That’s what I keep saying: Trump isn’t the problem, he’s a symptom.
And the disease is that a majority of voting Americans are either morally bankrupt and gullible enough to overlook all that Trump did and said and elect him, or actively fascist.
And that’s why, when people tell me I need to “make space” for those people and give them an exit ramp, so that when Trump finally turns on them too, and they realize what they done did, the nation can heal and come back together, I say: fuck this shit.
I don’t want to make space for immoral morons and fascists. These people deserve what they’re about to get, and what they’ve inflicted on the rest of us who didn’t sell out, and they’ll never come back from the moral quagmire that made them think it’s a-okay to elect a fascist POTUS.
I think the argument to make space for them is more practical than compassionate. WTF are we going to do if we just refuse to speak to or have any dealings with 1/3 of the working age population. Are we relocating all Trump voters South of Virginia and splitting the Union here?
Setting aside our own authoritarian problems for a second, if you want to have a wealthy country that can oppose authoritarian regimes (like China and Russia), you need all 350 million of us. (And you need Europe, India, and democratic Asia on board, perhaps even some middle eastern countries, all people you may have philosophical differences with that you have to learn to work with).
Even authoritarian governments can be swayed when money is on the line, imo. If countries enforce standards via an international trade deal, anyone that doesn’t play ball by the rules could be incentivized to change if they want a cut of the pie.
Take non-ethical working conditions for example. If every country said they will not do business with a country that doesn’t implement ethical working standards then that country could be incentivized to change. If there was a requirement for third party auditors to be able to regularly verify that those standards are being upheld then that could help ensure that those basic standards are being met even in authoritarian countries.
I agree, that’s why I feel that having more countries willing to stand together on certain points matters as well. The more people coming together to say something and stand by that, the more that message gets through, even to those that have selfish goals.
The problem is America , systemically not socially. The idiot Trump voters are likewise symptoms.
The sad part is many Americans simply think if you just get rid of Trump and his supporters that it would fix the problems with the country when in reality it perpetuates them by ignoring the underlying issues.
I’d take actually standing for something and not succeeding over standing for nothing and succeeding. It would fix the problems with the country permanently.
You were correct in the first half then you fell right off. Name a president that didn’t suck. You can’t, you won’t. This has nothing to do with Republican or Democratic being worst. BOTH are traitors to the American people.
You were correct in the first half then you fell right off.
I was going to comment that as well. They’ve identified the problem correctly, but rather than trying to fix it they decide to cement it in. We want people to be able to accept they were wrong and think (and vote) differently going forward. That sort of growth is how things get better. This vindictiveness just makes people defensive and want to double down on mistakes when doubt and regret could have lead to character development.
By all means, hold people accountable, but if you don’t allow them to change you are giving up hope entirely.
I do not understand how “vote for the better option” could possibly not be the correct move. If you want to change the candidates we have in the general election, no strategy for voting within the general election will change that; you would need to vote in the primaries to get the legitimately good candidates into the general. This is once again voting for the best option. If you have another theory I would love to hear how you expect it to work.
That’s what I keep saying: Trump isn’t the problem, he’s a symptom.
And the disease is that a majority of voting Americans are either morally bankrupt and gullible enough to overlook all that Trump did and said and elect him, or actively fascist.
And that’s why, when people tell me I need to “make space” for those people and give them an exit ramp, so that when Trump finally turns on them too, and they realize what they done did, the nation can heal and come back together, I say: fuck this shit.
I don’t want to make space for immoral morons and fascists. These people deserve what they’re about to get, and what they’ve inflicted on the rest of us who didn’t sell out, and they’ll never come back from the moral quagmire that made them think it’s a-okay to elect a fascist POTUS.
Make space if they actually repent for real, because it would be stupid not to. That’s an ally.
Do not make space if it’s not genuine, because it would be stupid to.
I think the argument to make space for them is more practical than compassionate. WTF are we going to do if we just refuse to speak to or have any dealings with 1/3 of the working age population. Are we relocating all Trump voters South of Virginia and splitting the Union here?
Setting aside our own authoritarian problems for a second, if you want to have a wealthy country that can oppose authoritarian regimes (like China and Russia), you need all 350 million of us. (And you need Europe, India, and democratic Asia on board, perhaps even some middle eastern countries, all people you may have philosophical differences with that you have to learn to work with).
Even authoritarian governments can be swayed when money is on the line, imo. If countries enforce standards via an international trade deal, anyone that doesn’t play ball by the rules could be incentivized to change if they want a cut of the pie.
Take non-ethical working conditions for example. If every country said they will not do business with a country that doesn’t implement ethical working standards then that country could be incentivized to change. If there was a requirement for third party auditors to be able to regularly verify that those standards are being upheld then that could help ensure that those basic standards are being met even in authoritarian countries.
Sure, but whether you’re talking about military might or economic might, more people is more leverage. That was my point.
I agree, that’s why I feel that having more countries willing to stand together on certain points matters as well. The more people coming together to say something and stand by that, the more that message gets through, even to those that have selfish goals.
My mom voted for Trump and her gov job is abt to be furloughed
The problem is America , systemically not socially. The idiot Trump voters are likewise symptoms.
The sad part is many Americans simply think if you just get rid of Trump and his supporters that it would fix the problems with the country when in reality it perpetuates them by ignoring the underlying issues.
you can’t expect perfect results…
I’d take getting rid of Trump and his supporters. It WOULD fix the problems with the country right now
You can certainly aim for your best…
I’d take actually standing for something and not succeeding over standing for nothing and succeeding. It would fix the problems with the country permanently.
You were correct in the first half then you fell right off. Name a president that didn’t suck. You can’t, you won’t. This has nothing to do with Republican or Democratic being worst. BOTH are traitors to the American people.
I was going to comment that as well. They’ve identified the problem correctly, but rather than trying to fix it they decide to cement it in. We want people to be able to accept they were wrong and think (and vote) differently going forward. That sort of growth is how things get better. This vindictiveness just makes people defensive and want to double down on mistakes when doubt and regret could have lead to character development.
By all means, hold people accountable, but if you don’t allow them to change you are giving up hope entirely.
I do not understand how “vote for the better option” could possibly not be the correct move. If you want to change the candidates we have in the general election, no strategy for voting within the general election will change that; you would need to vote in the primaries to get the legitimately good candidates into the general. This is once again voting for the best option. If you have another theory I would love to hear how you expect it to work.
There is a wide chasm between “suck” and “fascist”.
And it’s filled with slave owners, genociders, imperialists, and war criminals.
John Quincy Adams was pretty decent, as far as I’m aware.
If I were in charge I’d ban every last Trump voter from ever voting again. It’s only immoral if you’re incorrect ™.