Source: Durham Investigation Closing Down Without Indictments, Scared of Biden Blowback

[Prizm123 1,086]

8 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Nope, that is different.  I would never advocate for any President of any Party to be required to release discussions they have with other foreign leaders.  This is in no way comparable to releasing tax returns, or the dealings of a public charity, etc.  Your failure to understand the difference is a bit troubling, but keep wishing for it.  Releasing evidence used in an investigation that did not proceed further, much of it already known, is also not the same thing, and if it does further expose the swamp dwellers, all the better.

i know it wont happen, but you seem to want a double standard. that is the point. you spend a lot of time attacking liberal media and liberals and democrats but you dont seem to think that right wing media or anything that the right does is a problem.

 

 

[Dashinka 24,628]

7 minutes ago, Prizm123 said:

i know it wont happen, but you seem to want a double standard. that is the point. you spend a lot of time attacking liberal media and liberals and democrats but you dont seem to think that right wing media or anything that the right does is a problem.

 

 

Releasing evidence from an investigation for these bureaucrats are not a double standard.  Many of these folks are pundits giving their "valued" opinions to the public, so there is a need to understand their biases and potential hypocrisy.  As to the media attacks, that is not hard to explain, the MSM is much more pervasive and much more Leftist in our country, and much larger than anything that might be considered Right Wing Media.  They, the MSM, are generally not subject to censorship on big social media platforms  even though their reporting and editorial pages are way Left of the ideological spectrum.  I for one don't watch any media, and I do not partake social media platforms other than this one, VJ, but I do enjoy reading RCP articles which does tend to include a wide range of both sides.  The Right does in fact have problems, but they are not as huge as the Left, the Right is not the ones destroying cities and trying to bury it or in some way justify it, the Right is not calling for defunding of the police in this country, and the Right is not pushing one Party further Left and demanding an embrace of Democrat-Socialism.  The Right has been spending more than I would like to see, and the neocons on the Right tend to play a little loose with the US military which is something I admired about Trump, not starting another war with anyone and paring down our foreign presence as much as possible.  We will see what happens with Biden, he looks like he will be a lame duck President right out of the gate.  If he does decide to run in 2024, I am not sure how many folks will vote for an 82 year old.

[Prizm123 1,086]

6 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Releasing evidence from an investigation for these bureaucrats are not a double standard.  Many of these folks are pundits giving their "valued" opinions to the public, so there is a need to understand their biases and potential hypocrisy.  As to the media attacks, that is not hard to explain, the MSM is much more pervasive and much more Leftist in our country, and much larger than anything that might be considered Right Wing Media.  They, the MSM, are generally not subject to censorship on big social media platforms  even though their reporting and editorial pages are way Left of the ideological spectrum.  I for one don't watch any media, and I do not partake social media platforms other than this one, VJ, but I do enjoy reading RCP articles which does tend to include a wide range of both sides.  The Right does in fact have problems, but they are not as huge as the Left, the Right is not the ones destroying cities and trying to bury it or in some way justify it, the Right is not calling for defunding of the police in this country, and the Right is not pushing one Party further Left and demanding an embrace of Democrat-Socialism.  The Right has been spending more than I would like to see, and the neocons on the Right tend to play a little loose with the US military which is something I admired about Trump, not starting another war with anyone and paring down our foreign presence as much as possible.  We will see what happens with Biden, he looks like he will be a lame duck President right out of the gate.  If he does decide to run in 2024, I am not sure how many folks will vote for an 82 year old.

the irony is that there are a few things from the right i actually do agree with, but on a few issues i am a progressive.

its why i dont think there is a party that accurately reflects my views, but i would never vote for a republican due to a couple of things that are nonstarters for me, but i have voted for third parties and independents before.

 

the right of course isnt pushing further left (i know what you meant, i am just joking here), they are pushing further right into authoritarian territory

this is a huge problem.

 

Biden wont run again, i think he is just here to get us through this time, and then we can move on.

 

i dont think trumpism is going away after another election cycle. i wish it would because as things are now, noone wants to talk to each other and there is just a lot of hate and noise.

you and i, we have fundamental differences and we will never see eye to eye on a lot of things, but the things we can agree on is a start to maybe a process of less bickering and arguing all the time.

 

 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

3 minutes ago, Prizm123 said:

the irony is that there are a few things from the right i actually do agree with, but on a few issues i am a progressive.

its why i dont think there is a party that accurately reflects my views, but i would never vote for a republican due to a couple of things that are nonstarters for me, but i have voted for third parties and independents before.

 

the right of course isnt pushing further left (i know what you meant, i am just joking here), they are pushing further right into authoritarian territory

this is a huge problem.

 

Biden wont run again, i think he is just here to get us through this time, and then we can move on.

 

i dont think trumpism is going away after another election cycle. i wish it would because as things are now, noone wants to talk to each other and there is just a lot of hate and noise.

you and i, we have fundamental differences and we will never see eye to eye on a lot of things, but the things we can agree on is a start to maybe a process of less bickering and arguing all the time.

 

 

Examples?

 

And who's "us"? 

[Boiler 45,717]

Trump was an inevitable reaction to 8 years of Obama, and then the doubling down by nominating Hillary, it has been a long time a coming. Amusing that Trump was always a Dem and has many Dem traits, but yes can not see him coming back or his progeny, and obviously the swamp have Biden there as a figure head, not sure for how long, 

[Dashinka 24,628]

39 minutes ago, Prizm123 said:

the irony is that there are a few things from the right i actually do agree with, but on a few issues i am a progressive.

its why i dont think there is a party that accurately reflects my views, but i would never vote for a republican due to a couple of things that are nonstarters for me, but i have voted for third parties and independents before.

 

the right of course isnt pushing further left (i know what you meant, i am just joking here), they are pushing further right into authoritarian territory

this is a huge problem.

 

Biden wont run again, i think he is just here to get us through this time, and then we can move on.

 

i dont think trumpism is going away after another election cycle. i wish it would because as things are now, noone wants to talk to each other and there is just a lot of hate and noise.

you and i, we have fundamental differences and we will never see eye to eye on a lot of things, but the things we can agree on is a start to maybe a process of less bickering and arguing all the time.

 

 

That is the difference between us, I would and have voted for Democrats, and may in the future, but it is getting harder and harder to justify that in my mind.  There is a transformation going on and where the Democrats were perceived to be the Party of the working class, and minorities, they are slowly becoming the Party of the elite.  Personally I think this has more to do with their narrative of wokeness, or wokiness, or whatever which flies in the face of what a classic liberal like myself would like to see.  This is one of the reasons I tend to use the label Left instead of Liberal, because the Liberals of yesterday are generally speaking not the Left of today.  You mention the Right is heading toward authoritarian territory, but it seems to be the Left/Dems that are fighting to curtail free political speech.  Greenwald et. al. are great examples of the activism that has entered into the media and organizations like the ACLU/SPLC, not recognizing this movement toward authoritarian territory is troubling as there is plenty of evidence.  The condescension coming from the Left/Dems is another troubling direction.  In the Slotkin thread she mentioned that Trump never talked down to the voting populace, and that is true, the Dems on the other hand enjoy labeling those not assimilating as "deplorables" or more recently "chumps", the people making these statements were not talking personally about Trump, but rather personally about his supporters/voters.

 

Trumpism may not go away, and as I already mentioned, the GOP needs to embrace it if they want to continue with some amount of success. 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Trumpism = Populism

 

Trump did not invent populism, he simply channeled people's populist sentiments to win an election. The nature of populism is its broad appeal. Those who can't understand it are still busy talking about Russia, trying to find ways to censor others, etc.

[Prizm123 1,086]

3 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

That is the difference between us, I would and have voted for Democrats, and may in the future, but it is getting harder and harder to justify that in my mind.  There is a transformation going on and where the Democrats were perceived to be the Party of the working class, and minorities, they are slowly becoming the Party of the elite.  Personally I think this has more to do with their narrative of wokeness, or wokiness, or whatever which flies in the face of what a classic liberal like myself would like to see.  This is one of the reasons I tend to use the label Left instead of Liberal, because the Liberals of yesterday are generally speaking not the Left of today.  You mention the Right is heading toward authoritarian territory, but it seems to be the Left/Dems that are fighting to curtail free political speech.  Greenwald et. al. are great examples of the activism that has entered into the media and organizations like the ACLU/SPLC, not recognizing this movement toward authoritarian territory is troubling as there is plenty of evidence.  The condescension coming from the Left/Dems is another troubling direction.  In the Slotkin thread she mentioned that Trump never talked down to the voting populace, and that is true, the Dems on the other hand enjoy labeling those not assimilating as "deplorables" or more recently "chumps", the people making these statements were not talking personally about Trump, but rather personally about his supporters/voters.

 

Trumpism may not go away, and as I already mentioned, the GOP needs to embrace it if they want to continue with some amount of success. 

the reasons i would never vote for republicans are due to religion and economic policy being dealbreakers for me. i am pretty sure that there are a lot of people with dealbreakers, for some its as simple as the letter next to the name denoting what tribe they belong to.

 

i think there should be a reckoning on speech because you are right in that the more extreme voices are the loudest and its getting harder to tune them out because everyone wants what they want and thats that. doesnt matter if you are tea party or progressive, there can be no middle ground and its nothing more than extreme partisan warfare and the majority of people are stuck somewhere in between.

 

i think the condescension is more directed towards the hardcore extremists than the regular people. its an unfortunate side effect of the BS that extremists have taken to and the talking heads who want to pigeonhole the opposition into neat little categories. kind of like how not all people on the left are in favor of socialism, so everyone is painted with a broad brush to define each other as enemies. it should go without saying that i dont consider the vast majority of people who support trump as deplorables, and i would seriously doubt that a majority of democrats would want to attach those labels so broadly. again, the loudest voices are the ones that everyone seems to have a thing for but they do not represent the true majority of people. i dont expect it to matter, but i dont consider you and a few others here to be in that category.

 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 hour ago, Prizm123 said:

the reasons i would never vote for republicans are due to religion and economic policy being dealbreakers for me. i am pretty sure that there are a lot of people with dealbreakers, for some its as simple as the letter next to the name denoting what tribe they belong to.

 

i think there should be a reckoning on speech because you are right in that the more extreme voices are the loudest and its getting harder to tune them out because everyone wants what they want and thats that. doesnt matter if you are tea party or progressive, there can be no middle ground and its nothing more than extreme partisan warfare and the majority of people are stuck somewhere in between.

 

i think the condescension is more directed towards the hardcore extremists than the regular people. its an unfortunate side effect of the BS that extremists have taken to and the talking heads who want to pigeonhole the opposition into neat little categories. kind of like how not all people on the left are in favor of socialism, so everyone is painted with a broad brush to define each other as enemies. it should go without saying that i dont consider the vast majority of people who support trump as deplorables, and i would seriously doubt that a majority of democrats would want to attach those labels so broadly. again, the loudest voices are the ones that everyone seems to have a thing for but they do not represent the true majority of people. i dont expect it to matter, but i dont consider you and a few others here to be in that category.

 

 

 

  Yeah, a lot of people like to bring up identity politics on the left and then completely draw a blank over how the right has done it for years with religion. On economic issues, I am fiscally conservative, and it's pretty plain that the GOP is not. They like to talk like they are, but in practice they are not. They spend as much as the liberals, just on different things. 

 

  As extreme and partisan as things have become, this election was a message that many people are sick of all the pandering to the extremes. I hope Biden realizes that too. Many politicians talk about bringing people together. Trump even talked about it at one time. Talk is cheap. You can't bring people together with a polarizing agenda.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Steeleballz

[Dashinka 24,628]

10 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Yeah, a lot of people like to bring up identity politics on the left and then completely draw a blank over how the right has done it for years with religion. On economic issues, I am fiscally conservative, and it's pretty plain that the GOP is not. They like to talk like they are, but in practice they are not. They spend as much as the liberals, just on different things. 

 

  As extreme and partisan as things have become, this election was a message that many people are sick of all the pandering to the extremes. I hope Biden realizes that too. Many politicians talk about bringing people together. Trump even talked about it at one time. Talk is cheap. You can't bring people together with a polarizing agenda.

You do know there are very religious people in both parties right?  The GOP is not all about just the Evangelicals, and compared to the identity politics coming from the Dems, it pales in comparison.  Very few in Washington is fiscally conservative, I think that dream died when Nancy and Obama went after the Tea Party movement.

[Prizm123 1,086]

evangelicals are why i am an athiest

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

3 hours ago, Prizm123 said:

the reasons i would never vote for republicans are due to religion and economic policy being dealbreakers for me. i am pretty sure that there are a lot of people with dealbreakers, for some its as simple as the letter next to the name denoting what tribe they belong to.

 

i think there should be a reckoning on speech because you are right in that the more extreme voices are the loudest and its getting harder to tune them out because everyone wants what they want and thats that. doesnt matter if you are tea party or progressive, there can be no middle ground and its nothing more than extreme partisan warfare and the majority of people are stuck somewhere in between.

 

i think the condescension is more directed towards the hardcore extremists than the regular people. its an unfortunate side effect of the BS that extremists have taken to and the talking heads who want to pigeonhole the opposition into neat little categories. kind of like how not all people on the left are in favor of socialism, so everyone is painted with a broad brush to define each other as enemies. it should go without saying that i dont consider the vast majority of people who support trump as deplorables, and i would seriously doubt that a majority of democrats would want to attach those labels so broadly. again, the loudest voices are the ones that everyone seems to have a thing for but they do not represent the true majority of people. i dont expect it to matter, but i dont consider you and a few others here to be in that category.

 

 

Extreme voices are not louder, they're just given more attention. The reason racism particularly of the tiki torch "will not replace us!" dying klansman white variety was nearly extinct wasn't merely because they were opposed, virtue signaled against, or shut out of living life (denied a job, denied being able to go anywhere in public, etc.), but because the stupidity of what they preached was ignored, parodied, mocked, but was not given serious attention. We understood rights were universal even to bad people or those using them in a way we didn't like.

 

The intolerance to dissenting views used to be something I encountered when I was young from the right, things have flipped big time and I find the left are easily the most intolerant, and take their vindictiveness to a new level trying to destroy people's livelihoods. A good chunk of the blame also lies in those who cater to this stupidity. The underpinnings have generally been around for a while but like the methodology behind racists, these people were largely laughed off and ignored. Now they're a key stakeholder, out of nowhere. The people promoting it, corporations, bureau agencies, etc. are doing so in response to populism movements targeting that elite. The right aren't the only people with principles, and if the left had stuck to liberal principles, they'd realize they and the populists on the right that elected Trump have a lot in common and have a common enemy that's far more panoptic and troublesome than conspiracy nuts like Alex Jones or 4chan trolls making memes.

[Neonred 3,576]

6 hours ago, Dashinka said:

  Very few in Washington is fiscally conservative, I think that dream died when Nancy and Obama went after the Tea Party movement.

Interesting story from way back.  One of my father's good friends and one of his dental school classmates was Jim Edwards who became the Governor of South Carolina in the mid 70's.  I remember hearing him telling my father a story about DC politics. 

 

Jim Edwards had endorsed Reagan when Reagan was elected President.  Reagan asked Jim to be Secretary of Energy with the knowledge that his job would be to phase out and eliminate the Department of Energy.  Jim accepted this challenge.  Jim said he worked at it for two years but learned that pretty much nothing in DC can be downsized or eliminated.  The US Government just doesn't work that way.  After two years trying to downsize and eliminate he realized he couldn't do that so he left to become President of the Medical and Dental School of South Carolina.