American Politics Thread

[TheCapsFan]

"Democrats will need to take a lesson from this"

And what kind of lesson is that? To become more evil, like the Republicans?

The lesson is that Democrats can't run a campaign on simply being anti-Trump when Trump isn't on the ballot. Is Youngkin essentially a better-looking, younger Trump from a policy standpoint? Sure, but Democrats need to quit highlighting the things they aren't and start highlighting the things they ARE. There had been so much work done in Virginia since Charlottesville in terms of racial justice, yet I never heard McAuliffe say ANYTHING about the work that state Dems have done in that department throughout the campaign. The decriminalization of marijuana. Just "Trump, Trump, Trump." That's boring and we've heard ENOUGH about that stuff for the past four years. Tell me why I should vote for YOU, yknow? On the flip side, Youngkin ran an incredibly smart campaign, toeing the line between keeping the Trump base in rural areas while also stressing an issue that appealed to a certain demographic he thought he could win. It was smart, sly, cunning, and effective, and although it was built on a lie, so have the rest of the Republican party talking points in the last ten years, so he fits right in.

Oh, and it helps when your candidate is more interesting than a piece of dry toast. Let me say that as a young, Democratic voter in Virginia, there was absolutely nothing appealing about McAuliffe or his campaign. Absolutely no charisma and so much disconnect with his party's core. The Dems never should have let him run this cycle; he was simply the wrong guy to put on the ballot. And it especially irks me when we had two incredibly interesting, strong, charismatic Black women in the primary that nobody gave a second thought to read up about and vote for because a familiar name was on the ballot.

The Dems need to start putting fighters on the ballot. People who will go toe to toe with the Republicans who spread lies and misinformation to call out those lies and misinformation. People with enough energy who to take it to the other side in a debate. People who are brave enough to go knock on doors in rural areas and galvanize the people who have given up on the political system. People who aren't afraid to necessarily alienate white voters by calling out racist or veiled racist remarks, yet also draw in those same voters with that same strong energy and messaging. It's not being evil, it's actually taking measures to COUNTERRACT evil. And yeah, you could argue it's kind of like fighting fire with fire, but the country's already a dumpster fire anyway, so maybe it's like putting another dumpster next to the current dumpster on fire, but in a different direction from the car that's spilling gasoline all over the alley? Lol idk.

Those are the lessons that the Democrats need to take away from Virginia.

And, by the way, I agree with the rest of your post, but wanted to give my two cents on the matter as a Virginian myself.

 

[CynthiaLover]

So, as of today, the $1.2T infrastructure bill has been signed by President Biden. Now we can finally put that issue to bed and get the needed money out to do what needs to be done for the sake of the country.

On another note, Trump is still fighting to keep the Jan 6 records hidden from the House Committee that is overseeing the insurrection that he caused. It appears to be 136 pages worth of documents that he's desperately trying to keep from being seen. Like his tax returns, the fact he's doing everything he can to hide these means it'll have critical information against him. I just hope the judge that he's appealing to just flatly says "No! Hand it over!" and puts an end to it, as these documents were supposed to be in the House Committee's hands last Friday. His classic stall tactic that drives everyone insane. What else is new...

 

[zoroarctic]

Parents protesting 'critical race theory' identify a new target: Mental health programs

Groups have voiced opposition to suicide prevention programs, mental health coordinators and social emotional learning, claiming they are being used to indoctrinate students.

www.nbcnews.com

I cannot express how enraged I am at this. These people are sick, and they need to be stopped by any means necessary.

 

[Juliko]

Yeah, that whole article and crusade just screams "Karens don't want their kids to be taught about basic human decency." Because teaching your kids about tough topics and treating them like people whose feelings are valid is certainly brainwashing, riiiiight? Gag me with a spoon. Plus, calling learning about complicated emotions no better than sexually grooming kids? Are you kidding me? These people have their heads so far up their asses, I feel bad for the kids that they're supposedly "fighting for."

 

[zoroarctic]

Yeah, that whole article and crusade just screams "Karens don't want their kids to be taught about basic human decency." Because teaching your kids about tough topics and treating them like people whose feelings are valid is certainly brainwashing, riiiiight? Gag me with a spoon. Plus, calling learning about complicated emotions no better than sexually grooming kids? Are you kidding me? These people have their heads so far up their asses, I feel bad for the kids that they're supposedly "fighting for."

My personal theory is that a lot of these parents are worried about their kids telling the schools what happens at home because it would probably result in a visit from CPS.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

And they just declared Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty...Are you fucking kidding me? He absolutely was guilty and he had no reason to be in Kenosha in the first place. The people who hailed him as a hero don't deserve the satisfaction. This is the epitome of what white privilege looks like.

 

[zoroarctic]

The worst part of it is during the next big protest, these far-right agitators will be actively looking for situations where they can "defend themselves."

 

[Ryoma Maser]

I think they can overturn this (it wouldn't be the first time for this judge) despite double jeopardy, I think there is a clause that can be made due to judge's attitude during the trial and his overall bias during the trial making him well not a unbiased judge like he's supposed to be.

Though my legal knowledge could use some fact checking. Other wise, when this asshole kid inevitably does this again, I hope the judge gets charged as accomplice since his bias affected most of the jury and made it impossible for the prosecution to do their case.

 

[TheCapsFan]

Yeah, I agree with Ryoma Maser. I think it's way too obvious that this judge was sympathetic and complicit.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

Yeah, its pretty obvious the judge was biased towards Kyle Rittenhouse. The trial was poorly handled, especially throwing in a judge that is biased and sympathetic to a clearly guilty man. Also, this sets a bad precedent. Because he got away with murder by citing self defense, swiftfox is right. Far-right extremists can easily claim self defense and seek out situations where they can kill and claim self defense.

 

[Volphied]

 

[WyndonCalling]

That guy's lying, though - Grosskreutz didn't see a man sitting in the road, shooting people. The footage is pretty clear; Rittenhouse was fleeing from a situation and being chased, fell over, and then shot the attackers bearing down on him, including Grosskreutz.

 

[Volphied]

That guy's lying, though - Grosskreutz didn't see a man sitting in the road, shooting people. The footage is pretty clear; Rittenhouse was fleeing from a situation and being chased, fell over, and then shot the attackers bearing down on him, including Grosskreutz.

Rittenhouse Jury Has to Decide If the Men Who Tried to Stop Him Were Heroes or Villains

Kyle Rittenhouse’s far-right defenders say he is not a murderer but a hero. The prosecutor says the protesters who tried to disarm him were the real heroes.

theintercept.com

He was clearly sitting and aiming with his gun, after he already shot someone before:

Just before Kyle Rittenhouse, seated, shot Gaige Grosskreutz, left, he had fired two shots at an unidentified man in light jeans who tried to kick him. Rittenhouse then fired a fatal shot into the chest of Anthony Huber, foreground, as the three men attempted to disarm the teenage vigilante — who had previously killed another protester, Joseph Rosenbaum — on Aug. 25, 2020, in Kenosha, Wis. Photo: Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Also, I really don't like how you used the word "attackers" when describing people who were defending themselves and others from an armed vigilante. Or to quote the prosecutor:

“I want you to keep in mind that we’ve all read stories and heard about heroes that step in to stop an active shooter, or to give their life to save others,” Binger told the jury. “When you think about the defendant’s behavior in this case, contrast it with Anthony Huber, a man who was there because he knew Jacob Blake, who carried his skateboard everywhere, and who rushed towards danger to save other people’s lives.”

“When a bank robber robs a bank and runs away and the crowd comes after him, can he just shoot anybody and claim self-defense?” Binger asked. “In this case, the crowd was right. The crowd knew the defendant had just shot someone.”

“That crowd was full of heroes,” the prosecutor added. “And that crowd did something that honestly I’m not sure I would’ve had the courage to do. If I see a guy running up the street with an AR-15 and I hear he just shot somebody, my first instinct is not to approach. Anthony Huber was different. Jump Kick Man was different. Gaige Grosskreutz was different. That doesn’t make them a threat to the defendant’s life. It doesn’t make their lives worthless. They don’t give up their right to defend themselves.”

 

[WyndonCalling]

Respectable Lawyer is still totally disingenuous. Grosskreutz saw Rittenhouse run (flee) past him and fall over, and he was then attacked from that position. The way RL is trying to frame the situation to suggest that Rittenhouse took a seat and then started shooting is Trumpian.

 

[Volphied]

Respectable Lawyer is still totally disingenuous. Grosskreutz saw Rittenhouse run (flee) past him and fall over, and he was then attacked from that position. The way RL is trying to frame the situation to suggest that Rittenhouse took a seat and then started shooting is Trumpian.

Well, I'm still perplexed about you using the word "attackers" to describe the people defending themselves and others from Rittenhouse. The way you framed it is in my opinion, much, much more Trumpian.

EDIT: No point in bumping this thread over this old debate, so I'm leaving my response here

There is not a scintilla of dispute that Rittenhouse was attacked first by Rosenbaum, who charged at him.

Why did he charge at him? Could it be because Rittenhouse was acting threatening with his gun? In that case, Rosenbaum was not the attacker. You seem to have a very narrow definition of "attacker".

And the way you use words like "scintilla of dispute" is once again very Trumpian.

 

[WyndonCalling]

Well, I'm still angry about you using the word "attackers" to describe people defending themselves and others from Rittenhouse. The way you framed it, is in my opinion, much, much more Trumpian.

There is not a scintilla of dispute that Rittenhouse was attacked first by Rosenbaum, who charged at him. After that first shooting, Rittenhouse attempted to flee the scene with several people in pursuit, one of whom had a makeshift weapon. I won't claim expertise nor deny that it's get murky as to what bystanders might interpret and what might be legally acceptable for those pursuers to do in that situation, but they were most definitely attacking someone who was running - quite possibly for their life - from the scene at that point.

There's many more questions to ask - was Rittenhouse's response to that first attack proportionate? What was he doing there? Was he looking for trouble? How and why did he approach the group? Would a black person have received the same verdict? Why is it legal for a 17-year old to be armed in such a manner? But please, we can address those questions without muddying the waters of what physically happened.

 

[zoroarctic]

Changing gears to a less morbid subject, Morning Consult (finally!) released their updated governor approval ratings. There's not really much that's eye-opening, but all 3 Red State Democrats being above DeSantis is not something I expected.

 

[Aulos]

Just popping in to say that the fact that Trump gets booed for saying he got vaccinated and encouraging his audiences to do the same, just proves that he has created a monster that is out of his control. This is very scary.

 

[zoroarctic]

I've seen campaign ads for Doctor Oz and some other dude running for office in Pennsylvania while watching the Outback Bowl. Why are these ads airing in Alabama?

 

[Volphied]

Opinion | Jimmy Carter: I Fear for Our Democracy (Published 2022)

Even established democracies can fall to military juntas and despots. We can’t let that happen here.

www.nytimes.com

One year ago, a violent mob, guided by unscrupulous politicians, stormed the Capitol and almost succeeded in preventing the democratic transfer of power. All four of us former presidents condemned their actions and affirmed the legitimacy of the 2020 election. There followed a brief hope that the insurrection would shock the nation into addressing the toxic polarization that threatens our democracy.

However, one year on, promoters of the lie that the election was stolen have taken over one political party and stoked distrust in our electoral systems. These forces exert power and influence through relentless disinformation, which continues to turn Americans against Americans. According to the Survey Center on American Life, 36 percent of Americans — almost 100 million adults across the political spectrum — agree that “the traditional American way of life is disappearing so fast that we may have to use force to save it.” The Washington Post recently reported that roughly 40 percent of Republicans believe that violent action against the government is sometimes justified.

Politicians in my home state of Georgia, as well as in others, such as Texas and Florida, have leveraged the distrust they have created to enact laws that empower partisan legislatures to intervene in election processes. They seek to win by any means, and many Americans are being persuaded to think and act likewise, threatening to collapse the foundations of our security and democracy with breathtaking speed. I now fear that what we have fought so hard to achieve globally — the right to free, fair elections, unhindered by strongman politicians who seek nothing more than to grow their own power — has become dangerously fragile at home.

I personally encountered this threat in my own backyard in 1962, when a ballot-stuffing county boss tried to steal my election to the Georgia State Senate. This was in the primary, and I challenged the fraud in court. Ultimately, a judge invalidated the results, and I won the general election. Afterward, the protection and advancement of democracy became a priority for me. As president, a major goal was to institute majority rule in southern Africa and elsewhere.

After I left the White House and founded the Carter Center, we worked to promote free, fair and orderly elections across the globe. I led dozens of election observation missions in Africa, Latin America and Asia, starting with Panama in 1989, where I put a simple question to administrators: “Are you honest officials or thieves?” At each election, my wife, Rosalynn, and I were moved by the courage and commitment of thousands of citizens walking miles and waiting in line from dusk to dawn to cast their first ballots in free elections, renewing hope for themselves and their nations and taking their first steps to self-governance. But I have also seen how new democratic systems — and sometimes even established ones — can fall to military juntas or power-hungry despots. Sudan and Myanmar are two recent examples.

For American democracy to endure, we must demand that our leaders and candidates uphold the ideals of freedom and adhere to high standards of conduct.

First, while citizens can disagree on policies, people of all political stripes must agree on fundamental constitutional principles and norms of fairness, civility and respect for the rule of law. Citizens should be able to participate easily in transparent, safe and secure electoral processes. Claims of election irregularities should be submitted in good faith for adjudication by the courts, with all participants agreeing to accept the findings. And the election process should be conducted peacefully, free of intimidation and violence.

Second, we must push for reforms that ensure the security and accessibility of our elections and ensure public confidence in the accuracy of results. Phony claims of illegal voting and pointless multiple audits only detract from democratic ideals.

Third, we must resist the polarization that is reshaping our identities around politics. We must focus on a few core truths: that we are all human, we are all Americans and we have common hopes for our communities and our country to thrive. We must find ways to re-engage across the divide, respectfully and constructively, by holding civil conversations with family, friends and co-workers and standing up collectively to the forces dividing us.

Fourth, violence has no place in our politics, and we must act urgently to pass or strengthen laws to reverse the trends of character assassination, intimidation and the presence of armed militias at events. We must protect our election officials — who are trusted friends and neighbors of many of us — from threats to their safety. Law enforcement must have the power to address these issues and engage in a national effort to come to terms with the past and present of racial injustice.

Lastly, the spread of disinformation, especially on social media, must be addressed. We must reform these platforms and get in the habit of seeking out accurate information. Corporate America and religious communities should encourage respect for democratic norms, participation in elections and efforts to counter disinformation.

Our great nation now teeters on the brink of a widening abyss. Without immediate action, we are at genuine risk of civil conflict and losing our precious democracy. Americans must set aside differences and work together before it is too late.