- Page 3

[Pauly3]

Kad said: "I have no argument for you, Pauly, because there’s no point. Your whole stance is built on unsubstantiated or false beliefs.

But if you think Trump has been preserving the country, then the country isn’t worth preserving."

 

This is a discussion where I have briefly provided my opinions.  Yes, some of what I have stated is unsubstantiated.  How are you any different?  Is it your stance that I can't or shouldn't offer an opinion that hasn't been substantiated, but you along with the mass media are good to go with unsubstantiated claims?  Regarding false beliefs, what have I stated that is (substantively) false?

Regarding Trump's perceived tearing down of the country (or not preserving it), I would be interested in someone articulating an argument that this is true.  He was the victim of a which hunt in both the Russian collusion mess and the impeachment, and he's blamed for all corona virus deaths.  He is constantly mischaracterized with the "there were good people on both sides" comment and constantly falsely accused of not denouncing white supremacy.  This only begins to describe the war on Trump.  I see why people think he's torn the country apart, but none of the "war on Trump" items I just referenced is substantiated - and some are just plain (substantively) false.

On the other hand, Trump cares about our border which is something Democrats as recent as Obama used to care about.  He cares about what's going on in the middle east and has gotten us out of a terrible Iran nuclear deal - has not started any wars and is bringing troops home - and is brokering peace between Israel and other countries, which is a big deal despite people like Pelosi calling it "Trump's distraction".  He got rid of the awful NAFTA agreement and implemented a much better USMCA deal.  He cut taxes and regulation, which contributed to an incredible economy with average family income going up five times more in three years than Obama's admin in eight years.  We had incredibly low unemployment (prior to the pandemic), and among the lowest GDP loss of any major economy following the pandemic.  His willingness to sign Criminal justice reform and introduce opportunity zones and a host of others things benefiting underserved communities are things Obama could of done but didn't.  Our military is stronger now than in the prior administration, and we are energy independent.  Both of which are significant.  Trump cares about the integrity of the Supreme Court.  That he has nominated conservative judges doesn't negate this belief.  Trump could have sought to pack the court a long time ago.  He didn't.  Knowing what we know about Democrat wishes to pack the court, perhaps Trump should have sought to pack the court already?  Much of what Trump has overseen is worth preserving.

And unlike what many Democrats wish they could do, Trump will not open the border and pay for healthcare and education for all who enter illegally.  He won't defund police, which would bring more harm into underserved communities rather than reduce it.  He won't kill energy sector jobs and recommend mine workers go learn to code.  He will not participate in the programming of black people to become devoid of the diversity of thought.  He won't pack the Supreme Court.  He won't push to greatly modify or eliminate the 1st or 2nd amendments.  He won't support abortion all the way until the moment of birth.  He won't abolish the electoral college.  He won't lower the voting age to 16.  He won't add states to gain additional representatives and senators for his own party.  He won't raise taxes and implement regulations that would drive businesses away rather than attract them.  He won't denounce America's constitution or the great parts of America's history.

Trump is mean and an inarticulate buffoon, but either he has good instincts or has taken good advice on many of his policies.  Gallup's recent poll indicating 55% of Americans say they are better off now than four years ago is stunning given how lopsided the media, Hollywood and much of the public portrays Trump - and all the more stunning given this pandemic.  Unsubstantiated you could say, yes.  The preponderance of evidence indicating a favorable view of Trump - and a push back against progressive radical ideas (and a lot of nonsense), makes Trump's reelection predictable despite such hatred for Trump and the thus far lopsided polling in favor of Biden.

 

 

[FindingNamo]

The laptop claptrap is the real #OctoberDemise.

[Kad]

You've mentioned the Gallup poll before, yet dismiss the polling showing Biden ahead and dismiss Trump's consistent disapproval. If people are so much better off under Trump's administration, why is Trump so disliked? In fact, that SAME SURVEY from Gallup you seem fond of citing had another result: 56% said Trump did not deserve to be re-elected (Straight from Gallup itself)

So, according to Gallup, people are better off, but they don't think it's because of Trump and don't want to reward him for it. I guess that's just the mass media for you!

You have posted a laundry list of conservative boogeyman talking points- abortions up till the moment of birth, elimination of the 2nd amendment, open borders and more- that do not describe the explicitly stated beliefs or policy history of Biden or any of the Democratic leadership. For all of the rightwing's hatred of AOC, she is a freshman Representative and does not dictate party platform or wield considerable power over it (hence continued progressive anger at Pelosi). Biden beat Sanders, Warren, et al- he is the standard bearer for the party, and won with moderate consolidation.

You have created a shadow candidate that does not exist so you can justify voting against Biden.

Trump won't pack courts because he doesn't have to- McConnell did a perfectly good job of refusing to confirm Obama's nominations and holding vacancies open, and then inventing the bull**** "no SCOTUS confirmations in an election year" rule and then tossing it away. All permissible under our ol' Constitution, sure, but so is expanding the Court or changing its jurisdiction.
 

[Pauly3]

No, I don't dismiss polling showing Biden ahead or dismiss any other evidence.  I try to evaluate all evidence available to me, and then base my opinion on a preponderance of evidence.  To answer your first question, it is quite possible to be doing better than four years ago and dislike Trump at the same time.  I'm an example.  You might be too.  I'm guessing the severity of dislike between you and me is different though, which is an example of nuance that missing in a lot of this type of discussion.  Whether people are better off because of Trump or not, those people will weigh the evidence for and against both Trump and Biden and vote accordingly.  I'm suggesting there will be enough voters that both favor Trump and fear a Biden administration more so than Trump's administration that will result in Trump's re-election.

The talking points aren't boogeyman-like.  Prominent Democrats, including the vice president candidate, have provided good reason to fear they will push Biden toward their wims and desires.  Yes Biden won the moderate consolidation, but will he govern the way moderates would choose?  There is plenty of reason to think he won't.  And no one will be surprised if Biden does not run for a 2nd term or even end up not finishing the first term.

No, Trump doesn't need to pack the court.  But he could take a strategic ploy out of the progressive's playbook anyway and make life more miserable for Democrats.  The point is he hasn't.  If he wins, I believe he won't in the future either.  I have not created a shadow candidate.  Trump is just a better candidate, flaws and all.

 

[FindingNamo]

One of the myriad ways Trump's cult-speak has degraded discourse and ruined language, is to see even the mildest question as "nasty" and any critique at all as "hate."
 

It's a deliberate scrambling of meaning and the truth and it is resulting in an inability for conversation to happen.  I mean, the cops document a Proud Boy dressed in black walking into a precinct during unrest, throwing a malatov cocktail and yelling "Avenge George Floyd" and Trump says it's the radical left.

The words Roxy and Pauly are using, particularly "hate," are attributable to the radical right, but the cult members are trained to reverse the script. That's what cults do.

As Sarah Schulman has pointed out: CONFLICT IS NOT ABUSE.

Hard questions are not nasty.

Criticism is not hate.

Cops killing unarmed black people? That's hate.

 

[JennH]

I don't even know where to begin with this thread and it's misinformation on court packing, borders, immigration, and heaven knows what else...And about the impeachment...why would Mueller risk as much as he did for a witch hunt? There are many ways to interfere in an election.