Politics 2020 - the gift that keeps giving

[Guard Dog]

6 hours ago, Achilles said:

 

All this to say, you will only ever have two options:

1. The candidate who moves more of the things you care about closer to where you think they should go
2. The candidate who move less of the things you care about further from where you think they should go

Grabbing your rifle won't change that, because whatever system is put in place after this one will still present you these two choices. Sitting out elections only guarantees that other people make these decisions for you while you're home on the couch with your protest non-vote. If you really want things to change, you have to pay attention to what the power players are doing and then hold them accountable for their actions. That means voting, regardless of whether or not "your" candidate is on the ballot. That means supporting (either financially, if you can, or with your volunteer hours, if you can't) candidates you think are "better".

Anything less than this is living in a dream world.

Let me give you a little insight into my posting style Achilles. It's likely you have not read many of my posts but I tend to treat serious subjects with a facetious flair. I also indulge in hyperbole freely and willingly sometimes to be argumentative and sometimes to provoke a discussion. My comment about "picking up a rifle" was an example of that. Notice it was sandwiched between two serious options? Not accidental. Most of the other folks around here, Gromnir in particular know my schtick. Just in case you didn't. 

Now to address your point. Neither major political party is moving anything anywhere near where I want things to go. The US is nearly $27T in debt. Actual and unfunded liabilities. We have a $3T spending deficit right now. The position of the dollar as the worlds reserve currency is is jeopardy. If there were an acceptable alternative right now we be f----d. The last four Presidential administrations have usurped legislative and state power and no one has uttered a peep. The Federal government is literally spying on us and everyone just shrugs and goes on. Obama turned the IRS into a political secret police and no one cared. Trump took money designated by Congress for other things and used it to build part of his wall. The President can't do that. But no one stops them. He also unilaterally started using tariffs as he pleased. That is a congressional power not an executive power. No one says a word. The Court decided it's perfectly ok for the government to seize your home and sell it to someone else and no one stops it. 

The reason why no one stops it is both political parties are equally responsible for it. Both do it freely. For all the political bickering there isn't a times worth of difference between the two. They both do the same thing: spend money, spend more, expand government power. The rest is just window dressing. 

I vote in every election. But I will never vote for a Republican again and I sure as hell will NEVER EVER vote for one of the goddamned Democrats. The love of freedom and liberty does not abide in either party.  I donate to candidates. Heck I donated $1k to Gary Johnson's campaign in 2016. I donated $500 to Jo Jorgenson this year. I pay my dues to the LP every year. I am under no illusions about her chances of winning. But I am ok with the guy in the mirror because I did NOT support a political philosophy I hated.

And by the way the Pennsylvania Democrat Party recently sued to keep the Green Party candidate off the ballot. There may not be a stable of philosopher kings waiting in the wings but there ARE other opinions of what we can/should  do and the Democrats and Republicans along with a willing media are working like hell to ensure voters don't get to vote for or hear from them. THAT is also a suppression of liberty. 

[Guest]

It’s definitely your vote and I respect your right to use it however you want

[Bartimaeus]

McConnell has already announced there will be a vote for the next SCJ. Not even a day, .

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Orogun01 said:

gibberish

article from 2017... not 1901

How is the Civil War taught in school? Depends on where you live.

When curriculum standards were approved in 2010 by Texas’ Republican-controlled Board of Education, debate focused on slavery being a Civil War "after issue."

The state’s fifth- and seventh-graders taking Texas history courses, and eighth-graders taking U.S. history, are now asked to identify the causes of the war, "including sectionalism, states’ rights and slavery."

Eighth-graders also compare ideas from Abraham Lincoln’s inaugural address with those from Confederate President Jefferson Davis’ inaugural address, which did not mention slavery and instead endorsed small-government values still popular with many conservatives today.

The eighth-grade curriculum also lists Confederate Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson alongside Frederick Douglass, a 19th century abolitionist, as examples of "the importance of effective leadership in a constitutional republic."

Home to about 5.3 million public school students, Texas has a textbook market so large that volumes published for its classrooms can be sold in other states, though that influence has waned recently. Publishers can now more easily tailor electronic materials to the needs of individual markets.

Still, in 2015, a publisher promised to make editorial changes after a mother in Houston complained that her son’s ninth-grade geography textbook referred to African slaves as "workers" and immigrants."

saying that we got standardized k-12 education is nonsense and link a wiki article for common core standards don't mean you know what the hell you are talking 'bout.  common core is NOT common curriculum, which is prohibited by fed law by the way. 

from common core site:

Myth: These standards amount to a national curriculum for our schools.

Fact: The Common Core is not a curriculum. It is a clear set of shared goals and expectations for what knowledge and skills will help our students succeed. Local teachers, principals, superintendents, and others will decide how the standards are to be met. Teachers will continue to devise lesson plans and tailor instruction to the individual needs of the students in their classrooms.

Myth: The federal government will take over ownership of the Common Core State Standards initiative.

Fact: The federal government will not govern the Common Core State Standards. The Common Core was and will remain a state-led effort. The NGA Center and CCSSO are committed to developing a long-term governance structure with leadership from governors, chief state school officers, and other state policymakers to ensure the quality of the Common Core and that teachers and principals have a strong voice in the future of the standards. States and local school districts will drive implementation of the Common Core.

oh, and am admitted confused by your recognition o' how education gets funded and the disparate impact such has on education. common core is swell and all but minimum standards for state funding don't change fact that individual school districts have, from a practical perspective, much different tools and options for trying to meet such standards. 

not common curriculum, and is particular not common for stuff such as history and civics. do you even know what common core covers? will give you time to self educate before further chastising.

oh, and bring up university where adults (still kids in our mind, but legal adult) is being educated when the following is what started this discussion

is predictable ludicrous.

not to mention fact is complete unrelated to your concern as these is stem professors. these professors is so not being investigated 'cause they is a threat to the hearts and minds o' fragile young minds as they indoctrinate students with their pro chinese hegemony propaganda.

"The cases underscore Justice Department concerns about Chinese programs that recruit scientists with access to cutting-edge technology in the U.S. and encourage them to conduct research for Beijing’s gain and even to steal the work of American academics."

you see rando word "china" in links to education and somehow glomp onto such as potential proof that your night terrors brought on by the teaching o' women's studies (HA!) and critical race theory (another wiki link) in universities is justified. 

btw, we don't doubt that foreign powers use university campuses to recruit young and gullible. is so far afield o' what is being proposed by trump and is not actual at all related to the links you provide.

you are such a weird person and your ideology driven posts would be laughable save that 1) your chosen ideology is pernicious and 2) you pretend as if the ideology, which would make the daughters o' the confederacy proud, is the result o' intellectual curiosity and reasonable reflection. 

your schtick is not unique; the venom is, am sad to say, all to common. real tragedy is that as much as we criticize florida man, the shift o' high tech industry to the south is doing more to change the current paradigm than is any efforts by naacp or educators to change notions 'bout bigotry. increasing educated southern parents is teaching their children to reject conspiracy theories and thin veiled bigotry. as more educated folks is moving south, what we loathe 'bout the south (other than the humidity) decreases. meanwhile, is the rust belt which is becoming more southern every day.  won't be long before is indiana man we need worry 'bout more than florida... so 1920s.

am gonna leave the ginsburg reflection for at least a day or two.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[BruceVC]

On 9/18/2020 at 2:40 AM, Malcador said:

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2020-09-17/trump-says-he-will-create-commission-to-promote-patriotic-education

Indeed, Americans need to love their country like a child does their parents.

This is one of those examples where I agree with Trump around the objective of the 1619 project and what its attempting to create or reposition around what contributed towards the history of the USA

Have you guys researched what the 1619 project is doing or wants to do, its very concerning, inaccurate and selective around what made the US a great  country. I wish I could say its well meaning but I fail to see how being selective around events of documented, proven history could someone be a good way of educating young people?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_1619_Project

From what I have heard from people supporting this idea is that they have  a view that says " the USA success was built primarily on the labor of African, American slaves " ......but they want to ignore all other developments and realities that many different groups made to the overall history. No one should deny that slavery contributed towards aspects of the US economy and industry but so did many other things, for example many of the early settlers to the USA came as white, indentured slaves..,...by that  argument raised by the 1619 people surly we should recognize there early contribution as the beginning of the colonies and more important ? So things like  the history of any country and especially the USA consist of many events like wars, trade deal, laws, independence from Britain, economic success and  yes slavery was part of this and then finally how the US Constitution was created which defined the foundation for the legal and political future of the USA

How can anyone suggest that only the industry created by slaves is significant ? On another criticism  I have with the 1619 movement is directly quoted from the article which unfortunately I have come across before but framed differently  where it states that the 1619 project " The project was envisioned with the condition that almost all of the contributions would be from African-American contributors, deeming the perspective of black writers an essential element of the story to be told.^[" 

Why would an accurate account of history need to be written by a particular race to be considered authentic and acceptable ? I am certain all of us have read books on history that were not even written by a citizen of that country and I can see no logical correlation to this being a requirement for accuracy ?

Finally I dont think the 1619 idea is going to become a replacement for normal history that is taught at schools, you may need to be more inclusive but not this suggestion of trying to recreate historical contributions

And I have come across a similar sentiment occasionally raised in SA and the UK where there is view that places like the UK, SA and EU only are doing well economically because of colonialism and abuse of resources from places like Africa. And like the USA this is not a fair or accurate reason that the EU is a success. Its not going to lead to any meaningful change to think this is the entire story of why certain countries have different levels of inequality and how we can address this is sustainable way 

Trump claims California will be implementing this 1619 project into there school  history  curriculum, I find that hard to believe any qualified historian would suggest this idea even in a progressive, well meaning state like California ? 

 

 

 

 

 

[Orogun01]

13 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

btw, we don't doubt that foreign powers use university campuses to recruit young and gullible. is so far afield o' what is being proposed by trump and is not actual at all related to the links you provide.

Ok

14 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

you are such a weird person and your ideology driven posts would be laughable save that 1) your chosen ideology is pernicious and 2) you pretend as if the ideology, which would make the daughters o' the confederacy proud, is the result o' intellectual curiosity and reasonable reflection. 

Has anyone told you're a bit tsundere? Can you assume the best and think I'm at least somewhat reasonable....I don't know what you think but history is always dictated by the current politics. Its the truth of every Hollywood movie that chooses to paint whites as the aggressor and its the truth of several news articles and college course that attempt to re-contextualize history to suit political ends.
Honestly I wish we could just all agree that when it comes to history and politics the biggest caveat should be: We are all humans, we are all capable of great wrongs and rights and belief or race don't factor into it.

 

20 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

your schtick is not unique; the venom is, am sad to say, all to common. real tragedy is that as much as we criticize florida man, the shift o' high tech industry to the south is doing more to change the current paradigm than is any efforts by naacp or educators to change notions 'bout bigotry. increasing educated southern parents is teaching their children to reject conspiracy theories and thin veiled bigotry. as more educated folks is moving south, what we loathe 'bout the south (other than the humidity) decreases. meanwhile, is the rust belt which is becoming more southern every day.  won't be long before is indiana man we need worry 'bout more than florida... so 1920s.

Trust me I don't like it more than you do. The biggest fear right now is that they're bringing their politics and that they will create the same hellscape that they made in their liberal states. However development in S Florida has to do more with it having a port than this recent move. The tech industry has been on the rise since 2014, at least that's when I became involved in it.

No, I'm sorry to say that the development of Florida will likely cause more Florida man incidents since it will create a rise in inequality and when you add all the drugs running into the country through here. That's not a good mix, so Indiana can wait.

 

25 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

am gonna leave the ginsburg reflection for at least a day or two.

I honestly look forward to your post as you are more educated in this subject that probably everyone on these forums...at least I think so.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

 

I vote in every election. But I will never vote for a Republican again and I sure as hell will NEVER EVER vote for one of the goddamned Democrats. The love of freedom and liberty does not abide in either party.  I donate to candidates. Heck I donated $1k to Gary Johnson's campaign in 2016. I donated $500 to Jo Jorgenson this year. I pay my dues to the LP every year. I am under no illusions about her chances of winning. But I am ok with the guy in the mirror because I did NOT support a political philosophy I hated.

 

 

59 minutes ago, Achilles said:

It’s definitely your vote and I respect your right to use it however you want

GD there is another way to vote that I think in the USA is considered anathema but  can be real, you make a strategic vote purely because you dont want a particular party to win or you simply want to support the principle of having real oppositions parties that can be significant. So you vote not because of policies or opinion but just to add numbers to a party

I can understand this may be unheard of in the USA but these are unusual times so with all the current concerns people have with the  ideological path the USA is taking you could vote for party x and its not because of the view you may have of that party.....so then this can lead to less anxiety about a correct choice because you dont vote for normal ideological views 

[Gorth]

The world lost another one of its interesting characters...

Ruth Bader Ginsburg: US Supreme Court judge dies of cancer, aged 87

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54214729

 

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

 

GD there is another way to vote that I think in the USA is considered anathema but  can be real, you make a strategic vote purely because you dont want a particular party to win or you simply want to support the principle of having real oppositions parties that can be significant. So you vote not because of policies or opinion but just to add numbers to a party

I can understand this may be unheard of in the USA but these are unusual times so with all the current concerns people have with the  ideological path the USA is taking you could vote for party x and its not because of the view you may have of that party.....so then this can lead to less anxiety about a correct choice because you dont vote for normal ideological views 

Some day we may have ranked choice voting and I think that will definitely be a move in the right direction.

As it stands now, the U.S. is a two party system and voting outside of that system is ineffectual.

[Gromnir]

56 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

 

Trump claims California will be implementing this 1619 project into there school  history  curriculum, I find that hard to believe any qualified historian would suggest this idea even in a progressive, well meaning state like California ? 

as usual, trump is full o' p00p. ca won't implement some kinda cumpulsory 1619 project. what will continue to occur is that individual school districts will include the 1619 project as a potential recommended resource for teachers such as @Hurlshot... along with dozens if not hundreds o' similar resources. 

regardless, the 1619 project is not a straight jacket or a comprehensive history curriculum. thank goodness. more than a few historians roll their eyes at the assertion the american Revolutionary war was fought primarily because of slavery.  those darn abolitionists were actual major instigators o' rebellion. even the 1619 creator has agreed that the project was a starting point and it should evolve, and she admitted she might have reached a bit too far in an effort to make every pivotal event in early american history a slave/race issue. that said, is nothing wrong with recognizing just how significant slavery was in the formation o' the US and how it shaped institutions into the late 20th century and that it impacts us still today. 

for chrissakes, is more than a few high schools which has machiavelli's the prince on their polisci reading lists. *gasp* isn't bruce terrified impressionable young minds is being indoctrinated with an instructional manual as to how to overthrow the current regime and then take and hold power? what about fragile minds? 

oh, and am not certain how trump could implement his 1776 plan or forbid use o' 1619.  the reason nclb and common core is legal is kinda the opposite o' oro's argument. is 14th amendment equal protection which makes possible. precise because the quality o' education is so disparate from school district to school district in the US, and thanks to a history o' zoning and race-based housing limits, such gaps 'tween those who get quality education and those who do not is based on reasons repugnant to the Constitution. the Federal Government is prohibited both by the Constitution and by federal statute from direct interfering with state education. at same time, 14th amendment says we all get equal protection of the law. the justification the fed has in interfering with state education is to bring 'bout fairness o' education regardless o' sex and race and whatnot. 

this 1776 thing by trump is a dog whistle. nothing more.

HA! Good Fun!

Edited September 19, 2020 by Gromnir
ps am not certain what an "ionstrigator" is, but they were involved in the american revolution before our edit

[Malcador]

50 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Finally I dont think the 1619 idea is going to become a replacement for normal history that is taught at schools, you may need to be more inclusive but not this suggestion of trying to recreate historical contributions

Was this ever the case ? Sounds like they were going to incorporate it not replace, uh "normal" history. 

However, yet another Marxist plot to have White Genocide, no doubt.

 

Edited September 19, 2020 by Malcador

[BruceVC]

6 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Some day we may have ranked choice voting and I think that will definitely be a move in the right direction.

As it stands now, the U.S. is a two party system and voting outside of that system is ineffectual.

I agree with the view that this election should only be  a choice for the 2 main parties unless a person can justify they have no concerns if either party wins

But just on this forum alone in the last election  many US forum members were critical of both parties and decided to vote for Libertarian or not vote because of disillusionment  with general party outcomes. This is always something I have never really understood but sentiment that actual citizens have matters so it was clear to me my view was not reflective of the US political choices and reasons you should vote 

 

[Hurlshort]

Fun Fact: My lesson on Machiavelli is one of my favorites.

Less fun fact: Very few students remember or understand it. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I agree with the view that this election should only be  a choice for the 2 main parties unless a person can justify they have no concerns if either party wins

But just on this forum alone in the last election  many US forum members were critical of both parties and decided to vote for Libertarian or not vote because of disillusionment  with general party outcomes. This is always something I have never really understood but sentiment that actual citizens have matters so it was clear to me my view was not reflective of the US political choices and reasons you should vote 

 

I’m not speaking to what it should be, rather to what it is.

Until the U.S. implements rank voting or something like it, voting outside the two party system is akin to throwing your vote away. The idealistic part of me understands the appeal, but the pragmatic side just kinda shakes its head. 
 

I’m not sure I get people who looked at Trump and looked at Hillary and thought there really was no discernible difference. Same thing goes for Biden in this cycle. One of these two men is going to be president. If you really think that the future looks no different under one than the other, then vote however you want. 

[Orogun01]

2 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Until the U.S. implements rank voting or something like it, voting outside the two party system is akin to throwing your vote away. The idealistic part of me understands the appeal, but the pragmatic side just kinda shakes its head. 

Except the two party system adopts the view of third parties to maintain hegemony. It's why the democrats and the republican now have environmentalism as a issue in their platform.  With more than two party you end up with weird stalemates in which single issue parties hold the vote for an issue that's not in their agenda. Just imagine the Green party being the deciding vote in an pro-life or pro-abortion bill. On one hand we are all creatures of the Earth on the other one more people contribute to the carbon footprint, they'll likely flip flop on the issues and bring more instability to the process.

[BruceVC]

21 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

 

for chrissakes, is more than a few high schools which has machiavelli's the prince on their polisci reading lists. *gasp* isn't bruce terrified impressionable young minds is being indoctrinated with an instructional manual as to how to overthrow the current regime and then take and hold power? what about fragile minds? 

 

this 1776 thing by trump is a dog whistle. nothing more.

HA! Good Fun!

Yes I agree that actually even  raising  1619 as an example of how the Dems want to recreate history is pure Trump grandstanding but its where he can be very convincing as he is able to add to peoples real concerns and irrational views

If you look at who is behind this idea of 1619 its just a relatively small  group of historians/activists and some people who  believe this somehow matters but it has received serious and fair criticism from other historians on numerous levels. So it should not get the attention  is has received....but I also am cognizant of how these types of events get added up and used as a political point to vindicate why you should vote for Trump

And this election has been characterized by both sides making certain hyperbolic points which seem to be misplaced on how both parties should be gaining support 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Orogun01 said:

Except the two party system adopts the view of third parties to maintain hegemony. It's why the democrats and the republican now have environmentalism as a issue in their platform.  With more than two party you end up with weird stalemates in which single issue parties hold the vote for an issue that's not in their agenda. Just imagine the Green party being the deciding vote in an pro-life or pro-abortion bill. On one hand we are all creatures of the Earth on the other one more people contribute to the carbon footprint, they'll likely flip flop on the issues and bring more instability to the process.

Sorry, I'm old enough to remember when environmentalism was a republican issue.

My personal opinion: political parties are stupid, but ala Rousseau, seem to be something humans are dead-set on having. We don't need a green party or a libertarian party to cause change. We need engaged voters paying attention and demanding that their representatives dance for their votes on the issue we care about. All registering for another party or thinking that not voting is gonna make a difference does is take you out of the game.

No one is going to knock on your door, ask you why you didn't vote, and then use that feedback to shape the future of the party. On the contrary, if you do vote, and you vote within my party, I'm going to do everything in my power to convince you to vote for me. You don't need to volunteer for many campaigns to see this in action.

Edited September 19, 2020 by Achilles
typo

[Guard Dog]

27 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Fun Fact: My lesson on Machiavelli is one of my favorites.

Less fun fact: Very few students remember or understand it. 

That is a shame. The Prince is required reading at GD University

[BruceVC]

31 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Was this ever the case ? Sounds like they were going to incorporate it not replace, uh "normal" history. 

However, yet another Marxist plot to have White Genocide, no doubt.

 

But Malc you are unintentionally validating something that would be incongruous for how this type of history should be taught 

 The stated  objective of 1619 is a real, recreation of the entire story of the contribution and you  dont need to create a project where only a certain race can write about it ....its bizarre and makes no practical sense to separate the two as if they are alternative views...they should not be  explained like this ?

Considering how the Trump initial winning strategy was decimated by the virus lockdown and the global economic impact this is something any Trump political strategist will focus on and embellish

And if you someone who doesnt want another 4 years of Trump these seemingly inconsequential BLM outcomes just add to his support ...so for me they are harmful to a Biden victory and it would be much better if this type of project was never initiated 

 

[Malcador]

6 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

But Malc you are unintentionally validating something that would be incongruous for how this type of history should be taught 

 The stated  objective of 1619 is a real, recreation of the entire story of the contribution and you  dont need to create a project where only a certain race can write about it ....its bizarre and makes no practical sense to separate the two as if they are alternative views...they should not be  explained like this ?

Considering how the Trump initial winning strategy was decimated by the virus lockdown and the global economic impact this is something any Trump political strategist will focus on and embellish

And if you someone who doesnt want another 4 years of Trump these seemingly inconsequential BLM outcomes just add to his support ...so for me they are harmful to a Biden victory and it would be much better if this type of project was never initiated 

 

Well, everyone has different views of things from everyone else.  I don't really see the issue with a bunch of Black people in the US looking at history from their perspective,  the project is referred to as a starting point for discussion by the people behind and even people critiquing it say it's a good thing to discuss.  No one's going to look at how California will incorporate it and how it will turn out, checking details is too much work.

As for adding to his support, ehh, I think people who'd get so outraged over this crap already are drunk on the Kool-Aid (given Jones used Flavor-Aid why don't we use that...), I'd certainly hope Americans would take things more seriously than get upset about some people in another state learning things "the wrong way".  Heh, how is the Civil War taught in the South, anyway ?

[Hurlshort]

7 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

That is a shame. The Prince is required reading at GD University

I'm not sure that it is a shame though. Your average 12-year old is blessedly naïve about the about the world around them, and I don't know that we need to really rush to crush that with realities of power and manipulation in government.  

[Orogun01]

3 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Sorry, I'm old enough to remember when environmentalism was a republican issue.

My personal opinion: political parties are stupid, but ala Rousseau, seem to be something humans are dead-set on having. We don't need a green party or a libertarian party to cause change. We need engaged voters paying attention and demanding that their representatives dance for their votes on the issue we care about. All registering for another party or thinking that not voting is gonna make a difference does is take you out of the game.

No one is going to knock on your door, ask you why you didn't vote, and then use that feedback to shape the future of the party. On the contrary, if you do vote, and you vote within my party, I'm going to do everything in my power to convince you to vote for me. You don't need to volunteer for many campaigns to see this in action.

Sorry, I'm paranoid enough to remember when Nixon nationalized and sold swaths of American land as collateral for countries to adopt the petrodollar.

But whilst I find your idealistic view endearing,  the fact is that information travels fast and is often very biased requiring an educated view. Most voters tend to adopt a political/religious/moral stance on issues since its easier to digest. Voter engagement is an issue that reflects the general disenfranchisement of everyone with establishment politics, one of the reasons Donald Trump likely won was the lack of faith in both party as well as a lack of faith in the electoral process. After 10 years of both parties lying and ignoring the will of the American people it was to be expected, whether you agree with him or not, his talking points resonated with enough Americans to win him the Presidency.

I doubt that the system will improve, as now data is easier to collect. We are going to see a generation that has completely been shaped by the algorithms of silicon valley, what party they're going to lean to is yet to be determined.
 

[Guard Dog]

1 minute ago, Achilles said:

Sorry, I'm old enough to remember when environmentalism was a republican issue.

My personal opinion: political parties are stupid, but ala Rousseau, seem to be something humans are dead-set on having. We don't need a green party or a libertarian party to cause change. We need engaged voters paying attention and demanding that their representatives dance for their votes on the issue we care about. All registering for another party or thinking that not voting is gonna make a difference does is take you out of the game.

No one is going to knock on your door, ask you why you didn't vote, and then use that feedback to shape the future of the party. On the contrary, if you do vote, and you vote within my party, I'm going to do everything in my power to convince you to vote for me. You don't need to volunteer for many campaigns to see this action.

You are working on the assumption that the Libertarianism can be a plank in a Republican platform or the Green's agenda can be a plank in a Democrat platform. That was certainly true forty years ago. Perhaps even 20 years ago. Not now. Not even close. I was a reliable Republican supporter for many yeas. When I got out of the service I even worked on the campaign staff of Don "Big Daddy" Garlits when he ran for Congress. The Republican party of today bears small resemblance of the one then. If Reagan or Goldwater were alive to see it they would be disgusted. They have turned their backs on small government advocacy and small "L" libertarianism. McCain was the last Republican I voted for. And he will be the last unless the ship is somehow righted in the future. I joined the Libertarian Party because it is becoming what the Republican Party should have been. But isn't. Libertarians are not Republicans. Greens are not Democrats. And vice versa. 

 

@BruceVC strategic voting is something I will do down ballot if needed. I expect Biden will win so I'd be inclined to support Republican candidates for Congress because I do NOT want a President and Congress of the same party ever again. If I thought Trump was likely to win I'd be inclined to support candidates other than Republicans. But voting for Biden because I dislike Trump or Trump because I dislike Biden I will not do. One of these idiots will win and we'll be stuck with them. Nothing I can do. But I will NOT put my name on it by voting for it.

 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

But Malc you are unintentionally validating something that would be incongruous for how this type of history should be taught 

 The stated  objective of 1619 is a real, recreation of the entire story of the contribution and you  dont need to create a project where only a certain race can write about it ....its bizarre and makes no practical sense to separate the two as if they are alternative views...they should not be  explained like this ?

Considering how the Trump initial winning strategy was decimated by the virus lockdown and the global economic impact this is something any Trump political strategist will focus on and embellish

And if you someone who doesnt want another 4 years of Trump these seemingly inconsequential BLM outcomes just add to his support ...so for me they are harmful to a Biden victory and it would be much better if this type of project was never initiated 

 

The part of this post that I agree with: yes, the timing on this is...dumb. If you want Trump out of office, then all of your focus should be on accomplishing that. We can talk about anything else later.

The part of this post that I'm not sure I agree with: slavery is part of the United State's DNA. We were the last "civilized" nation to give it up and we fought a civil war over the matter (once upon a time the stat was that more americans died in that war that all our other wars combined, though I'm not sure if that's still true). We, as a society, do need to face our history and reconcile it. We haven't done that yet and I'm not sure we'll be able to move on until we do.

My 2 cents.

[Guard Dog]

2 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

I'm not sure that it is a shame though. Your average 12-year old is blessedly naïve about the about the world around them, and I don't know that we need to really rush to crush that with realities of power and manipulation in government.  

Once you lean how it's done it's easy to recognize it's bring done. When some dystopian future government starts burning books again $5 days The Prince will be one of them.