I see you're a right winger.

The judge talked about politicians choosing personal interest over country's, and pointed to the fact that they would not admit to having done so, perhaps even believing that they had not made such a choice.<-----that's a huge problem! What's best for the country is what's best for the overwhelming majority of Americans. Neither party has done what's best for Americans(particularly poor and working class) for at least 45 years. That paved the way for Trump, for it greatly increased the distrust of government that Reagan began fomenting in the 70's.

The clear and present danger was about the attempt to overturn a free and fair election and the openly espoused plan to make a concerted attempt to do so in the future based upon legal and historical precedent. It failed in 2021, but some are actively putting in place all the pieces necessary to succeed in the future, should the circumstamces arise to do so.

Of course it doesn't really matter because the two parties are the same party with differing heraldry. — Streetlight

Absolutely. What astonishes me is the godlike status these parties are afforded such that any policy they come up with is waived through as being at least reasonable, but every alternative is treated as if it were utter madness. It's just baffling the faith these people seem to have in the status quo. As if it were designed by benevolent philosopher kings.

Given their unrelenting documented history of utter contempt for ordinary people, that an idea is not on the manifesto of either party is one of the most compelling arguments in its favour.

I advocate for defense rather than attack but I also advocate for change through the democratic process. — universeness

A weaselly fudge of an expression - "the democratic process". What is that exactly?

A weaselly fudge of an expression — Isaac

It's unwise to be derogatory towards that which you claim to not understand.
Why are you asking me 'what it is exactly?' If you have already labelled the term 'the democratic process,' 'a weaselly fudge.'
You reveal your lack of control over your own bitter and twisted thinking.
Which process do you prefer over the democratic one?

It's unwise to be derogatory towards that which you claim to not understand. — universeness

Ah, the final question was rhetorical.

But on the off chance you're uniquely able to define what is and isn't part of the 'democratic process' then crack on.

As to my bitter and twisted thinking, that's between me and my therapist.

No my final question to you was not rhetorical.
I am not uniquely able to define what is and is not part of the 'democratic process,' but I am able to.
Why would YOU need me to or want me to, if you already think it's 'a weaselly fudge?'
I do not wish to come between you and your therapist. I am just happy that you must live in a democracy which provides you with one. Free of charge I hope, but if not, then perhaps you could help fight for better free mental health services in the country you live in.

What astonishes me is the godlike status these parties are afforded such that any policy they come up with is waived through as being at least reasonable, but every alternative is treated as if it were utter madness. — Isaac

:up: I despise policies set forth on the far right as I despise those set forth on the far left. Where is the middle these days? I'm dropping a party affiliation and going independent.

Abolishing capitalism would be good, but in lieu of that, get money of out politics, abolish the Electoral Collage, pack or abolish the Supreme Court, rewrite that stupid piece of shit document they call a constitution, bring back the corporate income tax rate of the 1940-1950s, massively limit speculation on housing, massively raise the capital gains tax, establish a decent fucking healthcare system, fund the ever living daylights out of public housing, gut to the point of death funding for the military and for cops, so and and so on. — Streetlight

Ironically, Trump supporters would fight you tooth and nail on all of that.

going independent. — jgill

:grin: I hope you are predicting Scotland's future, as I think that would mean the end of our version of the American republican party, the Scottish tory party.

Of course it doesn't really matter because the two parties are the same party with differing heraldry.
— Streetlight — Jackson

Nonsense.

Ironically, Trump supporters would fight you tooth and nail on all of that. — RogueAI

Not sure what's ironic about that so much as obvious?

I'm dropping a party affiliation and going independent. — jgill

Becoming a Teal.

Might the middle class be sufficiently disgruntled with both parties that the vote for neither? What then?

Not having proportional representation is a basic flaw in the US Constitution.

is there a political solution to the problem? — Wayfarer

I would take a look at someone like Jane McAlevey. I think she describes one solution very well. It involves organizing. Not lecturing others, but listening and helping them identify and solve problems. Militant unions, a strong labor movement, etc., are going to be part of any solution. That involves real work. It involves, first and foremost, a genuine care for working people. Not contempt and condescension.



Both parties are corporate parties— but asserting they’re the same isn’t exactly true. There are minor differences which we have to acknowledge, however we dislike them. Those differences matter in a superpower like the US, as you both know.

Look at the Supreme Court, to take the obvious example. If Clinton had been elected, we wouldn’t be seeing the end of Roe — which will have very real effects for years to come. As will the upcoming ruling on guns and on restricting the EPA’s ability to regulate emissions. That’s not nothing. That’s not an endorsement of Clinton, of course, but it’s true nevertheless— I think we can all agree?

Given this alone, if things like abortion rights and the environment matter to you, it would be preferable if we didn’t go backwards. That may not sway your vote, but it’s still a difference.

:up:

Both parties are corporate parties— but asserting they’re the same isn’t exactly true. There are minor differences which we have to acknowledge, however we dislike them. — Xtrix

Trump and the GOP tried a coup. The House Democrats are trying to get Trump indicted for crimes. I would say there is a profound difference between the two parties.

They’re nearly all corporatists.

To argue there are profound differences because of this ridiculous media farce really isn’t serious.

To argue there are profound differences because of this ridiculous media farce really isn’t serious. — Xtrix

The media farce of Trump's violent coup attempt?

Look at the Supreme Court, to take the obvious example. If Clinton had been elected, we wouldn’t be seeing the end of Roe — which will have very real effects for years to come. As will the upcoming ruling on guns and on restricting the EPA’s ability to regulate emissions. That’s not nothing. That’s not an endorsement of Clinton, of course, but it’s true nevertheless— I think we can all agree?

Given this alone, if things like abortion rights and the environment matter to you, it would be preferable if we didn’t go backwards. — Xtrix

Pelosi was fighting tooth and nail for anti-abortion democrats over left candidates right as she released sop-story press statements about the importance of woman's rights in the wake of the supreme court leak. Clinton's unbeliveable incompetence and the Democratic party's anti-democratic internal corruption all but ensured - and continue to ensure - that Republicans will be in place to continue America's march toward its fascist future. Democrats are the same insofar as their existence leads to the same results, not because of hypotheticals that one can take imaginary comfort in apres coup.

If there is one point of major difference it's that there is no more effective tool than the Democratic party is murdering left and progressive energy. Not even the Republicans can do it as effectively and with more devestating results than the Dems.

Edit: Not to mention that the person who similarly fought tooth and nail to ensure that a sexual abuser like Clarence Thomas got onto the court was none other than the current sitting president. And all he had to do was humiliate and retraumatize Thomas' victim in congress on national TV to do so.

No, this commission. Another chance for ratings. Like the Mueller report and impeachment trials before it. I wouldn’t get caught up in this stuff. They’re all trying to recapture the supposed glory days of Watergate.

No, this commission. Another chance for ratings. Like the Mueller report and impeachment trials before it. I wouldn’t get caught up in this stuff. They’re all trying to recapture the supposed glory days of Watergate. — Xtrix

Trump attempted a violent coup.

Democrats are the same insofar as their existence leads to the same results, not because of hypotheticals that one can take imaginary comfort in apres coup. — Streetlight

I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say our Supreme Court would look different had Trump not been elected— which is indeed a different and important outcome. But yes, technically I can’t prove it.

Trump attempted a violent coup. — Jackson

Fine. This commission is still a farce.

This commission is still a farce. — Xtrix

Because?

Because the outcome is predictable and it’s mostly a waste of time and a media production.

There were profound differences of opinion between Republicans and Democrats during the civil war. The conflict was over whether the South should be part of the USA.

Is that the kind of difference you want to see?

Is that the kind of difference you want to see? — Tate

I really don’t see the relevance.

I really don’t see the relevance. — Xtrix

I was just asking what sort of parties you'd like to see.

I’d like to see, at bare minimum, a labor party. But this is getting off topic so I’ll leave it at that.

74 million Americans voted for Trump. Trump is enormously representative of American values, ideals, and aspirations. — Streetlight

More significantly, which you overlook and therefore misunderstand the statistic you've quoted, 81 million Americans voted against Trump. :mask:

Consider: The failure and loss of "White's Only Democracy" has been, for over fifty years, driving the increasingly violent movement to "repeal and replace" it with a White Nationalist Autocracy, which is now the overt agenda of the Republican Party. The Counter-"Revolution" Is Being Televised, comrades, and hyper-partisan paralysis-by-design of the Federal and State governments is bringing Murica's paramilitarized populist gumbo to a boil. The organizing principle and driver is post-Civil Rights "white grievance" (no doubt catalyzed – not, however, caused – by the ravages of rapacious neoliberal policies that most of these MAGAs (and too many fucking Dems) still support).

Follow the links down this rabbit hole to ... "Magaland".

America's looming so-called 'demographic crisis'. — 180 Proof

Well, You're here now! You might as well help try to improve things for others whilst recommending that life should fade away asap.
You can advocate for antinatalism all you want, but meantime, you can do your best to help those who are suffering. — universeness

No one cares about my suggestions for improving things, just about complying with the agenda at this stage. Like everyone else.