Unburdened by what has been

Post by Adam H. Kerman
I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention and looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-03 05:04:05 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh

I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.

We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

Rhino

2024-11-03 15:10:33 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.

My working theory is that she is every bit as Far Left as she always was
but doesn't dare run that way because it would be electoral suicide.
She's also squeamish about pretending to actually have centrist
positions during the campaign and then being blasted with the label of
hypocrite if she then reverts to her true values after a successful
election so she says nothing at all. She hopes that this will be enough
to get her across the finish line, then she can govern with her Far Left
positions intact and not be labelled a hypocrite. She might even get
kudos for a clever strategy that didn't involve lying so much as evading
the truth.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

That certainly beats voting for Harris in my book!

--
Rhino

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-03 15:38:40 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.

I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

Post by Rhino
That certainly beats voting for Harris in my book!

shawn

2024-11-03 16:08:16 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:38:40 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

That's okay. I'll make that vote for you.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-03 16:14:40 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

That's okay. I'll make that vote for you.

Did Kamala call upon you personally?

shawn

2024-11-03 17:47:15 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 16:14:40 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

That's okay. I'll make that vote for you.

Did Kamala call upon you personally?

No, but I got a call from Obama.

Rhino

2024-11-03 16:41:56 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

I'm really curious to see who wins and by how much. I keep hearing and
seeing things that suggest there is going to be a very substantial
defection from the Democrats this time around and that Trump is going to
do surprisingly well. There are signs that some blue states are going to
go purple if not red. But maybe that's just because I mostly look at
right-leaning media and they're generating BS to try to push people who
are wavering to the right.

I think you did the right thing by not voting for Harris. I know you
well enough to believe that you put a LOT of thought into this. I don't
trust that woman AT ALL and I think the far Left wing of the Democrats,
which seems to be in the ascendancy, is not going to put the brakes on
her if she becomes President. I have no trouble picturing her
recognizing Palestine and announcing an arms embargo to Israel on her
first day in office, to name just two issues.

Post by Rhino
That certainly beats voting for Harris in my book!

--
Rhino

shawn

2024-11-03 17:50:38 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:41:56 -0500, Rhino

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

LOL. I'm hearing the exact opposite. Earlier everyone was saying that
it was looking like Trump was going to win, but now the tendency seems
to be leaning to Harris. There's one pollster in Iowa who has picked
the winner for a few decades other than once and she's saying it looks
like Harris is going to win Iowa. If Harris can win Iowa that looks
good for her to win the overall electoral votes.

Though everyone says that even if the electoral college goes mostly
for Harris (over 300) the polls still say it will be a tight race.

Post by Rhino
I think you did the right thing by not voting for Harris. I know you
well enough to believe that you put a LOT of thought into this. I don't
trust that woman AT ALL and I think the far Left wing of the Democrats,
which seems to be in the ascendancy, is not going to put the brakes on
her if she becomes President. I have no trouble picturing her
recognizing Palestine and announcing an arms embargo to Israel on her
first day in office, to name just two issues.

Post by Rhino
That certainly beats voting for Harris in my book!

Rhino

2024-11-03 20:31:40 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:41:56 -0500, Rhino

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

And that may all be BS too. I truly don't know. We'll find out in a few
days. After all, the only poll that really matters is the election.

Post by shawn
Though everyone says that even if the electoral college goes mostly
for Harris (over 300) the polls still say it will be a tight race.

Post by Rhino
That certainly beats voting for Harris in my book!

--
Rhino

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-03 19:09:06 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

I watch a lot of C-SPAN Washington Journal. A guest on Friday explained
the split-ticket phenomenon. These independent voters have far greater
concerns about how the president will handle the economy than those who
are already partisans for Trump or Harris. They are leaning toward Trump
because they don't feel Harris will do a good job with the economy.

But they are still fearful of the excesses of another Trump presidency
and are voting Democratic for House races and some Senate races, hoping
Congress will reign in Trump.

Post by Rhino
I think you did the right thing by not voting for Harris. I know you
well enough to believe that you put a LOT of thought into this.

Nah. I rejected her during the primary race in 2020 and have never
forgiven her for making me feel sympathy toward Biden. She was a
terrible candidate but won't just vanish back into California. She stays
on the national stage, never ever going away.

Post by Rhino
. . .

Rhino

2024-11-03 20:42:04 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.
I don't live in a swing state. My vote wouldn't have mattered anyway.

I watch a lot of C-SPAN Washington Journal. A guest on Friday explained
the split-ticket phenomenon. These independent voters have far greater
concerns about how the president will handle the economy than those who
are already partisans for Trump or Harris. They are leaning toward Trump
because they don't feel Harris will do a good job with the economy.
But they are still fearful of the excesses of another Trump presidency
and are voting Democratic for House races and some Senate races, hoping
Congress will reign in Trump.

I have heard almost nothing about the Senate and House races this time
around, beyond knowing that Ted Cruz and Jon Tester are being challenged
for their Senate seats. The media seems almost relentlessly focused on
the Presidential race.

I did a bit of research last week and got the impression that the House
and Senate would each be very close to 50/50 splits, which largely
mirrors the status quo. That will make the upcoming sessions full of
drama unless the dominant party in each house has really strong
discipline. Is that what you're seeing? I'm sure you've seen much more
material about the down-ticket races.

Post by Rhino
I think you did the right thing by not voting for Harris. I know you
well enough to believe that you put a LOT of thought into this.

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

Post by Rhino
. . .

--
Rhino

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-03 21:05:22 UTC

. . .

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

I have no aversion to voting Republican. There may be a candidate that I
prefer once I've read bios and issues statements.

. . .

Rhino

2024-11-04 01:25:59 UTC

. . .

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

I have no aversion to voting Republican. There may be a candidate that I
prefer once I've read bios and issues statements.

Apparently, I've been misunderstanding you then. I'll try not to do that
again.

--
Rhino

shawn

2024-11-04 02:25:11 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:25:59 -0500, Rhino

. . .

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

I have no aversion to voting Republican. There may be a candidate that I
prefer once I've read bios and issues statements.

Apparently, I've been misunderstanding you then. I'll try not to do that
again.

Yeah, I was interested in John McCain before he made his choice of a
VP. That ruled him out as a potential Presidential candidate for me.
That said since Trump came unto the field there are no reasonable
Republican candidates that have a shot at being the Presidential
candidate for the Republicans. That may change by 2032. Time will
tell.

moviePig

2024-11-04 02:58:00 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:25:59 -0500, Rhino

. . .

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

I have no aversion to voting Republican. There may be a candidate that I
prefer once I've read bios and issues statements.

Apparently, I've been misunderstanding you then. I'll try not to do that
again.

Conservatism vs. liberalism, per se, is never a slam dunk. But, for me,
the Republican party would have to somehow shed the disgrace of its
abject capitulation to (per J.D. Vance) "America's Hitler".

BTR1701

2024-11-04 05:55:51 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:25:59 -0500, Rhino

. . .

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

I have no aversion to voting Republican. There may be a candidate that I
prefer once I've read bios and issues statements.

Apparently, I've been misunderstanding you then. I'll try not to do that
again.

Conservatism vs. liberalism, per se, is never a slam dunk. But, for me,
the Republican party would have to somehow shed the disgrace of its
abject capitulation to (per J.D. Vance) "America's Hitler".

If Trump is the most Hitlery Hitler that America can produce, I'd say we're
doing all right.

moviePig

2024-11-04 15:50:49 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:25:59 -0500, Rhino

. . .

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

I have no aversion to voting Republican. There may be a candidate that I
prefer once I've read bios and issues statements.

Apparently, I've been misunderstanding you then. I'll try not to do that
again.

Conservatism vs. liberalism, per se, is never a slam dunk. But, for me,
the Republican party would have to somehow shed the disgrace of its
abject capitulation to (per J.D. Vance) "America's Hitler".

If Trump is the most Hitlery Hitler that America can produce, I'd say we're
doing all right.

The question is whether he's Hitlery enough to warrant severe and
unconditional repudiation ...as an object lesson to future Hitlery.

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 16:21:28 UTC

Post by BTR1701
If Trump is the most Hitlery Hitler that America can produce, I'd say we're
doing all right.

The question is whether he's Hitlery enough to warrant severe and
unconditional repudiation ...as an object lesson to future Hitlery.

Hello, Kamala!

--
When we cheat, we win!
Harris/Walz 2024

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-04 03:14:21 UTC

. . .

Yeah, I was interested in John McCain before he made his choice of a
VP. . . .

Pardon me. I thought you were about to discuss John McClane.

BTR1701

2024-11-04 16:24:46 UTC

. . .

Yeah, I was interested in John McCain before he made his choice of a
VP. . . .

Pardon me. I thought you were about to discuss John McClane.

Welcome to the party, pal!

suzeeq

2024-11-04 03:53:47 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:25:59 -0500, Rhino

. . .

I should have known you've been on to her long before now ;-) But I've
long sensed a real aversion to voting Republican so I thought you might
hold your nose and vote for her anyway.

I have no aversion to voting Republican. There may be a candidate that I
prefer once I've read bios and issues statements.

Apparently, I've been misunderstanding you then. I'll try not to do that
again.

Yeah, I was interested in John McCain before he made his choice of a
VP. That ruled him out as a potential Presidential candidate for me.

Same here.

Post by shawn
That said since Trump came unto the field there are no reasonable
Republican candidates that have a shot at being the Presidential
candidate for the Republicans. That may change by 2032. Time will
tell.

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:49 UTC

Yeah, I was interested in John McCain before he made his choice of a VP.

Same here.

TROLL-O-METER

5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:48 UTC

Yeah, I was interested in John McCain before he made his choice of a VP.

TROLL-O-METER

5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:47 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off. We just had Kennedy, who
already made his Trump deal.

So you voted RFK Jr.?

No. I left it blank.

If you leave it blank, some Dem will fill it in for you.

[Kerman's incorrect formatting fixed.]

--
When we cheat, we win!
DNC 2024

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:46 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.

Occab's Razor indicates she's retarded. The party told her to shut
up in an attempt to lose as few votes as possible before the election.

--
When we cheat, we win!
DNC 2024

moviePig

2024-11-03 16:01:08 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

shawn

2024-11-03 16:09:50 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

I'm more interested in their opinions on the economy. Even Musk is
admitting that Trump's tariff plan will cause lots of pain if
implemented.

moviePig

2024-11-03 18:55:12 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

I'm more interested in their opinions on the economy. Even Musk is
admitting that Trump's tariff plan will cause lots of pain if
implemented.

I'm interested in those opinions, too, but I don't feel expert enough to
do more than guess at the actual outcomes of actual policies. Whereas,
I'm pretty confident that Trump has *already* made the world a bit safer
for fascism, and looks forward to furthering that enterprise.

Rhino

2024-11-03 16:44:43 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

--
Rhino

shawn

2024-11-03 17:52:33 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:44:43 -0500, Rhino

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism. Certainly
the people I've seen saying Trump has fascist tendencies also have a
number of points they use to justify that belief.

BTR1701

2024-11-03 18:53:11 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:44:43 -0500, Rhino

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism.

Well, see, that's the issue, isn't it? The vast, vast majority of people who
call Trump and/or Republicans fascist couldn't accurately define the word for
you if you put a gun to their head. To anyone under 40, 'fascist' now means
'anything I don't like or don't believe in'.

Rhino

2024-11-03 19:32:59 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:44:43 -0500, Rhino

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism.

Exactly. I used to butt heads with a Trotskyite on another newsgroup and
he used to call people "fascist" all the time. I once defied him to
define the word and, given the nature of Usenet, he could easily have
gone to dozens of sources to look up a definition. He could have claimed
to have known that was the definition, even if he'd never looked it up
before. I would never have known since we weren't communicating in real
time. Instead, he insisted that he could SMELL fascists and that I was
obviously one of them!

I don't think he had the foggiest idea of what fascism is and simply
used the word to mean "anything I don't like".

I feel sure moviepig is the same, although I expect he will look up a
definition somewhere to "prove me wrong", even if he swears he's known
the definition for years.

--
Rhino

shawn

2024-11-03 20:57:24 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:32:59 -0500, Rhino

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:44:43 -0500, Rhino

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism.

Exactly. I used to butt heads with a Trotskyite on another newsgroup and
he used to call people "fascist" all the time. I once defied him to
define the word and, given the nature of Usenet, he could easily have
gone to dozens of sources to look up a definition. He could have claimed
to have known that was the definition, even if he'd never looked it up
before. I would never have known since we weren't communicating in real
time. Instead, he insisted that he could SMELL fascists and that I was
obviously one of them!
I don't think he had the foggiest idea of what fascism is and simply
used the word to mean "anything I don't like".

For me I listen to experts who have studied history. Here's a few
examples who point out Trumps Fascist tendencies.

How Trump's rhetoric compares to historic fascist language

Why people keep asking if Trump is a fascist | DW News

The 10 tactics of fascism | Jason Stanley | Big Think

None of these people will outright call Trump a Fascist. They do all
point out Trump's tendencies/actions that are shared with Fascists of
the past. Timothy Ryback, historian that has studied and wrote on
Hitler, points to a number of things that Trump said/does that is
shared with Hitler.

So I can't say what Trump is because I'm not even sure what he
believes in, but it's clear he has authoritarian tendencies that go
along with Fascism. It's also different because someone like Hitler
had complete control over his government while we know that many of
the things Trump wanted to do were prevented by his own people. Would
that be the case in a second Trump Presidency is a question that many
ask with no clear answer.

BTR1701

2024-11-03 21:27:11 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:32:59 -0500, Rhino

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:44:43 -0500, Rhino

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism.

Exactly. I used to butt heads with a Trotskyite on another newsgroup and
he used to call people "fascist" all the time. I once defied him to
define the word and, given the nature of Usenet, he could easily have
gone to dozens of sources to look up a definition. He could have claimed
to have known that was the definition, even if he'd never looked it up
before. I would never have known since we weren't communicating in real
time. Instead, he insisted that he could SMELL fascists and that I was
obviously one of them!
I don't think he had the foggiest idea of what fascism is and simply
used the word to mean "anything I don't like".

So I can't say what Trump is because I'm not even sure what he
believes in, but it's clear he has authoritarian tendencies that go
along with Fascism.

So does Kammie.

Here she is promising to censor social media when she's elected:

https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1844183964077998083/vid/avc1/640x360/E8uVMr4SoFp61gdH.mp4?tag=14

And her utter disregard of the 4th Amendment:

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1836409459939147777/pu/vid/avc1/320x240/ysmfzzSD6KEZ41A1.mp4?tag=12

KAMMIE: "Just because you legally possess a gun in the sanctity of your locked
home doesn't mean that we're not going to walk into that home and check to see
if you're being responsible."

Apparently Kammie skipped the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement in law
school. Or, more likely, she just doesn't care and sees things like the 4th
Amendment as annoying speedbumps on the road to her preferred authoritarian
utopia.

AMENDMENT IV: The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses,
papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be
violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by
Oath or Affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and
the persons or things to be seized.

How does that square with Kammie's exciting plan to just "walk into your home
and check" to see if you're being a responsible gun owner? What probable cause
does she have that a crime is being committed or that the fruits or evidence
thereof is inside the home? None, you say? Well, then no warrant shall issue.
And with no warrant, Kammie doesn't get to walk in and check.

That's how America works, Kammie. You know, that democracy you're always so
worried Trump is going to destroy? We're not whatever authoritarian dystopian
society that's going on in your mind.

So that's the 1st and 4th Amendments out window under a Harris presidency.
She's already said she's going to pass a national abortion law, so we know she
won't abide by the 10th Amendment, either. She's knocking the Bill of Rights
down, one-by-one. Personally, I'm waiting for her to get to the 3rd
Amendment:

<knock-knock-knock>

"Police! Open up. We have no search warrant but we've come to search your
house and seize your guns. Oh, and this is Charlie Company from the national
guard. They'll be staying with you for a while."

Don't say you weren't warned about Kammie Harris.

Rhino

2024-11-04 01:32:34 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:32:59 -0500, Rhino

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:44:43 -0500, Rhino

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism.

Exactly. I used to butt heads with a Trotskyite on another newsgroup and
he used to call people "fascist" all the time. I once defied him to
define the word and, given the nature of Usenet, he could easily have
gone to dozens of sources to look up a definition. He could have claimed
to have known that was the definition, even if he'd never looked it up
before. I would never have known since we weren't communicating in real
time. Instead, he insisted that he could SMELL fascists and that I was
obviously one of them!
I don't think he had the foggiest idea of what fascism is and simply
used the word to mean "anything I don't like".

For me I listen to experts who have studied history. Here's a few
examples who point out Trumps Fascist tendencies.
http://youtu.be/6U4N-uTn3v0
How Trump's rhetoric compares to historic fascist language
http://youtu.be/fy2fleD-BPE
Why people keep asking if Trump is a fascist | DW News
http://youtu.be/CpCKkWMbmXU
The 10 tactics of fascism | Jason Stanley | Big Think
None of these people will outright call Trump a Fascist. They do all
point out Trump's tendencies/actions that are shared with Fascists of
the past. Timothy Ryback, historian that has studied and wrote on
Hitler, points to a number of things that Trump said/does that is
shared with Hitler.
So I can't say what Trump is because I'm not even sure what he
believes in, but it's clear he has authoritarian tendencies that go
along with Fascism. It's also different because someone like Hitler
had complete control over his government while we know that many of
the things Trump wanted to do were prevented by his own people. Would
that be the case in a second Trump Presidency is a question that many
ask with no clear answer.

Fair enough. I can respect someone who has done some actual research on
the meaning of fascism a lot more than I can someone who admits they
don't actually know and apparently can't be bothered to find out but is
still happy to echo the accusation, which is the case for moviepig.

That said, I haven't watched the videos you've cited yet and have no
idea if I'll find them persuasive. I've heard of Ryback but he's not
someone I've read so I have no opinions about his credibility.

Bottom line: I'm not agreeing or disagreeing that Trump is a fascist -
or has fascist tendencies - but major kudos to you for actually trying
to find out what fascism actually is before rendering your own verdict.

--
Rhino

moviePig

2024-11-04 03:12:46 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:32:59 -0500, Rhino

On Nov 3, 2024 at 9:52:33 AM PST, "shawn"

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 11:44:43 -0500, Rhino

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

   I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a
week. The
   candidates weren't improving any.
   I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention
and looked
   everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

   Heh
   I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
   I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
   ...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism.

Exactly. I used to butt heads with a Trotskyite on another newsgroup and
he used to call people "fascist" all the time. I once defied him to
define the word and, given the nature of Usenet, he could easily have
gone to dozens of sources to look up a definition. He could have claimed
to have known that was the definition, even if he'd never looked it up
before. I would never have known since we weren't communicating in real
time. Instead, he insisted that he could SMELL fascists and that I was
obviously one of them!
I don't think he had the foggiest idea of what fascism is and simply
used the word to mean "anything I don't like".

Fair enough. I can respect someone who has done some actual research on
the meaning of fascism a lot more than I can someone who admits they
don't actually know and apparently can't be bothered to find out but is
still happy to echo the accusation, which is the case for moviepig.
That said, I haven't watched the videos you've cited yet and have no
idea if I'll find them persuasive. I've heard of Ryback but he's not
someone I've read so I have no opinions about his credibility.
Bottom line: I'm not agreeing or disagreeing that Trump is a fascist -
or has fascist tendencies - but major kudos to you for actually trying
to find out what fascism actually is before rendering your own verdict.

John Kelly, Trump's Chief of Staff, in the NYTimes:
--------
“Well, looking at the definition of fascism: It’s a far-right
authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement
characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy,
militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural
social hierarchy,” he said.
Mr. Kelly said that definition accurately described Mr. Trump.
“So certainly, in my experience, those are the kinds of things that
he thinks would work better in terms of running America,” Mr. Kelly said.
--------

(I offer the above on the off-chance you actually think the 'fascist'
label is absurd. So, it would appear you at least have a little heavy
lifting to do in the denial department. But labels aren't the issue.
It's the specific hopes and dreams Trump himself has repeatedly voiced.)

The Horny Goat

2024-11-05 06:23:32 UTC

âWell, looking at the definition of fascism: Itâs a far-right
authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement
characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy,
militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural
social hierarchy,â? he said.
Mr. Kelly said that definition accurately described Mr. Trump.

How could it? Weimar Germany didn't have 'division of powers', America
has had some version of 'division of powers' from 1776 forward.

That's even if you ignore Trump's rhetoric his actual handling of
legislation is firmly within GOP standards - not even the most extreme
of GOP legislators.

My own view is that Trump's reputation is largely based on his "flash"
than his "substance". He's a master showman with far less substance
than most politicians.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-05 07:23:46 UTC

Post by The Horny Goat

. . .

How could it? Weimar Germany didn't have 'division of powers', America
has had some version of 'division of powers' from 1776 forward.

Not under the Continental Congress nor Articles of Confederation.

Post by The Horny Goat
. . .

The Horny Goat

2024-11-04 07:27:10 UTC

Post by BTR1701
Well, see, that's the issue, isn't it? The vast, vast majority of people who
call Trump and/or Republicans fascist couldn't accurately define the word for
you if you put a gun to their head. To anyone under 40, 'fascist' now means
'anything I don't like or don't believe in'.

My usual response when I hear that is "Come back and talk to me after
you've read Homage to Catalonia"

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:51 UTC

Hint:Â She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism.

++

(Ditto for those violating Godwin's Law)

--
Let's go Brandon!

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:50 UTC

Hint:Â She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

I think it all depends on what you consider to be fascism. Certainly
the people I've seen saying Trump has fascist tendencies also have a
number of points they use to justify that belief.

TROLL-O-METER

5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity

moviePig

2024-11-03 19:04:44 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

Trump doesn't either. It's a shame you Democrats (and "Democratic
Socialists") have drunk your own hysteria-laden Kool-aid and convinced
yourselves of all sorts of nonsense.

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to say
that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election, 2) refuses to accept
elections he loses, and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies
from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff). If that's not fascism, please
correct my vocabulary.

BTR1701

2024-11-03 18:51:01 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-03 19:13:38 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

Balbo putting Mussolini into office?

moviePig

2024-11-03 20:06:59 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

BTR1701

2024-11-03 21:04:27 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

First, the "enemies from within" to which Trump was referring are the tens of
thousands of vicious criminals that Kammie has allowed to waltz into the
country over the last three years. They are psychopathic thugs and are pretty
much universally heavily armed, which is why Trump suggested using the
military if the local police are overwhelmed.

This is just like when Trump said there'd be a (metaphorical) bloodbath in the
auto industry if Kammie wins-- meaning what's left of our auto manufacturing
will crater-- and the biased legacy corporate media went running to the
airwaves with their hair on fire saying, "Trump declares there will be a
bloodbath in the streets when he wins!"

It's the very lying, dishonest, propagandistic disinformation in which those
same media snakes claim Trump engages.

Next:

Fascism is an ultranationalist political ideology that promotes an
intertwining of government and private business, with the
government using the private sector to promote its policies
and economic and social goals, especially policies it doesn't
have the legal authority to pursue directly.

What does that sound like? Sounds a lot like how Biden and Kammie quietly used
Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms to promote its narrative
during Wuhan Flu and to silence dissenting voices.

Fascism elevates the state above all else and requires
subordination of the individual and individual rights in
service to the good of the state.

What does that sound like? Sounds like it came right out of Mao's little red
book. Fascism and communism are kissing cousins and the vast majority of
today's 'progressive' Democrats are anti-capitalist fans of collectivism.

Fascism promotes the concept of innate inequality and
inescapable social hierarchies between groups. Underlying
this hierarchy is the idea that a person's rank in society is
determined by aspects of identity that are beyond their
control, such as race, ethnicity and/or gender.

What does that sound like? Sounds more like 'progressive' Democrat DEI
ideology than anything Trump has ever espoused.

Point for point, the modern Democrat Party comes closer to meeting the
definition of 'fascist' than anything Trump puts out there. The only box Trump
ticks is his 'America first' philosophy, which his opponents call
'ultranationalist'. I'm not sure what the difference is between 'nationalist'
and 'ultranationalist' other than the latter is described as an element of
fascism, so Trump's rhetoric is automatically called 'ultranationalist' so
they can fit him into that box.

suzeeq

2024-11-03 21:19:39 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

BTR1701

2024-11-03 21:32:13 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

But those weren't the enemies that he was referring to when he said he was
going to use the military.

moviePig

2024-11-03 21:58:09 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

But those weren't the enemies that he was referring to when he said he was
going to use the military.

I don't know how much plainer he can be, or why you can't hear him. I
suspect you hope that "our institutions will hold" and keep him in
check. Regardless, it's a giant step towards a steep drop...

--------
“The crazy lunatics that we have — the fascists, the Marxists, the
communists, the people that we have that are actually running the
country,” Trump said this month at a rally in Wisconsin. “Those people
are more dangerous — the *enemy from within* — than Russia and China and
other people.”

“I think Nancy Pelosi is an *enemy from within*,” Trump said in the
Fox interview. “She lied. She was supposed to protect the Capitol.”

“These are bad people. We have a lot of bad people. But when you
look at ‘Shifty Schiff’ and some of the others, yeah, they are, to me,
the *enemy from within*,” Trump said on Fox News last weekend. -AP
--------

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-enemies-from-within-5c4a34776469a55e71d3ba4d4e68cf62

Rhino

2024-11-04 01:44:31 UTC

On Nov 3, 2024 at 8:01:08 AM PST, "moviePig"

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

      I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a
week. The
      candidates weren't improving any.
      I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial
retention and looked
      everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

      Heh
      I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her
on Israel and
      I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never
says anything.
      ...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice
to say
that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election, 2) refuses to accept
elections he loses, and 3) wants to use our military against
"enemies
from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff). If that's not fascism,
please
correct my vocabulary.

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

But those weren't the enemies that he was referring to when he said he was
going to use the military.

I don't know how much plainer he can be, or why you can't hear him. I
suspect you hope that "our institutions will hold" and keep him in
check. Regardless, it's a giant step towards a steep drop...
--------
   “The crazy lunatics that we have — the fascists, the Marxists, the
communists, the people that we have that are actually running the
country,” Trump said this month at a rally in Wisconsin. “Those people
are more dangerous — the *enemy from within* — than Russia and China and
other people.”
   “I think Nancy Pelosi is an *enemy from within*,” Trump said in the
Fox interview. “She lied. She was supposed to protect the Capitol.”
   “These are bad people. We have a lot of bad people. But when you
look at ‘Shifty Schiff’ and some of the others, yeah, they are, to me,
the *enemy from within*,” Trump said on Fox News last weekend. -AP
--------
https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-enemies-from-
within-5c4a34776469a55e71d3ba4d4e68cf62

All that article does is establish that Trump considers Pelosi, Schiff
and others enemies. It DOESN'T establish that he wants to use the
military in some nefarious way against them.

I feel entirely confident in saying that Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schiff,
and the others all consider Trump an enemy too, given the rhetoric
they've used against him.

Imagine that: two different parties in a republic opposing and even
demonizing one another!

What are you, 10? Have you never seen politics in your own country or
any other democracy? Do you think Democrats and Republicans were the
best of friends in previous election cycles? Do you think Liberals and
Conservatives are the best of friends in Canada or that Labour and
Conservatives are the best of friends in the UK?

--
Rhino

moviePig

2024-11-04 03:23:37 UTC

On Nov 3, 2024 at 12:06:59 PM PST, "moviePig"

On Nov 3, 2024 at 8:01:08 AM PST, "moviePig"

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

      I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a
week. The
      candidates weren't improving any.
      I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial
retention and looked
      everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

      Heh
      I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust
her on Israel and
      I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never
says anything.
      ...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice
to say
that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election, 2) refuses to accept
elections he loses, and 3) wants to use our military against
"enemies
from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff). If that's not fascism,
please
correct my vocabulary.

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

But those weren't the enemies that he was referring to when he said he was
going to use the military.

I don't know how much plainer he can be, or why you can't hear him. I
suspect you hope that "our institutions will hold" and keep him in
check. Regardless, it's a giant step towards a steep drop...
--------
    “The crazy lunatics that we have — the fascists, the Marxists, the
communists, the people that we have that are actually running the
country,” Trump said this month at a rally in Wisconsin. “Those people
are more dangerous — the *enemy from within* — than Russia and China
and other people.”
    “I think Nancy Pelosi is an *enemy from within*,” Trump said in
the Fox interview. “She lied. She was supposed to protect the Capitol.”
    “These are bad people. We have a lot of bad people. But when you
look at ‘Shifty Schiff’ and some of the others, yeah, they are, to me,
the *enemy from within*,” Trump said on Fox News last weekend. -AP
--------
https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-enemies-from-
within-5c4a34776469a55e71d3ba4d4e68cf62

All that article does is establish that Trump considers Pelosi, Schiff
and others enemies. It DOESN'T establish that he wants to use the
military in some nefarious way against them.
I feel entirely confident in saying that Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schiff,
and the others all consider Trump an enemy too, given the rhetoric
they've used against him.
Imagine that: two different parties in a republic opposing and even
demonizing one another!
What are you, 10? Have you never seen politics in your own country or
any other democracy? Do you think Democrats and Republicans were the
best of friends in previous election cycles? Do you think Liberals and
Conservatives are the best of friends in Canada or that Labour and
Conservatives are the best of friends in the UK?

He's using a phrase that was apparently a favorite of Joe McCarthy
...one with a well-established pedigree (like, e.g., "fellow
travelers"). Now, you may be able to sell yourself that the verbally
ungifted Trump has multiple and separate sets of associations with that
particular ornate phrase, but don't depend on finding lots of buyers.

suzeeq

2024-11-04 03:52:48 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

But those weren't the enemies that he was referring to when he said he was
going to use the military.

It's part of the enemies at any rate...

Rhino

2024-11-03 21:49:05 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

    I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a
week. The
    candidates weren't improving any.
    I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention
and looked
    everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

    Heh
    I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
    I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
    ...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

I have not heard the speech in which he allegedly proposed to use the
military against his enemies but I'm reasonably confident that if we
heard the remark in context, it would be a lot less ominous sounding
than the legacy media painted it.

Does anyone in this thread know when and where he said this or where we
could find video of the remark IN CONTEXT? Then we could make up our own
minds based on what he actually said rather than the media's massively
spun version of what he said.

--
Rhino

shawn

2024-11-03 21:54:58 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 16:49:05 -0500, Rhino

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

    I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a
week. The
    candidates weren't improving any.
    I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention
and looked
    everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

    Heh
    I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
    I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
    ...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

I can't agree having heard his own words from his mouth. Now whether
he would be able to do anything like that against his political
enemies is another matter. Certainly he wouldn't have been able to do
it in his previous administration but his search for loyal people to
fill his next administration makes me question whether his tendencies
would be supported or held back.

Post by Rhino
Does anyone in this thread know when and where he said this or where we
could find video of the remark IN CONTEXT? Then we could make up our own
minds based on what he actually said rather than the media's massively
spun version of what he said.

I'm not going to look for it but hmm, I was going to say the MSG
speech but now I think it was an interview that he did. Don't remember
who was the interviewer but it shouldn't be hard to find clips and
then know what the original interview was.

Rhino

2024-11-04 01:47:03 UTC

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 16:49:05 -0500, Rhino

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

    I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a
week. The
    candidates weren't improving any.
    I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention
and looked
    everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

    Heh
    I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
    I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
    ...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

I haven't the foggiest idea when and where he said these things so I
have no real idea how to find them. I'm curious to hear them for myself
so I can form my own opinion.

--
Rhino

shawn

2024-11-04 02:30:45 UTC

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:47:03 -0500, Rhino

Post by shawn
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 16:49:05 -0500, Rhino

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

    I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a
week. The
    candidates weren't improving any.
    I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention
and looked
    everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

    Heh
    I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
    I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
    ...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

He's outright said that his enemies are people like Pelosi and Cheney
among others. His political enemies, in other words.

I haven't the foggiest idea when and where he said these things so I
have no real idea how to find them. I'm curious to hear them for myself
so I can form my own opinion.

Looks like it was during the Maria Bartiromo interview on Fox News.
You can see part of the interview here:

It just came up in my feed so I don't have the entire interview.

Rhino

2024-11-03 21:17:30 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention and
looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to say
that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

The opposition in Venezuela has clear evidence that Maduro cheated on
their last election and have tried to overturn it. Would you consider
them fascists too? (I'm sure Maduro does but I'm asking what YOU think.)

2) refuses to accept

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won in
2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be ineligible for
re-election.

You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the results
of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not properly counted,
but (grudgingly) accepted the result.

and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies

from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff).

Try listening to the CONTEXT of what he said, not just the sentence or
two they played in the sound bite. I've seen several examples of Trump's
remarks that got disparaged as horrifying but if you listen to the
context, it's pretty clear that his remarks were (deliberately)
misunderstood by the media.

If that's not fascism, please
correct my vocabulary.

Are you COMPLETELY unable to use Google? Or visit a library?

You are apparently so fucking lazy that you won't look it up for
yourself. Shame on you! On top of that, you are so naive - or gullible -
that you are content to accept that every use of the word by an
"activist" is made by someone who knows what the word means and is using
it correctly. Consider the possibility (likelihood!!) that they are just
as ignorant of the meaning as you are.

I've got news for you: election cycles are massive efforts by opposing
teams to persuade people to vote for THEIR candidate and one of the
biggest tools in their tool belts is to distort what their opponents say
in a way that is unfavourable to the opponent and favourable to their
candidate. The activists you listen to, whether they belong to Antifa,
BLM, MSNBC, or the pro-Hamas crowd are all doing it - as are groups
supporting Trump.

You need to do some real work to filter out the BS from all sides and
figure out where the truth lies. If you just take the media at their
word, then you are every bit as much a dupe as you think Trump's
followers are.

--
Rhino

suzeeq

2024-11-03 21:28:08 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention and
looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to
say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won in
2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be ineligible for
re-election.
You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the results
of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not properly counted,
but (grudgingly) accepted the result.

But he hasn't said that, he still won't say he lost.

Rhino

2024-11-03 21:54:55 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention and
looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to
say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won in
2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be ineligible
for re-election.
You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the
results of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not properly
counted, but (grudgingly) accepted the result.

But he hasn't said that, he still won't say he lost.

Maybe not in so many words but the fact that he is running again, which
would be a violation of the Amendment that limits presidents to two
terms, which both he and the rest of the country knows about, strongly
implies that he understands that he DID lose in 2020. He probably still
feels that cheating prevented his victory being acknowledged but he's
running anyway. No law prevents him from running since he's only
officially had a single term as President.

--
Rhino

moviePig

2024-11-03 22:19:16 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention and
looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to
say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won in
2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be ineligible for
re-election.
You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the results
of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not properly counted,
but (grudgingly) accepted the result.
and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies

from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff).

If that's not fascism, please correct my vocabulary.

Are you COMPLETELY unable to use Google? Or visit a library?
You are apparently so fucking lazy that you won't look it up for
yourself. Shame on you! On top of that, you are so naive - or gullible -
that you are content to accept that every use of the word by an
"activist" is made by someone who knows what the word means and is using
it correctly. Consider the possibility (likelihood!!) that they are just
as ignorant of the meaning as you are.
I've got news for you: election cycles are massive efforts by opposing
teams to persuade people to vote for THEIR candidate and one of the
biggest tools in their tool belts is to distort what their opponents say
in a way that is unfavourable to the opponent and favourable to their
candidate. The activists you listen to, whether they belong to Antifa,
BLM, MSNBC, or the pro-Hamas crowd are all doing it - as are groups
supporting Trump.
You need to do some real work to filter out the BS from all sides and
figure out where the truth lies. If you just take the media at their
word, then you are every bit as much a dupe as you think Trump's
followers are.

Please supply the "missing context" for this:

Trump: ‘The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the
election is rigged’

Rhino

2024-11-04 01:50:26 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention and
looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to
say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won in
2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be ineligible
for re-election.
You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the
results of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not properly
counted, but (grudgingly) accepted the result.
and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies

from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff).

Try listening to the CONTEXT of what he said, not just the sentence or
two they played in the sound bite. I've seen several examples of
Trump's remarks that got disparaged as horrifying but if you listen to
the context, it's pretty clear that his remarks were (deliberately)
misunderstood by the media.

If that's not fascism, please correct my vocabulary.

Are you COMPLETELY unable to use Google? Or visit a library?
You are apparently so fucking lazy that you won't look it up for
yourself. Shame on you! On top of that, you are so naive - or gullible
- that you are content to accept that every use of the word by an
"activist" is made by someone who knows what the word means and is
using it correctly. Consider the possibility (likelihood!!) that they
are just as ignorant of the meaning as you are.
I've got news for you: election cycles are massive efforts by opposing
teams to persuade people to vote for THEIR candidate and one of the
biggest tools in their tool belts is to distort what their opponents
say in a way that is unfavourable to the opponent and favourable to
their candidate. The activists you listen to, whether they belong to
Antifa, BLM, MSNBC, or the pro-Hamas crowd are all doing it - as are
groups supporting Trump.
You need to do some real work to filter out the BS from all sides and
figure out where the truth lies. If you just take the media at their
word, then you are every bit as much a dupe as you think Trump's
followers are.

Trump: ‘The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the
election is rigged’

My interpretation: Trump is confident from his internal polling that the
Republicans are going to win the election fair and square.

Your interpretation (apparently): Trump is going to use every dirty
trick in the book (plus some new ones that his people have just
invented) to win, including disallowing valid votes, over-counting his
own votes, etc. etc. etc.

--
Rhino

moviePig

2024-11-04 03:30:06 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention and
looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to
say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won in
2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be ineligible
for re-election.
You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the
results of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not
properly counted, but (grudgingly) accepted the result.
and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies

from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff).

Try listening to the CONTEXT of what he said, not just the sentence
or two they played in the sound bite. I've seen several examples of
Trump's remarks that got disparaged as horrifying but if you listen
to the context, it's pretty clear that his remarks were
(deliberately) misunderstood by the media.

If that's not fascism, please correct my vocabulary.

Are you COMPLETELY unable to use Google? Or visit a library?
You are apparently so fucking lazy that you won't look it up for
yourself. Shame on you! On top of that, you are so naive - or
gullible - that you are content to accept that every use of the word
by an "activist" is made by someone who knows what the word means and
is using it correctly. Consider the possibility (likelihood!!) that
they are just as ignorant of the meaning as you are.
I've got news for you: election cycles are massive efforts by
opposing teams to persuade people to vote for THEIR candidate and one
of the biggest tools in their tool belts is to distort what their
opponents say in a way that is unfavourable to the opponent and
favourable to their candidate. The activists you listen to, whether
they belong to Antifa, BLM, MSNBC, or the pro-Hamas crowd are all
doing it - as are groups supporting Trump.
You need to do some real work to filter out the BS from all sides and
figure out where the truth lies. If you just take the media at their
word, then you are every bit as much a dupe as you think Trump's
followers are.

Trump: ‘The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the
election is rigged’

My interpretation: Trump is confident from his internal polling that the
Republicans are going to win the election fair and square.
Your interpretation (apparently): Trump is going to use every dirty
trick in the book (plus some new ones that his people have just
invented) to win, including disallowing valid votes, over-counting his
own votes, etc. etc. etc.

So, according to your interpretation, Trump is so certain of victory
that he categorically discounts the authenticity of any other result.

How is that different from simply declaring himself the winner?

Rhino

2024-11-04 16:53:48 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention
and looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to
say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

The opposition in Venezuela has clear evidence that Maduro cheated
on their last election and have tried to overturn it. Would you
consider them fascists too? (I'm sure Maduro does but I'm asking
what YOU think.)
2) refuses to accept

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won
in 2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be
ineligible for re-election.
You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the
results of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not
properly counted, but (grudgingly) accepted the result.
and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies

from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff).

Try listening to the CONTEXT of what he said, not just the sentence
or two they played in the sound bite. I've seen several examples of
Trump's remarks that got disparaged as horrifying but if you listen
to the context, it's pretty clear that his remarks were
(deliberately) misunderstood by the media.

If that's not fascism, please correct my vocabulary.

Are you COMPLETELY unable to use Google? Or visit a library?
You are apparently so fucking lazy that you won't look it up for
yourself. Shame on you! On top of that, you are so naive - or
gullible - that you are content to accept that every use of the word
by an "activist" is made by someone who knows what the word means
and is using it correctly. Consider the possibility (likelihood!!)
that they are just as ignorant of the meaning as you are.
I've got news for you: election cycles are massive efforts by
opposing teams to persuade people to vote for THEIR candidate and
one of the biggest tools in their tool belts is to distort what
their opponents say in a way that is unfavourable to the opponent
and favourable to their candidate. The activists you listen to,
whether they belong to Antifa, BLM, MSNBC, or the pro-Hamas crowd
are all doing it - as are groups supporting Trump.
You need to do some real work to filter out the BS from all sides
and figure out where the truth lies. If you just take the media at
their word, then you are every bit as much a dupe as you think
Trump's followers are.

Trump: ‘The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the
election is rigged’

My interpretation: Trump is confident from his internal polling that
the Republicans are going to win the election fair and square.
Your interpretation (apparently): Trump is going to use every dirty
trick in the book (plus some new ones that his people have just
invented) to win, including disallowing valid votes, over-counting his
own votes, etc. etc. etc.

So, according to your interpretation, Trump is so certain of victory
that he categorically discounts the authenticity of any other result.

NO!!! I said nothing of the kind. I meant that he is just confident that
he's going to win, like a gambler laying a bet because he has a hunch he
is going to win. And like the gambler, he may very well find that he loses.

Post by moviePig
How is that different from simply declaring himself the winner?

In the same way that the gambler doesn't simply demand his winnings
before the race is run: because he knows that the race actually has to
finish AND that the judges have to agree on who has won. Only then can
he collect his winnings, assuming he bet on the right horse.

I once inadvertently wandered into a private party that I initially
thought was a public event. It turned out to be a gathering for campaign
workers for the NDP (our socialist party) on the eve of an election.
Apparently, the candidate threw this party for the people that had
worked to get them elected. I lingered for a bit out of curiousity and
found myself witnessing a speech by someone that must have been one of
the people in charge of the campaign (or maybe the candidate himself). I
distinctly remember him thanking everyone for their hard work and
assuring them that their work had made an immense difference. He told
them that they had been instrumental in winning the election. As it
turned out, the NDP candidate didn't win or even come in second: he came
in THIRD. The assurances that they'd won the election were just his way
of thanking people plus a large dose of wishful thinking. The NDP
candidate never contested the election result either.

--
Rhino

moviePig

2024-11-04 17:50:33 UTC

On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:29:12 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""

I... voted. I'd been sitting on my mail-in ballot for a week. The
candidates weren't improving any.
I went through the bedsheet ballot for judicial retention
and looked
everyone up. That took a very long time.

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on
Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says
anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice
to say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election,

The opposition in Venezuela has clear evidence that Maduro cheated
on their last election and have tried to overturn it. Would you
consider them fascists too? (I'm sure Maduro does but I'm asking
what YOU think.)
2) refuses to accept

elections he loses,

And yet he is running again this time. If he really thought he won
in 2020, he'd be finishing his second term now and would be
ineligible for re-election.
You'd be on much more solid ground if you said he challenged the
results of the 2020 election, still felt the results were not
properly counted, but (grudgingly) accepted the result.
and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies

from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff).

Try listening to the CONTEXT of what he said, not just the sentence
or two they played in the sound bite. I've seen several examples of
Trump's remarks that got disparaged as horrifying but if you listen
to the context, it's pretty clear that his remarks were
(deliberately) misunderstood by the media.

If that's not fascism, please correct my vocabulary.

Are you COMPLETELY unable to use Google? Or visit a library?
You are apparently so fucking lazy that you won't look it up for
yourself. Shame on you! On top of that, you are so naive - or
gullible - that you are content to accept that every use of the
word by an "activist" is made by someone who knows what the word
means and is using it correctly. Consider the possibility
(likelihood!!) that they are just as ignorant of the meaning as you
are.
I've got news for you: election cycles are massive efforts by
opposing teams to persuade people to vote for THEIR candidate and
one of the biggest tools in their tool belts is to distort what
their opponents say in a way that is unfavourable to the opponent
and favourable to their candidate. The activists you listen to,
whether they belong to Antifa, BLM, MSNBC, or the pro-Hamas crowd
are all doing it - as are groups supporting Trump.
You need to do some real work to filter out the BS from all sides
and figure out where the truth lies. If you just take the media at
their word, then you are every bit as much a dupe as you think
Trump's followers are.

Trump: ‘The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the
election is rigged’

My interpretation: Trump is confident from his internal polling that
the Republicans are going to win the election fair and square.
Your interpretation (apparently): Trump is going to use every dirty
trick in the book (plus some new ones that his people have just
invented) to win, including disallowing valid votes, over-counting
his own votes, etc. etc. etc.

So, according to your interpretation, Trump is so certain of victory
that he categorically discounts the authenticity of any other result.

Post by moviePig
How is that different from simply declaring himself the winner?

In the same way that the gambler doesn't simply demand his winnings
before the race is run: because he knows that the race actually has to
finish AND that the judges have to agree on who has won. Only then can
he collect his winnings, assuming he bet on the right horse.
I once inadvertently wandered into a private party that I initially
thought was a public event. It turned out to be a gathering for campaign
workers for the NDP (our socialist party) on the eve of an election.
Apparently, the candidate threw this party for the people that had
worked to get them elected. I lingered for a bit out of curiousity and
found myself witnessing a speech by someone that must have been one of
the people in charge of the campaign (or maybe the candidate himself). I
distinctly remember him thanking everyone for their hard work and
assuring them that their work had made an immense difference. He told
them that they had been instrumental in winning the election. As it
turned out, the NDP candidate didn't win or even come in second: he came
in THIRD. The assurances that they'd won the election were just his way
of thanking people plus a large dose of wishful thinking. The NDP
candidate never contested the election result either.

Regardless of your interpretation or my interpretation of your
interpretation, let's consider some facts: 1) Trump has said that he'll
accept election results IF HE WINS; 2) Trump protested election results
on Jan. 6; 3) Trump pressured a Secy. of State to overturn Georgia's
election.

Do you question any of these facts? Can you reconcile them with any
image of a candidate who's merely "overconfident"?

The Horny Goat

2024-11-04 07:31:10 UTC

Post by moviePig
You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism. Suffice to say
that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election, 2) refuses to accept
elections he loses, and 3) wants to use our military against "enemies
from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff). If that's not fascism, please
correct my vocabulary.

It's _not_ - there are plenty of Latin American countries whose
leftist governments did much the same thing (Nicaragua comes to mind
here, so does El Salvador in the 1970s)

Sounds like your knowledge of Argentinian fascism comes from "Evita".

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:52 UTC

Post by BTR1701
What's the definition of fascism?

You're right that I'm not sure what's properly fascism.

Gee, what a surprise... NOT.

Post by moviePig
Suffice to say that Trump 1) tried to overturn an election, 2) refuses
to accept elections he loses, and 3) wants to use our military against
"enemies from within" (e.g., Pelosi and Schiff). If that's not fascism,
please correct my vocabulary.

Useful idiot says what?

--
When we cheat, we win!
DNC 2024

anim8rfsk

2024-11-04 01:18:19 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

In the Larry Niven group I moderate, we had some asshat screaming that
Larry was a fascist because in stories he wrote about space travel before
we had female astronauts, he didn’t change reality to include female
astronauts (he did once reality changed).

Said asshat is screaming somewhere else now.

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

Rhino

2024-11-04 02:09:04 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

Huh?? Was he supposed to publish new versions of those older stories to
include women astronauts?

I actually read a science fiction story that might be an example of a
major revision like that recently. It was a novel by Eric Frank Russell
called Sinister Barrier that has two different copyright dates: 1939 and
1948. It makes multiple references to "atom bombs". I'd be very
surprised if a novel in 1939 referred to atom bombs given than no such
bomb had been demonstrated at that point. The Manhattan Project hadn't
even started and the first atomic bomb test didn't happen until July
1945. It seems very likely to me that Russell used different terminology
in 1939 and then changed it to "atom bombs" in 1948 for the edition he
published then.

Of course, I'm not an actual expert in the Golden Age of SF so maybe the
term "atom bomb" was used regularly by writers anticipating that
development years before it became a reality.

By the way, back to woman astronauts, did you know that the first two
women in space were both Russian and that the first one made her voyage
in 1963? The first American woman to go into space was Sally Ride in 1983.

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

I read a passage in a book once - I think it was a novel - that said the
primary obstacle to Americans putting a woman into space was that they
didn't know how to deal with a woman's "sanitary arrangements". Somehow,
the Soviets figured something out in that regard long before America did.

Post by anim8rfsk
Said asshat is screaming somewhere else now.

Some asshat is ALWAYS screaming online :-)

--
Rhino

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:52 UTC

Post by moviePig
Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

What's the definition of fascism?

That's a system in whihc the free market (and private property) exists but
are controlled by the government.

--
Let's go Brandon!

The Horny Goat

2024-11-04 07:23:46 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
...

Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

If it's fair to call Trump fascist it's fair to call Harris Communist.

I don't really believe either really is.

Ubiquitous

2024-11-05 09:30:42 UTC

Post by The Horny Goat

Post by moviePig
Hint: She doesn't stand for fascism.

If it's fair to call Trump fascist it's fair to call Harris Communist.
I don't really believe either really is.

Trump isn't, Kamala obviously is one.

--
When we cheat, we win!
Harris/Walz 2024

Ubiquitous

2024-11-04 08:30:45 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off.

No, it was the Democrats who did that.

Oddly enough, they then tried to force Kennedy to _remain_ on the ballot.

--
When we cheat, we win!
DNC 2024

Rhino

2024-11-04 16:59:41 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off.

No, it was the Democrats who did that.
Oddly enough, they then tried to force Kennedy to _remain_ on the ballot.

That's not odd at all. They figured that some (presumably small)
percentage of voters wouldn't have heard that RFK Jr was still a viable
candidate and would vote for him. Many of those voters might otherwise
vote for Trump so having those votes go to RFK Jr helps them.

It's just a form of vote-splitting which is a very common tactic in
countries like mine that have substantial third, fourth and even fifth
parties.

You had at least one instance of that in your country when Ross Perot
siphoned enough votes away from the Republicans that Bill Clinton won
the Presidency.

Post by Ubiquitous
--
When we cheat, we win!
DNC 2024

--
Rhino

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-04 19:50:05 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off.

No, it was the Democrats who did that.
Oddly enough, they then tried to force Kennedy to _remain_ on the ballot.

I was wrong, but Ubi flat out lied. There have been past election cgcles
in which the Republican Party challenged the Illinois Libertarian Party
slate of candidates. That didn't happen this time. The Libertarians
didn't gather close to enough signatures (25,000) to file nominating
petitions as a new political party as they didn't get enough votes last
time to qualify as an established political party which has a lower
signature threshold. There was no nominating petition to challenge.

As far as Kennedy remaining on the ballot, Ubi lied again. He withdrew
after the deadline for revising the ballots in specific states, so he
remained on the ballot. That's not Democrats forcing anything. It's a
point of law and practicality as the ballots must be printed at some
point for absentee voters.

Post by Rhino
It's just a form of vote-splitting which is a very common tactic in
countries like mine that have substantial third, fourth and even fifth
parties.
You had at least one instance of that in your country when Ross Perot
siphoned enough votes away from the Republicans that Bill Clinton won
the Presidency.

I refuse to blame independent or third party candidates for forcing a
mainstream party candidate to lose. Voters get to express an opinion.

Rhino

2024-11-05 01:58:03 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off.

No, it was the Democrats who did that.
Oddly enough, they then tried to force Kennedy to _remain_ on the ballot.

I was wrong, but Ubi flat out lied. There have been past election cgcles
in which the Republican Party challenged the Illinois Libertarian Party
slate of candidates. That didn't happen this time. The Libertarians
didn't gather close to enough signatures (25,000) to file nominating
petitions as a new political party as they didn't get enough votes last
time to qualify as an established political party which has a lower
signature threshold. There was no nominating petition to challenge.
As far as Kennedy remaining on the ballot, Ubi lied again. He withdrew
after the deadline for revising the ballots in specific states, so he
remained on the ballot. That's not Democrats forcing anything. It's a
point of law and practicality as the ballots must be printed at some
point for absentee voters.

Sounds reasonable. We had a case of an incumbent being forced to
withdraw by the Party just days before the election a few years back.
(He'd been accused of sexual improprieties. He denied it but the party
forced him to step down.) The ballots had already been printed so he
remained on the ballot. Even though this was reported in the media, he
still got a bunch of votes, although not enough to win. I still wonder
occasionally what would have been done if he had won despite having his
candidacy withdrawn.

I seem to recall hearing about a US Senator that died in a plane crash a
few days before an election. The crash was publicized but he still won.
I don't know if people knew who would replace him and approved or if
most of them hadn't heard about the crash. I think his wife got the seat
for that term.

Back in the day, when voting pretty much all happened on Election Day, I
would have favoured simply reprinting the ballot and using the revised
ballot but with all the early and mail-in voting that happens now, I
think there need to be rules on what happens if a candidate withdraws or
dies after the ballots have been printed. In the US, the rules would
presumably vary from state to state.

I refuse to blame independent or third party candidates for forcing a
mainstream party candidate to lose. Voters get to express an opinion.

Don't get me wrong: I'm fine with voters getting lots of choices. We
currently have 5 parties that have representation in the federal
Parliament and many ridings have fringe parties, sometimes several
fringe parties, running. (This country even elected a Communist MP back
in 1945, not that I approve of that!)

I just meant to say that the presence of multiple parties can often lead
to unexpected consequences. For example, after Brian Mulroney got
trounced in 1993 and the Conservative Party was down to just TWO seats,
the Progressive-Conservatives had a rivalry with the Reform Party, which
was an Alberta-based conservative party. For the next couple of
elections, the conservative vote was split between the two conservative
parties so the Liberals won the elections, even though the combined vote
of Reform and the Conservatives was more than the Liberal vote. The two
conservative parties gradually merged, changed the name of the result to
the Conservative Party of Canada (dropping the "Progressive") and
started winning elections again.

--
Rhino

The Horny Goat

2024-11-05 06:36:10 UTC

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:58:03 -0500, Rhino

Post by Rhino
I just meant to say that the presence of multiple parties can often lead
to unexpected consequences. For example, after Brian Mulroney got
trounced in 1993 and the Conservative Party was down to just TWO seats,
the Progressive-Conservatives had a rivalry with the Reform Party, which
was an Alberta-based conservative party. For the next couple of
elections, the conservative vote was split between the two conservative
parties so the Liberals won the elections, even though the combined vote
of Reform and the Conservatives was more than the Liberal vote. The two
conservative parties gradually merged, changed the name of the result to
the Conservative Party of Canada (dropping the "Progressive") and
started winning elections again.

Uh I'm pretty sure 1993 was Kim Campbell's election (and I was a
friend of her late first husband - he and I were past and present
officers of the Chess Federation of Canada)

As for as Justin Trudeau goes he has won 3 elections - the first a
majority government with 39% of the popular vote and two minority
government wins (2019 and 2021) with 33% and 32% of the popular vote
while the Conservatives got more votes but Trudeau won more seats.

Rhino

2024-11-05 16:00:45 UTC

Post by The Horny Goat
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:58:03 -0500, Rhino

Uh I'm pretty sure 1993 was Kim Campbell's election (and I was a
friend of her late first husband - he and I were past and present
officers of the Chess Federation of Canada)

Yes, you're right. I oversimplified a bit in the interest of brevity.

I should have said that Mulroney served two consecutive terms - and got
the largest majority in Canadian history the first time - but that he
stepped down before the 1993 election because he was hated almost as
much as Justin Trudeau is today and Kim Campbell replaced him. SHE was
prime minister when the election was called and her
Progressive-Conservatives lost BUT I think it's beyond dispute that she
lost BECAUSE of Mulroney and the hatred people felt toward him and his
enablers in the PC party. The PCs got trounced because of Mulroney, not
Campbell.

Post by The Horny Goat
As for as Justin Trudeau goes he has won 3 elections - the first a
majority government with 39% of the popular vote and two minority
government wins (2019 and 2021) with 33% and 32% of the popular vote
while the Conservatives got more votes but Trudeau won more seats.

I continue to hope that the Liberals will be trounced at least as badly
as the PCs were in 1993 and hopefully worse.

--
Rhino

The Horny Goat

2024-11-05 06:29:12 UTC

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:50:05 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"

Post by Rhino
You had at least one instance of that in your country when Ross Perot
siphoned enough votes away from the Republicans that Bill Clinton won
the Presidency.

I refuse to blame independent or third party candidates for forcing a
mainstream party candidate to lose. Voters get to express an opinion.

Uh isn't that the whole point of holding the election?!?

It's not as if lots of "heavy favorites" have gone down to defeat.

Ubiquitous

2024-11-05 09:30:41 UTC

Now you're just burdened by what will be.

Heh
I couldn't bring myself to vote for her. I don't trust her on Israel and
I really have no idea what she stands for 'cuz she never says anything.
We had no Libertarians running statewide; I don't know what happened but
the Republicans must have kept them off.

No, it was the Democrats who did that.
Oddly enough, they then tried to force Kennedy to _remain_ on the ballot.
[Kerman's incorrect formatting fixed.]

It most certain is odd when they try to remove him when he's potentially
syphoning votes from the dems but suddenlyn decide he has to remain on
the ballots when he drops out and supports Trump!

--
When we cheat, we win!
DNC 2024

Adam H. Kerman

2024-11-06 15:56:05 UTC