mistake when you think the only reason Trump won is voter stupidity.

That’s mostly it. It has little to do with actual policy. He’s a prolific liar, and a bully. He’s good at using lawyers - what many of his people call ‘law fare’ to harass and intimidate people. The republicans have, for years, cheated by gerrymandering, and have been way better at that that the Dems. All things considered, it was almost a perfect storm that has allowed Trump back into the White House. He wants that power. Unfortunately, he doesn’t know how to do much good with it.