[How] do you think Trump, with the powers newly granted to the office he’s again running for, will act in his second term?

There could have been better worlds

So… because Trump didn’t get unhinged to the point where he started a nuclear war, you aren’t worried.

• How did you feel about refusing to concede in the 2020 election and creating uncertainty and doubt about the electoral process among a not insignificant minority of voters?

• How about inciting an angry mob to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power on January 6th?

• How did you feel about hoarding and hiding classified documents so that he could show them off to impress his friends and guests? Maybe even sell them if times are tough?

• How about strong-arming the Republican party and installing his family to run it?

• How do you feel about how his SCOTUS has changed the fundamentals of the US government?

• The Chevron deference?

• Bribery?

• Presidential “immunity” for official acts?

• How do you feel about the loss of the right to have an abortion?

Do you think Trump, with the powers newly granted to the office he’s again running for, will act in his second term? Where is your line?

I see. So what has happened over the last 8 years as a direct result of his election isn’t concerning to you?

now that Trump has been president once, I know what it’s like when that happens and don’t worry that much about it anymore).

That sounds disturbingly like you aren’t all that concerned about what a second Trump presidency would be like. It sounds like you think the first one wasn’t as bad as people thought it would be and the second one will similarly be better than people think. Am I misreading your words?

I agree, though I am super disdainful of any argument that is sort of reskinning “other people are really stupid”.

I don’t consider ignorance and susceptible to sophisticated influence campaigns to mean “really stupid”.

Perhaps I’m just using nicer language to say the same thing (or otherwise, ultimately, hold myself to be superior). That’s fair I suppose - but I’m aware of the circumstances and privilege that helped me achieve my perspective. I’m of the belief that, if given similar benefits, most would be just as “superior”.

Now that I’ve demonstrated I’m superior, and humble, I still feel like this could have been avoided if people in the district voted instead of just ignoring the campaign or assuming, like I did, that people in the district would do better.

To anyone reading this, if you are a resident in the district and didn’t vote for Bowman… do better next time for everyone’s sake.

This also assumes voters are informed and engaged, and that political campaigns are honest.

As I understand it, mailers trashing Bowman were like 80% of the mail you received in that district and their ads showed up constantly on Tv. It is possible to manufacture a perceived reality when you have enough money.

Admittedly, I was foolishly hopeful that residents of his district would recognize a racist, conservative piece of shit and vote for Bowman even if they didn’t agree with his stance on Gaza so shame on me.

You can abuse your position as a holdout and potentially fuck everything up in either chamber. Bills require passage in both chambers… but I’m sure you knew that.

I just hope there are enough gains in the house to make his ass irrelevant.

I am just destroyed by this. I genuinely had a little faith in humanity that people wouldn’t fall for this bullshit but I guess I sorely was mistaken.

Laitmer is a conservative, racist piece of shit who is going to take over Manchin’s job of fucking things up for progressives. Fucking hell this sucks.

To top it off, Israel just successfully dropped a political nuke on a critic and will likely have everyone running scared in the future.

I agree they’ve been trying to mitigate this but as I understand it things are quite precarious regardless. It’s not always possible to mitigate a disaster you see coming even if you try your best to prepare for it.

There has been more talk of it since then - that article just was the only concrete & most reputable source I could think of at the time and I didn’t want to turn a post into a research project.

Anyway, while there is more awareness of the issue it is, more or less, the same shady greed-driven risky behavior and nonsense that happened with home mortgages except its commercial mortgages and they’ve seen it coming.

It actually kind of is The Bigger Short

Some folks have been calling this for a while. The Bigger Short

What is so maddening about this comment is how much it proves my point that you don’t see.

…

This was literally the first sentence of my post. I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear enough and “maddened you”.

At this point I feel like it’s akin to art that people just don’t get. The average person doesn’t understand the message or point.

I personally don’t often enjoy art. In particular, the art where the artists are creating some kind of layered metaphor like a blank canvas with a cryptic title or something. The artist might be trying to communicate that consumerism will never fill our need for social contact or whatever but the message is lost on me.

The same thing applies here for most people I think. However, for once I actually see a meaning in it. I get horrified by the act, then I read later how little actual damage is done. Then I reflect on it and realize there is no way the protestors didn’t know that the Mona Lisa was protected by glass. There is no way they accidentally used the least harmful bright paint they could find on Stonehenge… and it occurs to me that I was so immediately upset at the perceived harm but have become desensitized to news of the actual harm of climate change.

I’m not stating that this message is obvious or that people are stupid if they are angry - I’m stating it gets lost and most people don’t get it. Yes, I’m a bit angry that the media often never mentions up front how little damage is done in any headlines I see. It’s usually “climate activists throw soup on Mona Lisa, arrested, condemned by bystanders and art lovers everywhere” not “activists harmlessly throw soup on painting protected by glass to demonstrate humanity’s questionable priorities”. Sure, the glass can be in the article somewhere but nobody bothers to read that far.

Regardless, I agree that the end result isn’t helping because most people don’t understand. I, however, sympathetic with the activists and felt compelled to explain the message as I saw it.

What is most interesting to me is that the “powers that be” have so much influence over the news that I feel like harmless acts of protests have lost their power and are demonized by default. Climate change, income inequality, police abuse, Gaza… I’m honestly concerned that people with very legitimate concerns (at least, in my mind) will have to further escalate their actions in order to feel heard. This is just the beginning I think.

“I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard.” MLK

At this point I feel like it’s akin to art that people just don’t get. The average person doesn’t understand the message or point.

These protestors are committing simple acts that threaten to damage something that people value. People are so very angry that biodegradable paint was sprayed on an ancient monument, or that soup was tossed onto the glass protecting a famous painting.

Yet they continue on with their lives and refuse to hold many corporations accountable while those corporations make our planet less habitable. This would become a wall of text that nobody would read if I tried to just outline the existential threat human society faces thanks to the reckless behavior of many of the organizations. The suffering, loss of life, economic damage… unimaginable… yet we are basically barreling toward that inevitability at full steam.

But I’m sorry, how silly of me. How could I forget that some scientists might lose the opportunity to study undisturbed lichen on Stonehenge this year.

I’m not a huge Cash fan but dude had some rough times with addiction. Alcohol, amphetamines, barbiturates…

It likely cost him his first marriage and he struggled with it his entire life. The movie “Walk the Line”, about Cash, features his substance abuse quite prominently.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Cash#Personal_life

Throughout their marriage, June attempted to keep Cash off amphetamines, often taking his drugs and flushing them down the toilet. June remained with him even throughout his multiple admissions for rehabilitation treatment and decades of drug addiction.

Dude also died less than a year after filming the music video, shortly after his (second) wife, June.

Reznor and Cash both struggled with addiction and guilt for the damage their addiction caused to those they cared about.

Not only is it ridiculous and likely unnecessary, but also consider they’ll need to budget maintenance costs for this.

Totally random, but reading your comment reminded me that there is an Israeli competition climber named Nimrod.

It’s not “tries to assassinate” it’s “tries to have assassinated”. Something tells me Trump couldn’t assassinate a stuff deer.

to do otherwise means we’re actually a combination of Trump supporting tankies who run socket puppet accounts for Russia, and actually want the country to continue sliding towards fascim.

Lol

So yeah, I understand your position just fine.

LOL. Fucking LOL.

One last reply and I’m done.

Yes, I doubt that you are some disgruntled DNC veteran. Yes, in this day and age I can’t be certain that you aren’t just part of some foreign or domestic social media effort to destroy morale and advocate for not voting. However, I only mentioned it offhand and have continued to treat you like an individual. You have not done the same.

I see you as misguided and angry. I see you as unaware of the consequences and ineffectiveness of the actions you advocate for. You never said anything to deny what a second Trump presidency would look like, besides the extremely simple assertion that he’s too stupid and petty. You act like it will be fine.

You ignore the damage he’s already done. Women all over the country are suffering, voting is being suppressed, minorities and LGBTQ+ folks are being denied their rights, environmental laws are getting gutted, and good federal agencies are being stripped of their power… because of the justices and judges that Trump appointed. You ignore all this and state you’re going to refuse to vote for establishment candidates in the general election. Why? Because, like a child, you are angry that your preferred candidate didn’t win the primary. So, to “send a message”, you’re willing to risk pushing our country another four years closer to a fascist theocracy…

Yeah, I’m going to hold my nose and vote with my conscience.

I see. So you are advocating to not vote for Biden. Your not explicitly telling people not to vote for Biden, your just telling them that doing so is actively making the country worse. Got it.

I never said don’t vote, NOT ONCE. I haven’t even appealed to others to follow my lead in not supporting Biden.

So how does one vote in the presidential election and not, in some way, support Biden?

My whole fucking point is that not voting for Biden brings us one step closer to a country I doubt either of us would prefer to live in. I am vocal in my opposition to the choice we’re being given and in my criticism of a great many actions and inactions of the current administration but I’m still going to vote for Biden over Trump and over any third party candidate.

What, exactly, is your point? If not withholding your vote and yelling about it then how does one “not support” Biden?