The Hill. Opinion: The 'Scared Majority'.
The ‘scared majority’ could deliver a landslide victory for Trump by Douglas MacKinnon, opinion contributor published at The Hill.
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/48 … %20Opinion
"For decades, we have heard about and often ignored “the Silent Majority.” Time and again, Republican leaders have predicted that this seemingly mythical phenomenon was going to come to the fore and save the country from destructive Democratic policies.
At least in terms of the popular vote, that mythical creature has mostly remained in stealth mode, as the Democratic candidate has won the popular vote in seven of the last eight presidential elections."
A little further along . . .
"The first is that the Democratic Party used to be the party of the poor and disenfranchised. Now it is the party of uber-wealthy tech and big-pharma barons and power-hungry special interests.
As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. posted last week: “Paycheck-to-paycheck voters were once the rank and file of the Democratic Party. Now they are abandoning it, and with good reason.” We also have this recent headline from Newsweek: “I Raised Millions for Democrats. At the DNC, I Realized They’re the Party of the Rich.”
“Here’s the sad truth,” the author correctly states in the piece. “The Democratic Party has lost its way entirely. They mostly speak to the college educated, the urban and affluent, in their language. Their tone is condescending and paternalistic. They peddle giveaways to the college-educated like student loan forgiveness plans that disproportionately help their base, snubbing the majority of the country without a four-year degree, and then offer no tangible plans for true reform.”
Finally, it concludes with . . .
"Fear is real. Fear does motivate. Working-class Americans do fear that elite-enabling liberal policies beyond their control are robbing them of their quality of life now and well into their futures.
But many of these Americans have also realized that there is one way to combat that fear and regain some of that control by voting.
I predict that there is a reckoning coming in November from those tens of millions of scared voters. And I suspect that reckoning is going to produce a landslide victory for Trump."
Take a gander reading the full article for the complete context. An emotion raising opinion piece providing a perspective of a stark reality.
Thoughts, criticisms, accolades, or commentary?Great Topic, I could write a book on this one.
First --- Although the article delves into what has happened to the Democratic Party, I’m going to focus on my guy, Trump. The Democrats have shifted away from the working class and embraced the elites, and now they're reaping the consequences of that shift. They’ve made their bed, so let them lie in it. For me, the real focus is on Trump and the reasons why he still garners so much support.
While the author suggests that fear will drive a landslide victory for Trump, I don't believe it's purely about fear. It's more about the tangible reasons that conservatives support him—reasons that go beyond emotion. Trump's presidency was marked by policies that resonated with middle- and working-class Americans, from job creation to tax cuts, and his push for energy independence. Many voters, especially those who felt ignored by the political elite, saw their livelihoods improve during his time in office.
Trump’s firm stance on immigration and border security isn’t just a reaction to fear; it’s about protecting American jobs and ensuring national security. His emphasis on law and order appeals to those who believe in maintaining safety and stability in their communities, while his opposition to political correctness speaks to concerns over free speech and traditional values.
More than anything, Trump's appeal comes from being an outsider who isn't afraid to challenge the entrenched power in Washington. His appointment of conservative judges has had a lasting impact on key issues like religious liberty, gun rights, and abortion—showing that he delivers on promises. For many, supporting Trump again means endorsing policies that prioritize American interests and stand up to globalism and the political establishment.
Yes, fear plays a role, but the real driving force behind Trump’s potential victory is the desire for a strong, prosperous, and secure America—values that Trump has consistently championed. Fear may motivate, but it’s these core principles that will likely bring voters back to Trump in 2024.
What is Harris's slogan --- "We aren't going back" Yeah we aren't... We have had enough of the last four years ---- We are not about to go back --- LOL
When I first heard the slogan, I could not believe she would dare go there.
Trump 2024"The Democrats have shifted away from the working class and embraced the elites,"
Curious, who are these elites and which policies are geared toward them?"Trump’s firm stance on immigration and border security isn’t just a reaction to fear; it’s about protecting American jobs and ensuring national security. "
In terms of protecting American jobs, is there the implication that immigrants are taking away jobs from Americans?
Looking at labor market trends, many industries, such as agriculture, construction, and hospitality, report significant difficulties in finding domestic workers. Job vacancies have surged, indicating that the supply of labor is not meeting demand.
Immigrants often take on essential roles in sectors that are struggling to fill positions. They provide labor in positions that are physically demanding . The fact is that we have a labor shortage and a declining (aging) workforce in our country. How will limiting immigration further exacerbate these trends?Yes, I would say there is implication... and data backing it up.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets … r-AA1q82Az
Data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, an arm of the Department of Labor, shows native-born Americans lost more than 1.3 million jobs over the last 12 months, while foreign-born workers gained more than 1.2 million jobs."native-born Americans lost more than 1.3 million jobs over the last 12 months, while foreign-born workers gained more than 1.2 million jobs."
Well looking at the labor stats and the demographic info provided, this may be a more compete statement...
"Older native-born Americans lost more than 1.3 million jobs over the last 12 months, while younger foreign-born workers gained more than 1.2 million jobs."Firing someone in their 50s or 60s so they can hire a cheap replacement in their 20s is probably more accurate still. Somehow it does not sound better for America.
Blame capitalism for that, where the all mighty dollar is king and consequently, anyone under the right circumstances is expendable.
Cred, Imagining a scenario where the U.S. operates without capitalism invites speculation about alternative economic systems, such as socialism or communism. Capitalism is often credited with fostering innovation and entrepreneurship, leading to job creation across various industries. Without it, job creation might rely more on state planning, which could result in less diversity and fewer new industries. In a purely socialist system, wages might be standardized, reducing income inequality but also limiting motivation for individuals to seek higher-paying roles, potentially leading to fewer high-paying jobs in specialized fields.
Without capitalism, the government would play a more significant role in providing employment, and ensuring jobs for all; however, low-paying jobs.
Capitalism also allows individuals to make choices about their careers, investments, and businesses, whereas a non-capitalist system restricts these choices, limiting the ability to pursue higher-paying jobs, and yes, better lives...
Historical examples, such as Venezuela, illustrate the challenges that arise when moving away from capitalism, including economic decline and shortages, which can lead to high unemployment and low wages.
While capitalism has its flaws, it has driven economic growth and job creation in the U.S. and enabled Americans to strive for that American dream.
The alternative systems could provide different forms of benefits but also come with significant trade-offs.Understood, Sharlee, capitalism and the desire to get more for ones self is natural and has a lot to do with the success of American economic dynamo over so long a period of time.
But Capitalism has had its negative trade off in the natural susceptibility of labor relative to the bourgeoise and its caprice. So, people, employees are interchangeable based on market conditions and have little if no security. Before the Early 20th Century "Progressive Era" and later the "New Deal" a worker under capitalism was not much more than a slave.
I don't have to be a socialist to recognize the many flaws that are inherent in a Capitalist system.Cred, I understand your concerns about capitalism and its historical impact on workers, but I think it’s important to acknowledge that while capitalism has flaws, it has also been the driving force behind unprecedented economic growth, innovation, and individual opportunity. Before the Progressive Era and the New Deal, there were indeed significant issues with worker exploitation, but these reforms showed that capitalism is not inherently static—it can adapt to address injustices. The key difference between capitalism and more rigid systems, like socialism, is that capitalism offers flexibility. The market can be regulated and improved without dismantling the entire system.
In contrast, socialism centralizes power in the state, which can be just as, if not more, oppressive. The very dynamism of capitalism means that workers aren’t condemned to static roles; innovation and entrepreneurship can create opportunities for upward mobility. Labor rights, safety standards, and wage laws have been successfully implemented within the capitalist framework, showing that we don’t need to abandon the system to address its flaws. Instead, we can continually refine it to ensure fairer outcomes while still fostering individual freedom and economic growth.I don't disagree with what you state. I recognize Capitalism's advantages of providing incentive. While I don't want to stifle the entrepreneurial spirit that is a part of Capitalism, I don't want the capitalist mogul to operate with impunity in regards to workers or the environment. I don't like the idea of anyone doing whatever they want in the public sphere and not being held accountable.
The "balance" created in the first half of the last century to tame Capitalism's rough edges were essential from my point of view as necessary to the very survival of Capitalism avoiding a revolt from the proletariat regarding economic exploitation and environmental degradation, that the capitalist is more than happy to accommodate in pursuit of more and greater profit.
The alternative to a controlled Capitalism does not have to be Socialism. But I don't want "conservatives" upsetting the balance and watering down protections against abuses of the Capitalist class.Cred, I completely understand your concern, and I agree that no one should be allowed to operate without accountability, especially in the public sphere. However, it's important to note that big businesses are already subject to many regulations to ensure they don’t harm workers or the environment. There are labor laws, environmental protections, and industry-specific regulations in place that businesses must follow. These laws exist to create a balance between the incentives capitalism provides and the need for fair treatment and sustainability. Of course, there are always debates about whether these regulations go far enough or need improvement, but the idea that capitalist moguls can act with impunity isn't entirely accurate given the existing regulatory framework. That being said, it’s always a good idea to review and adjust these rules as society
evolves.
While I agree that the regulations introduced in the early 20th century were crucial to addressing some of Capitalism's rough edges, I think it's an oversimplification to say that they were merely about avoiding a proletariat revolt. Yes, those reforms helped alleviate economic exploitation and environmental degradation, but they also demonstrated that the system can evolve in response to new challenges, without abandoning Capitalism altogether. Many business leaders today recognize that sustainable practices and fair treatment of workers are actually good for long-term profitability. It’s not always just about chasing profit at any cost—often, ethical business practices create stronger companies. While there are still bad actors, suggesting that the entire system would collapse without these checks ignores the adaptability and innovation that Capitalism also brings. The pursuit of profit doesn’t necessarily have to be in conflict with social and environmental responsibility, and many modern companies strive to strike that balance.
I fully understand your point, and I agree that we should always safeguard against abuses within Capitalism. However, my concern is that if we continually tighten controls or restrict capitalism too much, we could inadvertently stifle the very system that has made us such a prosperous nation. The balance you’re referring to is delicate, and while no one wants exploitation or environmental harm, we should be careful not to overregulate to the point where innovation, growth, and entrepreneurship are hampered. We’re lucky to live in a country as rich and developed as ours, largely because of the opportunities that Capitalism has provided. While it’s important to keep protections in place, we also need to remember that too much restriction can lead us down a path where economic stagnation or reduced opportunity might become a reality. In the end, maintaining a balance is key, but we should be cautious about leaning too far in one direction, as it could have unintended consequences for future prosperity.Yes, it is true that businesses operate under many regulations and restrictions and I would just make sure that the more important ones are not relaxed.
I have been hearing disturbing information from certain states about ideas of relaxing child labor laws spearheaded by Republicans naturally under the guise of teaching the work ethic. I could scrounge some of the articles if you wish. I don't believe that minors under 16 should be working in factory environment as their focus should be on school attendance. I am taken back to the 19th century sweat shops were children were exploited by the capitalist class. The capitalist class are not in business to lose money, thus anyone in their employ is expendable and exploitable. You speak of paternalism regarding these guys, I say that they will do what is necessary to lower costs and increase their profits. Is it a bad thing? Not necessarily. But it is to be expected.
You don't think that the changes that brought laissez Capitalism under control were welcomed with open arms by the owners? They resisted it as some conservatives now want to unravel the NEw Deal and its benefits to labor and the working man.
I am all for the "balance" as long it remains such and is not tampered with.
You have a more optimistic view of Capitalist class than do I. You worry about too much tightening, I worry about too much leniency and lax.I understand your concerns about the potential relaxation of child labor laws and the broader implications of deregulation. However, I believe it's important to balance the need for certain protections with the recognition that businesses do play a critical role in economic growth and innovation. While I agree that children should not be subjected to dangerous or exploitative working conditions, and their focus should primarily be on education, I think there’s room for reasonable discussions around work opportunities for young people, especially in environments that foster responsibility and skill-building without sacrificing safety or education.
The comparison to 19th-century sweatshops is a stark one, but I don’t think modern-day proponents of lighter regulations are advocating for a return to such conditions. Regulations, like those that came from the New Deal, were essential in curbing exploitative practices and ensuring workers’ rights, but blanket resistance to regulatory change might miss opportunities for improving flexibility in the workforce, particularly in sectors where the traditional model might not fit the modern economy. Some Republicans may argue for loosening restrictions to encourage youth employment, but this doesn’t necessarily mean they are looking to exploit children; it could be more about allowing responsible work experiences that teach important life skills.
Furthermore, while it's true that the capitalist class seeks profit, it’s also true that the market responds to the needs and expectations of workers and consumers, which means that businesses must adapt to meet those demands, not simply exploit them. A heavily regulated environment can stifle competition, innovation, and economic growth. In contrast, a well-calibrated regulatory framework that doesn’t overburden businesses but also protects workers can create a healthier balance. Excessive leniency can be dangerous, but overregulation can also harm economic prospects and limit opportunities for individuals, including young workers. Both too much tightening and too much leniency should be avoided, and I believe we can strive for that middle ground you mentioned, ensuring a fair and safe environment for workers while allowing businesses to thrive.
You bring up a crucial point about the state of education and the evolving needs of the workforce. As we face the reality that not all young people are being adequately prepared by traditional education systems, we need to think creatively about how to ensure they have access to viable career paths. Apprenticeships, on-the-job training, and skilled trades offer practical, accessible opportunities for those who may not follow a traditional academic route but still have the potential to build a stable and rewarding career.
The push for more apprenticeships and vocational training is essential, especially as the demand for skilled labor in areas like manufacturing, construction, and other trades continues to grow. Many high-paying jobs require technical skills that can’t be taught in a classroom but can be learned through hands-on experience and mentorship.
The dynamic of declining birth rates along with an aging work force is beginning to play out here in America.
Yes, I think you are correct. I think some people are thrown out of their jobs though because they are earning more than a younger person. Some might blame that on corporate greed, others on the overavailability of cheap imported labor.
Our Baby Boomers (the largest percentage of our population) taking early retirement was one of the factors that contributed to the worker shortage after the pandemic, which was really so severe that there were two open positions for every person seeking work in 2022.
In this country, we currently have a labor shortage. Our aging population and are declining birth rates will only exacerbate that problem in the future.
It has nothing to do with corporations firing older workers in favor of young inexperienced workers. Our native born labor force is simply shrinking.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/ … workforce/Só all the 50 somethings that have posted about losing their jobs to younger and cheaper workers are all liars?
Anecdotal accounts don't supersede the data related to our labor market.
You are probably correct, and we know it must be true because the labor department would never overreport employment numbers, like stating that there were 800,000 jobs created when none were created. It must be great to have such confidence in your governments statistics.
It is both. Migrants do provide very cheap labor-(1) they are unskilled so it is easy to pay them pennies & (2) they can be exploited because they are afraid to be deported back to their original countries.
Same results...
Americans lost their jobs to foreigners imported by the Biden Administration at taxpayer expense.
Just as Americans lose jobs to foreign Nations which our politicians allow, aiding in corporations moving overseas.
The ONLY time these trends reversed in the last 30 years, and Americans were gaining jobs and Corporations were reinvesting into America was during Trump's 1st Term.
Corporations go overseas to avoid U.S. taxes
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/corpo … -u-s-taxes
Trump to companies leaving America: ‘There will be consequences’
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … sequences/
7 Companies That Have Reinvested in America Following Trump's Election
https://www.gobankingrates.com/money/bu … -election/
Trump administration wants U.S. supply chain to leave China—but U.S. companies want to stay
https://fortune.com/2020/05/09/trump-ch … -business/
Trump fights for the American Workers... and for America's future prosperity.
The Biden-Harris Administration proved they fight against American Workers and against America's future prosperity.
America's bottom 50% are poorer today than they were 4 years ago
Americans feel like they’re poorer
https://thehill.com/business/personal-f … re-poorer/
And more importantly to feeling poorer, the dollar has less value than 4 years ago, by a substantial amount (link very interesting):
Value of $1 from 2019 to 2024
https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflat … 9?amount=1
$1 in 2019 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $1.23 today, an increase of $0.23 over 5 years. The dollar had an average inflation rate of 4.25% per year between 2019 and today, producing a cumulative price increase of 23.13%.
This means that today's prices are 1.23 times as high as average prices since 2019, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index. A dollar today only buys 81.301% of what it could buy back then.Thank you Ken for taking the time to post all this factual information. It is eye-opening.
I was reading an article today that stated that the labor costs to build a new iPhone in China was about 10 dollars. I am not sure the numbers are exact but it does show why Apples CEO is so anti Trump.
Most of the Major International corporations, and most certainly the Military Industrial Complex and its DC cronies, are anti Trump.
Corporations rely on the state for the provision of security and the enforcement of property rights in order to be able to engage in business transactions.
Nation states are losing their negotiating powers on behalf of their citizens against corporations, as International Agencies from the IMF to the WHO to the UN (which partnered with the WEF in 2019) become far more powerful than any minor Nation.
Today only a handful of Nations can resist this dominance, the likes of America and Russia for instance...
If you extrapolate this out, ultimately it means that the world will be completely and totally subservient to the will of China by their allotted goal of 2049.
Nation states depend on corporations for the employment of their citizens and as a basis for taxation. But the role of corporations in international politics remains a neglected issue where corporate interests do not align with national interests.
China will never have this problem (weakness) because corporate interests in China are nothing less than Nation state interests.
Globalization didn't really come into being as we understand it until the Fall of the Wall in 1990... and even then it wasn't until the internet made ordering things from Alibaba and Amazon easier than driving to the store ten minutes away that things really became revolutionary.
Call it what you will... without restoring Trump's America 1st efforts, America will fast track its decline as nations like Russia and China, who have Nationalized their Corporate efforts, dominate the international markets and international powers like the UN/WEF and BRICS which soon will supplant SWIFT and the American Hegemony.
Consider how Democrats (the establishment) today is dominated by this rejection of Nation state-centrism in particular, they support the growing size and overall dominance of corporate actors in the global political economy.
What do you think happens, when these folks who think social revolution is needed, so that we can pursue a future unburdened by the past, remain in control in the years ahead?
Transnational capitalism will succumb to Corporate institutions controlled by Central governments focused on Nation state dominance.
Its like we are watching in real time a transition of wealth and power shift over to Russia and China... as America shifts into a revolutionary (or anti-revolutionary) totalitarian state that will suppress freedoms and cause crushing economic hardship on all Americans.
Thanks for commenting and providing feedback, Sharlee. I appreciate it and will consider it with my weighing my vote.
" . . . I don't believe it's purely about fear".
Noted with respect.
Yet, some time back a year or so I did research on voting and made an OP thread about how much fear and anger played with people voting. It turns out it was above 30%+ or somewhere about. I referenced an article about a university cooperative that studied that in the US and Europe.
One thing it pointed out is that fear was more of driver than anger for voting. People who were angry tended more to not vote. People who were afraid had a greater propensity to vote.
I will go back through my folders on my PC to see if I can find it later.
Yes, I have commentary.
I have discussed much of this with my ideological kindred on the racism thread hosted by Esoteric. Since you are generally one of the few people here who can be said to be political unaligned, you can take a peek at what was said.
I expressed fear that the whole poll buisiness is far overrated,
For example, with the Herbert Hoover shambles of an economy in the depths of recession that Biden inherited from Trump, it is a surprise that Trump managed to get the number of votes that he did get in 2020. So, Trumps popularity certainly wasn't based on how he managed the economy, so what was it?
It is that "Silent Majority", that Nixon referred to, you remember. In my world, they were composed of conservative reactionaries in opposition to war protesters, civil rights and a direction of general progress. They were the anachronistic, provincial Archie Bunker types that we all were familiar with.
That is what we have now, this sort will not represent themselves in any polling, they know how unpopular their views are. There are many of them that will keep their views to themselves and pull the lever for Trump in November. Under such conditions, I would be pleasantly surprised if Harris managed to to win.
The Xenophobia has been more than emphasized by Trump and Vance, there is heart of the fear that you mention. That they are to overrun by dusky people climbing over the fence. They see people of color whether legal or not as a threat to their perceived way of life. In that fear, they would elect a tyrant that would protect power, unmerited privilege and preference over equality, rule of law, merit based achievement, whether it is fair or not. You have the "Great Replacement" theories that have been embraced by most conservatives and Republicans. Trump is there to assuage whites of their fears. That is the real reason that drives this new "Silent Majority" and they will come out for Trump in droves. Look at the resent assault on the Haitian community as an example as how to Trump and Vance callously stoke the fears of their base. It all fits.
Here is just a little bit more.....
Non-Hispanic White Americans were about 85 percent of those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020, much larger than the 59 percent of the U.S. population overall in that demographic. That was similar to 2016, when White voters were about 88 percent of Trump backers. It is very likely that White Americans will be more than 80 percent of those who back Republican candidates in this fall’s elections.
(So basically, fundamentally, the GOP is a white persons party)
The alliance between White Americans and the Republican Party has existed for decades. The last time a Democratic presidential candidate won the majority of White voters was in 1964, a year before Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law the Voting Rights Act. The Republican Party spent much of the next three decades courting White Americans, in part, by casting Democrats as too tied to the causes of minorities, particularly Black people and Latino immigrants.
Through the presidency of George W. Bush and Barack Obama’s first term, however, Republican leaders generally distanced themselves from this style of politics — feeling that the old tactics were not only morally wrong but also would doom the GOP in a country with a growing non-White population. But Trump and his allies have brought anti-Black and anti-immigrant sentiments and a focus on White identity back to the center of the Republican Party’s electoral strategy.
(I haven't seen the sort vomit that currently emanates from Trump's mouth since the candidacy of George Wallace in 1968)
Even when Republican politicians are not campaigning directly on racial issues, the party is organized around defending the status quo in America, which is weighted toward White Americans. Policies such as raising taxes on upper-income people and making college free would reduce gaps in income and opportunity between White Americans and people of color. By opposing them, Republicans in effect protect White advantages.
(So, why am I to believe that so many of you have changed? You accepted the status quo through much of the Twentieth century because regardless of political party there was no threat to your advantages and privileges. But with the threat of demographic change and a fear that the scales would be balanced, you all panicked. Trump plays on all this with his incessant racism and Xenophobia, and in your fear, you embrace it, no matter how dumb the messenger and message is, in fact.)
So it’s no accident that Republicans are winning the majority of White voters. It is in many ways the result of a successful strategy. It’s not that Trumpism brought White voters as a bloc to the Republican Party (they were already voting Republican) — but rather that it hasn’t scared many of them off.
Perhaps the best way to understand American politics is an overwhelmingly White coalition facing one that is majority-White but includes a lot of people of color.
And because White people are likely to be the majority of voters for at least two more decades, America is in trouble. Across the country, GOP officials are banning books from public libraries, making it harder for non-Republicans to vote, stripping away Black political power, aggressively gerrymandering, censoring teachers and professors and, most important, denying the results of legitimate elections. The majority of America’s White voters are enabling and encouraging the GOP’s radical, antidemocratic turn by continuing to back the party in elections.
It’s not, as much of our political discourse implies, that the Democrats have a working-class or Middle America or non-college-voter problem. The more important story is that America has a White voter problem. And there is no sign it’s going away anytime soon.
-----
As President Lyndon B. Johnson said in the 1960s to a young Bill Moyers: “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”
Trump’s supporters are saying to us, screaming to us, that although he may be the “lowest white man,” he is still better than Barack Obama, the “best colored man.”
In a way, Donald Trump represents white people’s right to be wrong and still be right. He is the embodiment of the unassailability of white power and white privilege.
To abandon him is to give up on the pact that America has made with its white citizens from the beginning: The government will help to underwrite white safety and success, even at the expense of other people in this country, whether they be Native Americans, African-Americans or new immigrants.
(Because of this fundamental underlying bigotry there is a great possibility that Trump could win.)Deleted
Well, Ken, I am sorry that you don't approve, but I am not surprised....
No one who is cognizant approves of the disaster that Democrats or rather Demoncrats have made of this country. To reiterate, inflation is at astronomical rates because of the immature spending of Democrats. They aren't living in reality but in some Utopialand. They are acting like overgrown 60s radicals. People see this & are getting disgusted w/it. They will be voting for Trump this November. I know I WILL.
Wow!! Thanks for the contribution, Cred!
A lot to digest while I have agreement with some portions from knowledge, though confessing my knowledge is limited, though increasing. I may come back to add more later.Unfortunately things like:
As President Lyndon B. Johnson said in the 1960s to a young Bill Moyers: “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”
Are not current to the driving factors within America today...
They are a snapshot of the past and what drove political perspectives then.
They do not correlate with 2024 realities.
They do however correlate to how many Americans over the age of 60 may view today's events.
A myth fabricated and perpetrated by 'the Left' and our Main Stream Media that promotes it constantly.
The poor and middle class, the citizens of America, are getting screwed over... if the race and sex narratives aren't continually pushed, enough people just might stand up and try to hold their government accountable for their actions rather than blaming each other due to race or sex.
Understand, there is an incredible amount of power and wealth behind the effort to do away with Nation states and move to a International order that is superior to and supersedes the Nation state... or if you like, the American Constitution with which we maintain our society/civilization.
America is in the process of transforming... we can choose to support this New World Order they are trying to bring into existence (which will not be beneficial to upward mobility or liberty and will do away with citizenship as we know it) or we can try to resist it and maintain what makes America unique, a land of freedoms and opportunity.
I would be ecstatic if they ran their political campaigns on these changes and the agendas they are looking to achieve... while Trump warns about it and says he wants to put America 1st... the Democrats do not run on what they are trying to do.
Its the deception that is so telling, their efforts to make everything about race, to label Trump as (insert all the labels here) and as his supporters as threats to Democracy, etc. etc. that is so annoying.
Just come out and tell the truth... for example:
We (America and the UK) want war with Russia, if we can defeat Russia, break it apart into a bunch of controllable banana republic states, then America can continue for decades to dominate the global scene and turn its attention to undermining China's efforts to spread its control globally.
Simple, straightforward, yet you will never hear it put to the American people in that way.
How much of our "reality" is built on lies?
How many conspiracies are actually true?
Kennedy assassination, MLK assassination, WMDs in Iraq, Vaccine induced heart attacks, etc. etc.
But one thing is for sure... the racism of the 60s is not prevalent today other than in the dark corners of the American fabric... no longer supported by the laws of the land, state or federal. No longer supported by our media nor our schools.
More a political tool used to stir division and elevate as high as possible in the minds of voters every 4 years.
The idea that we have to vote for Harris because she is a woman of color is nonsensical.
Like many, I had grown tired of Trump and the media's hate campaign against him... but today he has surrounded himself with people I would love to see running the country, Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Musk, RFK Jr, etc.
All of whom were Democrats not so many years ago.
I really wish more people would consider that.Thanks for the offering of your perspective. I can agree here and there and disagree too.
"How much of our "reality" is built on lies?"
I know you know that exists not only in politics. And, it is more factual as we age living a grand life of uncertainty. There is a coined adage I was told when much younger countering "life isn't perfect". It is "life is perfect in its imperfections".
I must share you are much more trusting of Trump and for the sake of a word his cabal just as much as my trusting of Harris and her cabal. I am very much a skeptic with a good measure of being a cynic as an equal opportunity observer.I can appreciate that...
But who is Harris, who are her 'cabal'... obviously Walz is one of them.
What are their goals... not what they say... what they have done.
What did Walz do as Governor.
What did Harris (and Biden) do over the last 4 years.
Contrast that to what Trump did as President, what Gabbard did as Congressman, what Elon Musk has done with companies.
If you do that, it is sure to become clearer what direction things will go.
One side supports increased migration, one does not.
One side supports feeding the war-machine, one does not.
One side supports unrestricted abortion, one does not.
One side supports making speech a crime, one does not.
Its not perfect, its messy... but the differences of where the two options are trying to take the nation today have never been greater.
Think back to Nixon vs Kennedy .... or Reagan vs Carter... the differences between the two choices were minor in comparison to 2024."One side supports making speech a crime, one does not."
Trump...
"These people should be jailed for the way they talk about our judges and justices""Think back to Nixon vs Kennedy .... or Reagan vs Carter... the differences between the two choices were minor in comparison to 2024."
As I have shared elsewhere over and over I was a mindless sheeple from 1972 when I first voted for Nixon and every Republican until 2014 including down ballot. I never paid attention to politics nor what was happening in the political/governance world. So, asking me to do what you suggested is meaningless because I don't have that base of knowledge.Its easy enough to watch a debate.
Nixon Kennedy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYP8-oxq8ig
Reagan Carter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YxFc_1b_0
And then consider the world that you knew existed at that time... to today.Thanks for taking the time to find the links and provide an opportunity to learn something while allowing me the liberty to decide for myself with a compare/contrast of yesterday with today focused on governance based on 'my' knowledge and experience. They have been bookmarked for future use.
You might find this interesting
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/harris-tru … -election/Thanks. Interesting and placed into my folder on my PC for polling.
I must admit that was an interesting and unexpected article.
It does make sense though... Trump has had a long journey.
Myself for instance, I went from supporting Trump in 2016 if only because I knew Clinton was psychotic, to thinking Tulsi Gabbard would be an excellent replacement in 2020 and just being weary of the constant Trump derangement...
And then we got Biden... who proved my every prediction about him to be true, in spades, and harmed America in ways I hadn't even imagined possible...
And then I watched as Trump was dragged through the mud, the FBI, the Court Cases, the non-stop MSM effort to character assassinate him and then the very real attempt to actually assassinate him.
And then, he got the backing of Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr. and I can understand why so many Americans are getting behind him.
Its one thing if Trump is the bad guy and no one else with any real credibility gets behind him... but Elon Musk and Tulsi Gabbard were not fans or friends of Trump 6 years ago.
They are now.
And perhaps many Americans out there have come around to seeing the same things they do and are making that shift as well.
I don't believe it will happen, I believe decades of misinformation and the dumming down of Americans will have the desired effects, I think they are ready for a Harris Presidency.On the contrary, that will be where all the secret Trump votes not revealed in the polls will come from, those who do like him but vote for him anyway as necessary to maintain their perceived advantages in society. That is the bottom line whether it be 1960 or 2024. They will elect a rabid dog to be assured of that.
Most of you have not so much changed from the 1960s more than you have simply accommodated and adjusted your attitudes to avoid their being blantantly revealed and exposed. Deep down, collectively, you have not really changed. Otherwise, a hateful man like Donald Trump would have been dismissed out of hand.
Anyone that allies with and associate with Trump is no better than Trump, in my humble opinion.
I believe that the fact that he is covered in mud is self inflicted. So, as I said, I almost expect Trump, despite his deplorable record, to win because in your insecurities you could not have it any other way.I think there are three perceptions of who and what Trump is.
You express very well one perception, one that has been nurtured by the majority of media sources in America... and most certainly by the Democrat Party, which is:
Trump represents Patriarchy, White Supremacy, Christian Religious Extremism, who is a traitor to America, a Putin puppet, and an existential threat to Democracy itself.
There is another extreme perception of him, that considers him some sort of savior. These people view him like many on the Left view Obama.
And then there are people like myself, that compare the human and pro-American Trump to the alternative(s) available.
Trump is not the evil incarnate the devout Left make him out to be.
Nor is Trump some sort of Christ like savior (though the more assassination attempts he survives, the more people are going to start believing such).
Trump is human... he has done some bad things, harming others, knowingly or not... and he has done some good things, many good things, where he tries to help others. This is the truth.
And what I hope all people do... is more or less ignore the drama and hyperbolic over-reaction of the media regarding Trump and Harris.
And focus on who they have surrounded themselves with and what policies and efforts they have made while being in the White House.
In other words... focus on the things that really matter and where they are likely to take the Nation if they are in control during the next 4 years.I pay attention to what he actually says.
His belief that those who speak out against judges should be jailed is not hyperbolic or an overreaction of the media. It is a statement, a reflection of his inner beliefs.And some of us pay attention to what he actually does, finding that it is almost always for the good of the nation.
We don't trust politicians and understand that all of them (not just Trump) are lying when their mouth is open. And we are capable of discerning when his words are literal and when they are not, such as jailing those that speak out against judges. We are also smart enough to catch the hypocrisy of claiming Trump ignores the concept of free speech...as liberals do everything in their power to end the concept entirely.In my view, after researching his statement in full ---- Trump suggests that people shouldn’t insult judges without merit, he’s likely referring to situations where individuals attack the judiciary simply out of frustration or disagreement with rulings, without offering substantive arguments. Trump seems to believe that, while he criticizes judges based on what he perceives as legitimate grievances, others may be disrespecting judges in a more random or baseless manner. In essence, he sees a difference between voicing concerns about fairness or bias in the legal process versus launching personal attacks on judges that serve no purpose other than to discredit them without evidence.
He was sharing an off-handed personal view. Could it reflect an inner belief? Trump has exhibited he is not afraid to share his beliefs, but as a leader his history shows he governs for all the people, he does not govern on his beliefs alone.
He was expressing an off-the-cuff personal view, which might reflect an inner belief. Trump has shown time and again that he isn’t afraid to share his thoughts openly. However, as a leader, his track record demonstrates that he governs for all the people, not solely based on his personal beliefs. He’s often vocal about his opinions, but his actions in office reflect a broader approach that takes into account the needs and interests of the entire nation.
Many people prefer a president who is not scripted, someone who is outspoken and unrehearsed. I believe this is one of the qualities that draws people to Trump. He echoes a time when presidents stood before the public and weren’t afraid to speak their minds, showing a very human side. Some of us are tired of, for lack of a better term, a hollow figure being told what to say and how to act, making an attempt to pass off a fake demeanor. Trump’s authenticity, whether you agree with him or not, is part of what makes him stand out to many.He said people should be jailed for exercising their first Amendment right to free speech.
"Sharing his personal view"? That's his right to free speech. I appreciate his letting us know where he stands on free speech for the rest of us. but I do not agree with the idea of people being jailed for disagreeing with judges.
I don't know, what countries restrict free speech and jail folks as a result?
Trump seems to believe that, while he criticizes judges based on what he perceives as legitimate grievances, others may be disrespecting judges in a more random or baseless manner.
Seems like free speech for me but not for thee. The government should restrict my speech or put me in jail because they determine it to be random or baseless? He has grounds to say anything he wants about Judges he disagrees with but the rest of us should be in jail?
"For someone who has so strongly objected in recent weeks to the idea that he’s an authoritarian or a threat to democracy, Donald Trump has a funny way of showing it.
At a rally Monday in Pennsylvania, the former president said for at least the fourth time that criticizing judges and justices either is or should be illegal. And for what may be the first time, he directly said people who do so should go to jail."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … g-dissent/Do you have a link to something more reliable than the completely untrustworthy Washington Post, which is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the most well-funded by government contracts billionaire Bezos?
I would trust Hunter Biden to tell the truth more than I would trust anything the Post puts out.We have different perspectives on this issue, and I believe we've discussed it enough for now. I've shared all I can on the topic, and I prefer not to dwell on it, especially with so many pressing matters at hand. It’s concerning to see a candidate who keeps repeating the same phrases like a well-trained parrot, seemingly unable to express original thoughts. This makes me question her honesty, both to herself and to others. I appreciate strong-minded individuals who confidently share their views rather than simply following what they're told to say.
To be honest, you seem to focus intensely on every word Trump says, yet you show little concern for the lack of substance in your candidate's statements. This speaks volumes about your thought process and your ability to critically evaluate the issues surrounding the words—or the absence of words—coming from the candidates.Yes, I am deeply concerned over his statement that he believes people should be jailed for freely expressing thought. That statement overshadows absolutely anything Harris has or hasn't said.
He expressed the desire to act upon the citizens of our country in a deeply anti-democratic manner.
It may be shocking to some but most of us out here don't want to live in the fear of going to jail because we expressed a negative thought.
I do appreciate you tackling this issue. You're the only one on this forum who has done so.I am always receptive to others' concerns and strive to foster conversations that encourage the sharing of diverse perspectives. Through my many years, I have learned that one can always gain valuable insights by listening closely to others. It's important to sift through their ideas and retain the best ones, while never disregarding their thoughts entirely.
His statement is troubling and even more troubling for me is that a large number of folks don't see the contradiction in that statement.
Trump would have me believe that Harris is a communist, frequently calling her comrade Harris. Yet he verbalizes thoughts that are strictly aligned with Communism. What is one to think of that? How to handle such contradiction?
It is obvious at this point that maga has gutted the Republican party. But what I believe I'm seeing now? Cracks in the maga base. It's splintering into 2 factions.
One group, these are the OG'S, takes his statements exactly as they are spoken. They believe that he honestly and accurately conveys his positions and thoughts. And this group really likes everything he says. They don't ever try and tell you "well, he really meant this...". There is no red line for these folks. These are Trump's "ride or die" followers. If he said he wants to jail folks for disagreeing with judges or take away certain medias broadcast license, it's cool with them.
And then we have another group who is emerging. They are the group that plays cleanup crew all over media. They take his questionable or offensive statements and through painstaking written gymnastics rework them as "just a joke". "sarcasm". "He really meant to say...". "I believe he was talking about..". And the litany of other common excuses. They do this in service of a man who never comes back to clean up or clarify such statements. These folks position themselves as what I like to call Trump whisperers. But these are also folks who can see a red line coming.
In time, the split will lead to the dissolution of maga. Because the one thing they can both agree on? Unity isn't a priority.I see the argument that Kamala Harris's statements may align more with socialist views rather than outright communism as an important point to consider. While some of her policy proposals—like expanding access to healthcare and increasing taxes on the wealthy—might reflect a more socialized approach to governance, I believe labeling her as a communist oversimplifies her actual positions and misrepresents the broader political spectrum. From a conservative perspective, it’s understandable to focus on her advocacy for government intervention in the economy, which can be viewed as a threat to individual freedoms and capitalist principles. After researching her views, I personally feel that she is left of Bernie Sanders and would classify her as a socialist. The contradiction often arises when critics conflate these nuanced positions with extreme ideologies. I think it’s important to engage in a more reasoned debate about her policies rather than resorting to labeling her.
As a Trump supporter, I see the claim that MAGA has gutted the Republican Party as a misunderstanding of the movement's impact and evolution. Rather than being a detriment, I believe that Trump's influence has energized a base that is passionate and engaged, bringing new voters into the fold who might have felt alienated by traditional Republican politics. The idea that MAGA is splintering into factions suggests that there’s a misunderstanding of what this movement represents.
Many of us appreciate Trump's straightforwardness and see it as a refreshing break from typical political doublespeak. While some may interpret his comments literally, it’s important to recognize that he speaks in a way that resonates with a lot of Americans who are tired of political correctness and want leaders who communicate honestly, even if it ruffles some feathers.
Labeling the so-called “ride or die” supporters as blindly loyal ignores the complexity of why people support him. We see him as someone who stands up for American interests, and it’s that commitment to America First policies that unites us. Instead of focusing on supposed divisions, we should be looking at how the MAGA movement is pushing back against a political establishment that has often failed to deliver for everyday Americans. Ultimately, the core of MAGA is about championing freedom of speech and challenging a media narrative that frequently misrepresents our values.
I believe we’re witnessing a significant divide in our society, with two distinct sides emerging, each passionately advocating for the change they support. From my perspective, we have one segment that is focused on Trump’s agenda, which centers on prioritizing America and fostering growth. Many of us see this as the number one issue because we want an America that preserves the once-vibrant American Dream for our children and grandchildren.
On the other hand, the opposing side promotes a government-centric approach that suggests people don’t need to work hard for their dreams; instead, they will be taken care of through government support. This creates a stark contrast: one side emphasizes the value of hard work and personal responsibility in achieving the American Dream, while the other offers a safety net that can lead to dependence on government handouts. The choice is clear—should we strive for opportunity through effort in a great country, or should we rely on the government to provide for us?Here in Brazil we had an election in 2022 between a coservative and a socialist. The socialist commented several times throughout the election that he was not a communist and declared that anyone that said that was spreading fake news.
Last year he declared that he was proud to be a communist. This is the CNN link https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/politica/n … e-orgulho/
I think you guys need to look at what Harris has done, not believe what she says.I can confirm that I feel she is very far left. I’ve done my research and have no doubt that if she wins, we’ll see the sheep expose a wolf. In my view, a leftist doesn’t revert to a middle ground joyfully, “Momala.” Not much can be done at this point. I think you’re aware that our society is broken, clearly due to ideology. Many here want to move toward what I would call socialist/Marxist principles. I’ve looked closely at what she’s done—she was involved in pushing her agenda under Biden, and now she claims she will fix everything! All that she broke. My question is, why hasn’t she done anything in the past four years? She’s just pinned it all on Old Joe. In my view, she bears the weight of all the problems we’ve had to witness and endure. Trump is right: “They are destroying our country.”
"My question is, why hasn’t she done anything in the past four years?"
Maybe because she's not the president. What were Mike Pence's biggest accomplishments as vice president? Or any vice president for that matter?While it's true that the vice president is not the president, the role still carries significant responsibility and influence, especially when it comes to advancing key priorities and working with the administration. Harris was given important tasks, such as addressing immigration issues and leading the push for voting rights reform, yet her progress on these fronts has been limited. Even though a vice president’s role is traditionally more supportive, history shows that many vice presidents have had significant accomplishments.
For example, Mike Pence played a key role in advancing tax reform and served as the administration's point person on COVID-19 response efforts.
Other vice presidents, like Joe Biden under Obama, were instrumental in securing economic recovery during the 2008 financial crisis and negotiating major legislative deals.
The fact that Harris has not made notable strides in areas where she was tasked raises questions about her effectiveness and ability to influence policy, regardless of not being the president. Being in such a high position, there are opportunities to make a difference, and comparing her track record to past vice presidents shows that more could have been achieved.
So many VPs have left their mark --- Al Gore played a critical role in advocating for environmental issues, which later won him a Nobel Peace Prize. He also spearheaded the "Reinventing Government" initiative, aimed at making federal government operations more efficient and reducing bureaucracy.
Lyndon Johnson Before becoming president after John F. Kennedy's assassination, Johnson was instrumental in pushing for civil rights. He worked closely with Congress to help lay the groundwork for key legislation that he would later pass as president, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Dick Cheney was one of the most influential vice presidents in modern U.S. history. He played a major role in shaping the Bush administration’s response to 9/11, including the War on Terror and the Iraq War. Cheney also wielded considerable influence over foreign and defense policy decisions.
George H.W. Bush: Ronald Reagan’s vice president, Bush was heavily involved in foreign policy and played an active role in key diplomatic missions, including managing U.S. relations during the Cold War. He helped broker U.S. relationships with China and was a crucial figure in military and intelligence operations.
Our Nation VPs as a rule offer accomplishments throughout our history. Harris has been all but invisible.While there were many VPs that were more than insignificant, there were many more who you would not remember today. But you look at the pattern, the more prominent VPs brought in relatively more experience than the President they served under, that includes Cheney, LBJ and GHW Bush
Regardless, she will be a continuation of the Biden Administration.
As much as Bush Sr. was a continuation of Reagan's Admin.I understand your perspective. While her lack of experience might be seen as a potential get-out-of-jail-free card, for doing a poor job as VP. Is she then to be considered a suitable candidate for president? She has been largely absent from the political scene in the past four years. What makes you believe she’s capable of handling the role? Have you thought all this through?
It's time to say, hey we are talking about the future of our Nation. Common sense must be considered. Are you liking what you see from Harris? I see her as a person that is in way over her head. Have you been watching her interviews?I think Biden has insured no matter who comes in next, they are way in over their heads...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWyWAYKJK8cAre you saying that China fired a ballistic missile right toward the U.S. after this woman basically said, "Don't mess with me, China"? Are not they the party of saying words matter?
Oh my God, I completely missed the report about China launching a missile into the Pacific Ocean. Is Joe just off playing beach party bingo this weekend? No problem. I mean I guess Harris is around to handle any little problems. OMG. We are so close to the Big Bang, are we not? Will that be what it takes to wake up those that are roaming around in fog? We are facing some scary times.Where the USofA stands at the moment:
Spending 1 Trillion dollars every 3 months MORE than we 'make' as a nation.
Spending 1 Trillion dollars a year on interest on our debt, which is more than we spend on an out of control Defense Budget.
At war with Russia
At war in the Middle East against nationless factions (IE - Hamas, Houthis, Hezbollah) backed by Iran, which Biden helped ensure received hundreds of billions of dollars.
At war in central Africa, in the Sudan, etc.
A looming confrontation in the Pacific, China, North Korea (now militarily aligned with Russia) don't forget, there is an Armistice with North Korea, so the war never officially ended.
Other things Biden allowed that went under the radar:
Much of America's infrastructure, its energy companies, its farms are now owned by foreign entities, something almost forced on energy companies to comply with and meet the new 'Green Energy' regulations the Biden Administration put into place.
Open Borders... joining the UN Global Compact on Migration. Funding flying in and housing hundreds of thousands of migrants.
Joining the Paris Accord Agreements.
Rescinding Trump's ban on Chinese technology being used in critical Networking and Internet providers allowing them easy access to our Internet, even our SIPR net, which the Chinese have successfully hacked into since.
Alienating former allies of America, like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which have since dropped trading oil in the dollar and have joined BRICS.
The amount of harm done to America in the last 4 years I would never have imagined could be accomplished by any one Administration in so short a time.
That is what I mean by no matter who it is they will be in way over their heads.Wasn't the firing of this missile a test? And the Pentagon was notified by China of the test? And didn't our country do a similar test just a few months ago?
China has a history of conducting missile tests and military exercises in response to various geopolitical tensions, including statements or actions by U.S. officials. While these tests may occur following provocative statements or actions, it's not always a direct response to specific comments from the U.S. president.
For example, missile tests have been more common during periods of heightened tensions over issues like Taiwan, trade disputes, or military maneuvers in the South China Sea. The timing of these tests can sometimes align with diplomatic disputes or criticism from U.S. officials.
Sharlee, I have to remember that In 2016 Trump was elected having absolutely NO political experience at any level, over Hillary Clinton who was a senator from New York. While you thought that he was a hero, I thought his term was abysmal.
Why is her supposed lack of experience, even though she was a Senator, attorney General in California, so much more than Trump's? You trusted this media star who had no idea about what it meant to be President and was not anxious to learn. Why cannot I have the same confidence in Harris?
I believe that she can rise to the occasion just like the relative neophyte, JFK did in 1961. She is at least as experienced as Trump as far as I am concerned.
My common sense tells me that she is a better candidate by means of temperament and her ideals for the country than Trump. So, yes, I like what I see and am more than behind her in our desire to defeat Trump.
Ultimately, the core of MAGA is about championing freedom of speech and challenging a media narrative that frequently misrepresents our values.
When he states that he would jail people for exercising their right to free speech and calling to revoke the broadcast licenses of media? Doesn't sound like a champion or Free speech to me.
"From a conservative perspective, it’s understandable to focus on her advocacy for government intervention in the economy, which can be viewed as a threat to individual freedoms and capitalist principles."
If her economic plans are government intervention, what are Trumps? One aims toward growing the economy from the bottom up and the other aims at top down . Aren't they both government intervention?
"The choice is clear—should we strive for opportunity through effort in a great country, or should we rely on the government to provide for us?"
I suppose I do not look at components of the Harris economic plan as giveaways or the government "providing" for people. This view would indicate that there is no benefit to such programs.
For example, child tax credits. Are these giveaways that have no benefit?
I believe it's safe to say that the credits are associated with reduced poverty, higher financial and household stability, improved child and maternal health, better educational achievement, stronger future economic outcomes. It's an investment in the future. It's an investment that has a great return.
As far as being left of Bernie Sanders, I know that narrative is out there but I don't see any similarities to her campaign and his of 2016. Her speech at the Pittsburgh economic club made that crystal clear."If her economic plans are government intervention, what are Trumps? One aims toward growing the economy from the bottom up and the other aims at top down . Aren't they both government intervention?"
Harris has discussed several policy proposals and priorities during her time in office and on the campaign trail, but her specific plans for accomplishing these promises have often been more general in nature, lacking the detailed blueprints seen in some other political figures' platforms. While she has been vocal about issues like racial justice, economic inequality, healthcare, and climate change, much of her focus has been on the values behind these initiatives rather than outlining detailed, step-by-step strategies for implementation.
Her rhetoric tends to focus on broad themes of fairness and justice, but the details of how she would implement economic reforms remain unclear. In contrast, Donald Trump has provided more concrete proposals, particularly when it comes to economic growth and job creation. His plan includes continuing the pro-growth policies of his first term, such as cutting taxes and reducing regulations, which he argues will stimulate business investment and create jobs.
Trump has also been a strong advocate for bringing manufacturing jobs back to the United States through policies like renegotiating trade deals, such as the USMCA, and imposing tariffs on countries that he believes engage in unfair trade practices, such as China. His economic strategy focuses on reducing the tax burden for businesses and middle-class Americans, promoting energy independence through domestic oil and gas production, and ensuring that the U.S. remains competitive on the global stage by limiting overregulation. Trump's plan for job growth and economic recovery is grounded in his belief that lowering taxes and reducing bureaucratic red tape will allow businesses to thrive, thereby increasing employment opportunities, especially in skilled trades and manufacturing. By providing a more specific roadmap, Trump offers a clearer strategy for economic improvement compared to Harris, whose plans often lack detailed pathways to achieving the broad reforms she advocates.
While programs like tax credits or social assistance can offer short-term relief and benefits, there are significant drawbacks to relying on such systems for long-term economic success. One of the primary concerns is that these programs can create a dependency on government assistance, disincentivizing work and personal responsibility over time. While proponents argue that tax credits reduce poverty and improve outcomes, they can also discourage labor force participation if people become reliant on benefits rather than seeking employment or advancing in their careers.
Historically, America thrived on a strong work ethic, innovation, and a capitalist system that rewarded hard work and entrepreneurship, without the extensive social programs seen in modern times. The American economy has traditionally been built on individual initiative, and many argue that over-reliance on government programs erodes the self-reliance and ambition that have driven U.S. prosperity.
While these programs aim to reduce poverty, they are costly and require extensive funding, which often comes from taxpayers. This places a greater burden on working individuals and businesses, potentially stifling economic growth and job creation.
"Trump represents Patriarchy, White Supremacy, Christian Religious Extremism, who is a traitor to America, a Putin puppet, and an existential threat to Democracy itself."
Yes, through both his words and actions that Is how I see him. I hold a person accountable for what he or she directly says and does, no spin needed
-------
For a national candidate, Trumps failings go far beyond this idea "of youre only human".Yeah, the difference is how a person perceives him.
You have people that believe the MSNBC version of him...
You have people who believe the FOX (or whatever) version of him...
And then there are people who don't align/trust/follow either or any media news source.Ken,
I cannot deny what the man clearly says and does, I do not need a media mouthpiece to tell me that.
So the ones that do not trust any media news source are coming up with their conclusions from thin air?Yeah, sorry, if you believe this guy...
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zht80LFLlPQ
...is the evil you just quoted and said he was...
Then yeah, you are probably far more influenced by 'media mouthpieces' than you want to believe.
I don't mean that to be insulting...
You can disagree with Trump without seeing him as evil-incarnate...
You can say, I don't want to go back, I want to move forward, and then explain the future you want... say you want to transform America... say you want to reinvent the world and do away with borders.
It doesn't matter, just give up the hate for the guy, the belief that if he were elected that would be the 'end of Democracy'... come on.
Our war against Russia, in the Middle East, in Africa, and the escalating tensions in the Pacific are far more likely to bring the 'end of Democracy'.Let me give you example as to how my reasoning works.
Before an audience of over 60 millions, Trump accused the Haitian community in Springfield Ohio of hunting down dogs and cats in the community to eat them. Is that not what he said? I heard that as did millions of others.
First of all the comment was unvetted as to its accuracy, I am going to believe the mayor of Springfield and the Governor of the state before I believe muckraker, Vance, as to the authenticity of Trump's statements over national TV.
Second of all, targeting a community the way he did is not something I would expect from a candidate for President, it was a dumb comment needlessly divisive and callous. This was not an inappropriate place to introduce such nonsense.
While he may not be the epitome of evil, he is the epitome of stupidity and poor judgement. That is not the kind of reasoning I want from those that seek to be my leader.
And I did not get any of that from MSNBC, I got it from the horses' ass, itself.
You cannot spin that which is clearly heard and seen as coming from the subject in question.
Yes, from his behavior and his record, he appears to capable of doing or saying anything, the Constitution not withstanding. Now that just my opinion.Its interesting, when I heard this it didn't even make an impact...
I spent several months with Haitian migrants, so I knew overly well what he was referring to without having any context (yet) to what was being said regarding Springfield, OH.
For me, when I saw the initial posts on here I was perplexed almost by people's reactions to it.
In my mind I was thinking: Yeah, what do you expect to happen when you bring in 20k Haitian migrants in just a couple years?
I knew the reality, I knew Haitians would eat anything they could get their hands on... lizards, rodents, fish, sea turtles... anything with some meat to it.
Again... its a difference between knowing what the reality is... versus not knowing and projecting or guessing at what it is.
Life in Haiti is as tough as can be imagined, as dangerous as can be imagined, and no food source is considered anything more than that.
They don't think of geese or cats as pets, they don't think of sea turtles as endangered species... they think of them in terms of food.Yet you knew the reality, but that is not proof before spreading such things. Are the Haitians wild animals incapable of adjusting to a new environment? None of them in Springfield faced the threat of starvation.
Your "reality" is different from the Haitian community in town whose leaders want to sue the Trump campaign. I can't speak to how successful they will be, but Trump and Vance deserve it.
The people are not in Haiti, and spreading such vicious stereotypes base on some sort of conjecture is not kosher with me.
Often times, your reality could just be another biased opinion. Do I believe you and your reality or the official statements of elected officials on the scene? How do YOU know so much about Haitians, what is the basis of your "reality"?
Yes, it has made an "impact" on me which was entirely negative.In that sense, I understand why so many have a problem with it...
And I am fine with you saying Trump is a dumb-ass that says the dumbest things and is always insulting people and I don't want him as President.
And you can add to that you want changes he doesn't believe in, and you support changes Biden made that you know he will get rid of.
That would be great... the evil-incarnate... existential threat that must be eliminated talk is not a good look at this time.
I know, everyone believes on "your side" that if you can just get rid of Trump this all goes away, and maybe it does... maybe no-one else is capable of stepping in and rallying the American people for the issues as he does with as much popularity as he has.
I'd rather get 4 more years of Trump... simmer down some of these wars being escalated... clean out some of the corrupt cronies that have been occupying DC for decades (IE - Biden, Clinton, Pelosi, etc.) and let some new blood come in and represent the Democrats in 2028.
I think that would be so much better for America, for the World, if we could take a hard pass on the continuation of the Biden Administration under Harris.First of all, shame on you for misappropriating the word "kosher".
Second, why do we need to deny reality?
If I say "Koreans eat dogs" is that offensive, racist, why?
I know it to be true, its called kagogi, it used to be sold on street corners throughout Korea when I was there.
So while I agree, they should have KNOWN what they stated to be true, to have evidence, more than the couple of local news reports making note of it being suspected to have occurred...
I also believe people need to lighten up, deal with reality... which when you believe in 72 sexes and that men can be women and feelings are more important than facts, I guess would be a hard thing.
I guess we are at the point where Names really can do more harm than Sticks and Stones... dangerous times aye?The term is commonly used and is not an insult to anyone.
Yes, Koreans may eat dogs, but to attack a Korean community in America accusing them of eating dogs in a residential community without incontroversial proof is stereotypically racist. Am I bringing negative attention tomentire community that may be totally unjustified? Can you prove that Koreans are eating American dogs as residents in America? That is still not the sort of information that I expect a presidential candidate to speak of in a nationally televised debate.
Regardless of how we want spin things, bigotry is never a matter of "lightening up"
You're telling me about Korea, what about Haiti? I am certain that Korean communities in America are not hunting down the neighbors pets and eating them?Yes, I get it.
I understand, to make the accusation without having substantial proof is idiotic on so many levels... and yeah, it carries racial undertones...
And without substantial proof to back what you claim is happening... it is the racial component that is going to be highlighted, because it is Trump.
It is the MIGRANT aspect of it... as in these are Haitians that were flown in over the course of the last few years, that makes it completely understandable to ME... based on my experiences with Haitians.
You know the progression of this right? First we are told that Trump was lying, and only later are we told that it is racist to oppose this.
Its funny, looking back on the last 12 years, the photos I have been cleaning out tell an interesting tale:
Those are all between 4 and 12 years old I believe...
A select few... I can honestly say it appears ALL of our issues have gotten worse since 2012 in all categories.
With most of the same corrupt cronies that were controlling things back in 2012 still there today. Schumer, Pelosi, Biden, etc.
Same leaders... 30-50 years worth... no wonder we have the same problems only worse. Feinstein, McCain, others staying for decades and dying from old age/disease while in office.
In that sense, I understand why so many have a problem with it...
OK
-------
And I am fine with you saying Trump is a dumb-ass that says the dumbest things and is always insulting people and I don't want him as President.
Saying the dumbest things has to correlate with dumb beliefs and attitudes, why should I believe anything beyond what he says? So, yes, I don't want someone like that as President.
-------------
And you can add to that you want changes he doesn't believe in, and you support changes Biden made that you know he will get rid of.
This is true
------------
That would be great... the evil-incarnate... existential threat that must be eliminated talk is not a good look at this time.
I know, everyone believes on "your side" that if you can just get rid of Trump this all goes away, and maybe it does... maybe no-one else is capable of stepping in and rallying the American people for the issues as he does with as much popularity as he has.
He rallies many, but on our side there are rallies in opposition to him and his ambitions for another term
---------------
I'd rather get 4 more years of Trump... simmer down some of these wars being escalated... clean out some of the corrupt cronies that have been occupying DC for decades (IE - Biden, Clinton, Pelosi, etc.) and let some new blood come in and represent the Democrats in 2028.
I know you would, but I have never seen him as a solution. Just one who exacerbates problems, a pliant tool of a sinister right wing cabal who poses the real danger behind Trump and MAGA. There are plenty of the so called RINOs that take issue with Trump, maybe the GOP is in need of a clean sweep?
------------
I think that would be so much better for America, for the World, if we could take a hard pass on the continuation of the Biden Administration under Harris.
We all have a right to our opinion, I just don't subscribe to it.
Like I said, spent several months with several thousand of them.
...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_refugee_crisis
Guantanamo was again opened to hold refugees in June 1994.[7] The new camp held first Haitians then Haitians and Cubans.[8] Cubans only began to be sent to Guantanamo after Clinton reversed a nearly 30-year-old policy of immediate amnesty for Cubans arriving to the US.[16] However, the Cubans were treated noticeably better than the Haitians.[17] In an effort to decrease the size of the camp, the US tried to convince other countries in the Caribbean or Latin America to accept either Haitian or Cuban refugees.[18] Up to 21,000 Haitians were held in Guantanamo at one time during this wave of the Haitian refugee camp.[19] More than 30,000 Cubans were detained at once at the camp.[9] The main problem for the camp in sustaining so many people was primarily infrastructure such as water, electricity, and sewage, not space.[20] Roughly 10,000 Haitians agreed to return home after President Aristide was returned to power in October 1994.[21] However, 6,000 were forcibly repatriated against their wishes.[22] By December 1994, 5,000 Haitian refugees were still at the camp.[19] The UNHCR voiced disapproval of the US policy of forced repatriation of Haitians and suggested it was outside international refugee law in early 1995.[23] Haitians remained at Guantanamo until at least May 1995.[9]You said that you had personal experience working with Haitians, what does Guantanamo have to with your personal involvement? What does any of that have to do with eating pets? If you get hungry enough as was the case with the Donner Party crossing the Sierra Nevadas from present day Nevada into California in the 1840s, you could eat anything even another human being. Those were white guys that circumstances reduced to cannibalism. Relative to that, eating dogs is quite mild.
Not trying to dodge the issue, just do not want to delve into the particulars or memories any more than I have, at this time.
This I hope is far more common place than I believe...
If not this election, they will never have another chance:
"I grew up in abject poverty as a child, and most of my contacts to this day are those in the working class or lower. While the entrenched elites from politics, academia, the C-suites, Hollywood and the media who live in bubbles of luxury and protection won’t notice, those Americans have never been more scared in their lives. Not only about their future, but about their present.
Those I speak with on a regular basis tell me they have never been so frightened about circumstances out of their control. Circumstances they believe were deliberately and politically exacerbated by the Democrats and most especially by the Biden-Harris administration.
There is something going on. These times do not feel like the others for the working class. They feel much more foreboding."This is true. The Democratic Party used to be for the solidly middle & working classes, now it has reversed its stance to be for the upper middle & upper classes. Starting in the 1980s, many lower middle & working classes began to flock to the Republican Party. Obama started the shift of the Democratic Party to the upper middle & upper class elites.
It is not only a political war but a socioeconomic war. The Democrats who are upper middle & upper classes couldn't care less about the solidly middle & working classes who are struggling with the effects of inflation. All they are concerned about is reproductive & lifestyle issues. Inflation doesn't affect them. Remember what Whoopi Goldberg said on THE VIEW, people don't pay attention to inflation, vote Democrat to guarantee your freedoms. There is a saying what good is freedom to a starving man. The Democrats are just luring people. They don't care if people are suffering as a result of their policies. They don't care about remedy the socioeconomic conditions of America whatsoever. They just want to implement more inane social programs. Republicans want to concentrate on the crucial issues which concern realistic, aware Americans.Thanks for sharing, Ken!
Just as an aside, in contrast, neighborhoods are not canned being the same everywhere. I know you know that, yet I take heed of what the author wrote regarding the 'middle class', though which middle class and which neighborhood. Certainly, not the one I live in with a large Hispanic population. And, they are middle class, though may be closer to lower-middle class. There fears are not the same as expressed by the author of the article. One thread that runs through their woven cloth is education for their kids.There fears may not be the same... but the dreams they have for themselves and their children are probably very similar to my own.
For your enjoyment:
Harri Hursti Hacks a Voting Machine LIVE on PBD Podcast!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTtZgN9oYVQ
I don't know how I missed the article or this discussion about it, but here I am, late to the show... again!
I enjoyed the article, it is very well written. (love that he used the word "reckoning" I too used it in an article a while back)
I, personally, don't believe that the Dem Party has ever stood for anything but, power and greed! They've never cared for the hard-working, paycheck to paycheck crowd. But the fallacy, "Dems are for the little people", "for the working man", blah, blah, blah, has always worked for them, so they go with it.
As a little kid I knew that LBJ was a condescending, phony. I may not have known the meaning of the word "condescending", but I knew that I didn't like him, didn’t trust him! I couldn't wait til I could vote and my first vote went to Ronald Reagan (R).
So it has taken a little longer for others to figure out the frauds & cons that the Dem Party is....
All of these same things were happening in 2020. People weren't excited for Joe Biden. Breakfast crowds would have one lone person off in the corner that would admit to being for Biden. Trump had the massive rallies, streets lined with people for miles. Boat parades, signs everywhere, all the excitement we currently see. While nothing, nada, was happening for Biden-Harris. Odd!! All I will add, I, too, hope and pray that this election is "too big to rig", really tired of Dems getting away with murder. (so to speak!!)
Im sorry. That person writes opinion pieces on how awesome is Trump at golf and how RFK jr should lead the investigation of the Trump assassination attempt, etc. So I wont waste my time.
But thanks for posting new/different topics!Americans lost their jobs to foreigners imported by the Biden Administration at taxpayer expense.
The foreign born are people who reside in the United States but who were not U.S. citizens at birth. Specifically, they were born outside the United States (or one of its outlying areas such as Puerto Rico or Guam), and neither parent was a U.S. citizen. The foreign born include legally-admitted immigrants, refugees, temporary residents such as students and temporary workers, and undocumented immigrants. However, the survey does not separately identify people in these categories.Extraction regarding the benefits of Capitalism:
"Capitalism ... allows individuals to make choices about their careers, investments, and businesses, whereas a non-capitalist system restricts these choices, limiting the ability to pursue higher-paying jobs, and yes, better lives ...
... capitalism ... has driven economic growth and job creation in the U.S. and enabled Americans to strive for that American dream." Sharlee
Does VP Harris understand the benefits of Capitalism as she advocates for implementing policies based on an "Opportunity Economy"?
We should fear that the answer is "NO."Policies based on an "Opportunity Economy"
Harris’s stark outlook on issues often reflects a strong emphasis on systemic inequality and the urgent need for comprehensive reforms. She is an advocate for bold, decisive action to address critical social issues, such as racial injustice, economic disparity, and climate change. Her rhetoric frequently highlights the necessity of government intervention to rectify historical injustices and create equitable opportunities for marginalized communities.
For example, Harris has been vocal about the need for police reform in the near past, and criminal justice reform, framing these issues as essential to creating a fairer society. She often when running for president in 2020, discusses the impact of systemic racism and advocates for policies aimed at dismantling these structures, such as comprehensive immigration reform and voting rights protections. Additionally, her approach to economic policy emphasizes the importance of investing in social safety nets and public services to ensure that all citizens have access to healthcare, education, and housing.
Moreover, her stark outlook often encompasses a sense of urgency regarding climate change, pushing for aggressive policies to combat its effects and promote sustainability, as she did in the Biden administration. This perspective reflects a belief that the government has a pivotal role in addressing these multifaceted challenges and that failing to act decisively could perpetuate cycles of inequality and injustice. Overall, Harris’s outlook can be characterized by a call for socialist-like reforms.
"Fear is real. Fear does motivate. Working-class Americans do fear that elite-enabling liberal policies beyond their control are robbing them of their quality of life now and well into their futures.
But many of these Americans have also realized that there is one way to combat that fear and regain some of that control by voting.
I predict that there is a reckoning coming in November from those tens of millions of scared voters. And I suspect that reckoning is going to produce a landslide victory for Trump."
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/48 … %20OpinionCan anyone who can translate the Trump language for me, tell me what his strategy is? I will give rare kudos to Trump for standing behind a supporter as toxic as Mark Robinson in North Carolina. But his support is misplaced, he in one of the most toxic leading members of the GOP right now. Trump's loyalty may be misplaced in a battleground state, where he may need to pick his allies more carefully. This might tip North Carolina to the Democrats.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-lede … h-carolinaIt’s perplexing why Trump would choose to support this man. Could it be that his endorsement is a strategic political move? North Carolina is a vital battleground state, and backing a strong gubernatorial candidate helps Trump preserve his influence. Supporting Robinson, who has, believe it or not, demonstrated his capability to win the Republican primary for the North Carolina gubernatorial election. He secured approximately 63% of the vote,
Trump may well be using this as a tactic to ensure a Republican victory in the presidential race. Despite the controversies surrounding Robinson, he still enjoys significant popularity among segments of North Carolina’s electorate. At any rate, Trump has stepped into the mud with this guy.
This is a head-scratcher.i think that he is doubling down on his base of support in North Carolina, they are the only ones that could accept the Trump-Robinson association. I dont know about the people who are not diehard Trump, such an association might prove disturbing for them.
This is the second time that Trump has mis stepped. He did in Georgia attacking Governor Kemp at a rally there when Trump should have considered that for any chance at success in battleground Georgia, all hands need to be on deck.
Trump has only "the best people". He knew who the guy was. The recent scandal is not the only one. Yet, he called him "better than Martin Luther King".
He said this recently, he likes anyone who likes him. There you have it. A LOT of awful people like him. And many of those currently work (and would) work for him.IB, Trump has a habit of saying dumb things. To make such a statement he obviously knows nothing at all about Dr. King and his times. This Robinson guy is a total disgrace, who does not recognize it? It is just going to make moderates question his judgement.
He has proven time and time again that he is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. It is obvious that his supporters do not support him based on his temperament and knowledge. It is due to his playing to white Republicans darkest fears and insecurities. In the face of that powerful influence, he does not have to KNOW anything.Yup, Trump says a lot of dumb things...
And then the one's that are supposed to say the smart things (Harris, Biden, etc.), tell us blatant lies that most of us can detect, or tell us nonsense stories about middle-class experiences and how they will create "a future unburdened by what has been".
Thats what the Democrats are these days, gimmicks, labeling others, drumming up fear, telling blatant lies, getting the media to help them every which way during the debates:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WATb4fet7MA
Its gotten to be comical... comical that anyone has faith in this Administration, comical anyone thinks Biden is running things...
The joke of trying to say Trump is unfit for the job and would end life as we know it... when we already had a Trump Presidency and we were all doing great until the "china virus"... and the FBI censorship, the FBI induced "insurrection"...
Only the people who tune into the View and believe what they hear are capable of believing the BS the Democrats have been spinning.
All that said, Harris will win... I see no other scenario allowed to play out.As for your opinion regarding Harris and Walz it is just you and the right wing community that cling to that. I don't buy it.
Excuses, excuses and more excuses, Ken?
The media did not force him to say all the stupid s*** he says on national television. The media had nothing to do with Trump embracing Robinson.
People who consistently say dumb things cant be too terribly smart.
I don't think Trump is smart enough to bring in the authoritatism, but there are plenty of far more dangerous Rightwingers behind the scenes that are chomping at the bit.
The Republicans tell me to my face that they have a fascist, totalitarian bent, so why the need to spin?
Because, I believe that the "silent majority" will be composed of so many Trump supporters coming from under the floorboards in the dark of night to cast their ballots.
Like I said, if Harris can win, it will be a pleasant surprise.My earlier comment was ignored. I guess the proper etiquette is to insult Trump (or other Republicans) before speaking ill of Democrats?!
Not sure why... because Dems certainly never insult their own, no matter what!
That's just the way it is, I suppose.
"If Harris wins" nothing "pleasant" will come of it.Well, do you not insult Harris and other Democrats before speaking ill of Republicans? Do Republicans insult their own, not on this forum so far.
Until we Democrats can vanquish Trump and MAGA, that is probably how it will stay.
Let me ask you this... are you happy with what you have?
The argument of its better than Trump... why?
Because they created a World War III scenario for us to live thru?
Because they are spending billions helping foreigners enter into America?
... and then supporting many of them with our social services?
Because you feel Transgenders need to be a protected minority and allowed to enter any opportunity formerly reserved for women?
Because children getting sex-changes should be a protected right?
... even though they can't legally do anything else because, you know, they are children that don't understand the ramifications of their actions?
This Administration has been a disaster... on every level... and continuing on with the same people who gave us the last 4 years does not bode well for the next 4 years.Ken, life is more relative than absolute particularly when we are not talking about the physical sciences.
Am, I happy? In an absolute sense, NO, but in relative sense, I can live with not having everything that I seek.
In a relative sense, having an avowed racist, xenophobe and misogynist as President will make me more less happy. I cant be expected to support such a person at any level. In the interests of self-preservation, I wont vote for racists.
Yes, there are concerns that you mention that need to be addressed, but in relative world, I have to take the lesser of two evils, and Trump certainly is not the "lesser".
Trump and his party have nothing to redeem them in my eyes right now.Allowing in 425,000 KNOWN foreign criminals... 13,000 of which are known for murdering MULTIPLE people.
Sending hundreds of billions to Ukraine to fight an INSANE war against a country with the MOST nukes.
Losing allies like UAE and Saudi Arabia who joined the BRICS.
I have been trying to tell you for a few years now... in your fight against racism, or your fight for the rights of others, you have allowed the people into DC that are going to destroy the nation.
You don't have to worry about Trump bringing us back to the 1950s... Biden/Harris are going to bring us to something much worse than that.Yes, you have been telling me, but I see evidence to the contrary. Why don't I have to worry about Trump bringing us back to the fifties? That seems to be what he and his party are advocating for. The real danger is your people and candidates. Am I any safer allowing the equivalent of the KKK to infiltrate Washington? I doubt it. Who knows how much of this stuff that you cite is an exaggeration? You have been known for that.
The fight against Republican based racism is right in my back yard and not on far away shores. I am satisfied with the Harris/Walz agenda.Yup... heard all the same scare tactics before... but the truth keeps coming out and shining light on the real threats to Democracy:
DOJ report shows FBI field sources stormed the Capitol on January 6th
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aItGIPk0eKAThese stall tactics work for them. Most people will have forgotten all about J6 when we're 4 more years down the road. When it is brought up, all that will be remembered... because that’s the way it was sold, 'Trump urged supporters to storm the Capitol Bldg.' Damage done! Nothing else matters.
So, people the FBI had flipped to be informants participated. That's hardly surprising or the bombshell the right thinks it is. Go watch an episode of Miami Vice.
Sure...
Whistleblower report: FBI used Jan. 6 riot to mislead on domestic terrorism spike
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … ism-spike/
Former FBI employees accuse bureau of ‘weaponization’ against conservatives
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/w … servatives
FBI hero paying the price for exposing unjust 'persecution' of conservative Americans
https://nypost.com/2022/09/21/fbi-hero- … americans/
So, if the FBI paid Confidential Human Sources or Agent Provocateurs to act out on J6, or if Agents in disguise participated in J6... its not a problem?
They were just doing their job... to create evidence? ... to create a riot?
Exactly how are we supposed to trust the FBI to tell us the truth?
You know... like they told us the truth about the Dossier and Russian puppet accusations? Like they told us the truth about the Hunter Biden laptop?
Yeah...Ken, had to touch - base, traveling --- but, had to know what you think about today's bold move, Iran to launchs missiles into Israel.
The continued escalation...
WWIII is imminent... as in any day... either something done to Russia or Iran to escalate it to the next level where we directly begin to engage.
That will pull in North Korea and Belarus immediately on the BRICS side and I'd imagine the NATO countries would get around to it on the SWIFT side of things.
China is going to play the role that America played in WWI and WWII... it is going to sit on the sidelines playing Neutral, everyone else will beat the crap out of each other then they will come in and clean up, dominating the next century ahead.
Some Americans can sense that something is seriously wrong and realize Trump is the only way to avoid it.
And maybe not even then... most likely not even then... things have progressed too far, and they still have a couple months to push it further.
The guy who praises Musk for union-busting is for the working class? The one who gives tax cuts that benefit himself and those like him the most is for the working class?
Sounds like the author has a big case of TDS - Trump Demagogue Syndrome.Yeah, all those millionaires Musk created, with the Stock incentives he has for his employees.
I was just speaking to a Security Officer that works for Space X the other day, in just a few short years he amassed Stock in Space X that is worth hundreds of thousands today.
The folks who have worked for Tesla for more than a few years have millions of dollars worth of stock, if they fully participated.
Musk is such an evil, backwards, character.
Related Discussions
- 76
What Happened To The Democratic Party We Once Knew
by Sharlee 10 days ago
What happened to the Democratic Party we once knew? It seems that over the years, the party has shifted, and not in a way that resonates with the people who once felt truly represented by it. In the past, the Democratic Party prided itself on standing up for working-class Americans, fighting for...
- 20
Why Do A Majority Of Black American's Vote Democratic?
by Sharlee 7 months ago
The historical bond between the Democratic Party and the Black community in the United States is rich and complex, marked by pivotal moments and initiatives, particularly in the 1960s, that underscore Democrats' support for Black citizens. In this brief overview, I will present a condensed timeline...
- 3
Democrats' working-class exodus sets off reckoning within party
by Readmikenow 3 weeks ago
It seems as if the democrats are not seen as best representing the working class."WASHINGTON — Demoralized Democrats are soul-searching and blaming each other after President-elect Donald Trump's resounding election victory exposed erosion among working-class support for Democrats that poses a...
- 172
Has Donald Trump Killed the So-Called Republican Party?
by Scott Belford 9 months ago
In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any...
- 40
The DARK SIDE of the Democratic Party-Do THEY CARE About America?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 2 weeks ago
It is not as much as an ideological war but a socioeconomic/educational war as well. The Democratic Party now represents the upper middle to upper class, highly educated populace. The Democratic Party has a covert disdain for the solidly middle class although the party claim that...
- 90
Trump Has Won, ACCEPT IT
by Grace Marguerite Williams 8 days ago
Trump has become the 47th President. Now, the hatred has escalated to full force. There are those who has an unfounded, phobic fear that Trump will turn America into a dictatorship. There are some who even believe, baited by MSNBC, CNN, & other left leaning media outlets, that Trump...