The Republican identity
Relying on mechanizations and manipulations ie Supreme Court appointees, Gerrymandering, is their substitution for bringing forth policy .
I grew up in New England with sane Republicans. Didn't agree with their politics, except Ed Brooke, but they respected the rule of law. Today's Republican Cult of Personality & its racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, homophobia and misogyny I no longer know this country. As a Jew I know there is no place for me in the America the GOP desires. My grandfather came here from the Azores looking for a better life. I'm now considering moving back there for a safer life.
I have been belaboring my friends with this thought. When W replaced the Iraqi government with the premise of a democracy, it was a parliamentary government that is nothing like our two party electoral college system. What does that say about our democracy?
Thank you for this plain spoken analysis of our situation. I will share with my grandsons. So glad to have found and subscribed to Steady.
“Patriotically” is starkly at odds with overturning an election. He can’t have it both ways. Plus, he did nothing to stop the mayhem. And, undercut his own Vice President.
I don't think any should die. I do believe that we were all created equal and deserve "the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness", and yes that is cliche. I didn't bring up the topic of conservative or non-conservative states, but I don't think the issues you raise are that simplified.
I'm sorry you feel the burden of the world rests solely on women's shoulders. We need strong leadership (Men and Women) in this country. We need men to step up and be men.
It's true I don't know much about the "hell holes" in Mississippi you speak of, but I doubt the causation really traces back to true "conservative" principles.
I hope we can continue with civility.
Donald Hodgins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
1:20 PM (4 minutes ago)
Back when our family unit was living on 7 mile and Middlebelt in Livonia my son Rob had a memorable experience we have never let him forget. I was working at the Sears store just up the street and the wife had a job tending bar at a local golf course's 19th hole. Life was providing us with all the necessities even though things were rather tight. The weather was getting chilly and as a result, the kids were wearing their fall jackets. I can't remember what it looked like but Rob had a coat he wasn't all that thrilled with, I think it looked sort of bluish in color. One crisp afternoon he came home complaining he was cold because he had lost his jacket. The wife, seeing the need, took the poor boy up to Sears and purchased a new one for him. Here is where my son's convoluted way of thinking attracted my attention. Rob came home after a hard day's efforts exploring the outside world wearing the jacket he claimed he had lost. However, the outward appearance of this item of clothing was beyond filthy. It was as if the thing had been buried and then dug up for a nefarious purpose. The mystery was about to be revealed. My son's dislike for his previous coat was so severe he actually dug a hole in the swampy area behind our apartment and buried the thing. He knew the ultimate outcome of not having a jacket to keep him warm would be to get a new one. Beware of the thinking of a 5-year-old. Now here's the rub, Rob never considered the replacement would be more undesirable than what he had recently buried in the muck. Facing a problem with few options my son made a decision. He ventured into the forbidden zone and dug up the first jacket. Upon making an auspices entrance to our apartment he just stood there in the hallway, a look of guilt was draped across his innocent face. To this day we have no idea what happened to the new one the wife had purchased, I think at the time we were afraid to ask. The only thing that was evident, the old coat needed a visit to the washing machine. As for me, I called my shrink.
As usual, Dan, you've stated the facts and the issues clearly and elegantly.
Though I hesitate to say so, I reluctantly agree that it probably is in the best interests of the nation to have a more unified and robust Republican party. Certainly that's true if it becomes free of any cult of personality -- whether Trump, DeSantis, Musk, or anyone else.
I believe the American Christian allegiance to the Republican Party, often decisive in elections, is the biggest unexplained mystery in political history. Hopefully, someday, the American new media will ask the most influential American pastors and priests who lead Sunday morning prayers to explain how the government policies supported by Republicans are consistent with the teaching of Jesus in the New Testament. Or, will they say they encourage their flock to vote Republican simply because the promised lower taxes translate to more dollars that can be donated to the church instead.
tfg - “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” said the guy.
If we are going to have more than 2 political parties we need to have some kind of guardrails put in place to assure that no one person wins with less than 50% of the vote. Democracy is not helped in a winner take all system. For example lets say you have party1,party2,party3,party4,party5. Here are a set of hypothetical vote percetages in the 5 party political race where one person from each of the parties are running against each other:party1 gets 18% of the vote;party2 gets 22% of the vote;party3 gets 25% of the vote;party4 gets 15% of the vote;finally party 5 gets 20% of the vote. Therefore;in this example, the party3 candidate will win this 5 party race with only 25% of the total vote. This means 75% of the vote is going to the other 4 candidates. It would suggest getting the 4 candidates that won the other 75% of the vote and eliminate the party3 candidate in another election round and maybe have the four candidates who lost run again. When that second race concludes, eliminate the winning candidate who wins with less than 50% of the vote since more than 50% of the voters voted against the winner of the four party race. Then do a third round of voting with the three candidates who together got more than 50% of the total vote. If the winner of the 3 party race wins with less than 50% of the vote, then eliminate that candidate and take the 2 candidates who managed to garner more than 50% of the total vote and have them do a fourth round of elections. Since there are only 2 parties running in this fourth round of elections then there should most definitely be someone who can win with at least 50% of the vote. I must admit that I am worried that voters will be least likely to turn out for subsequent elections for the same political office. It would cost a lot of money to set up multiple runoff elections when you have multi party candidates for the same office. For practical reasons, it might be best to have no more than two people running in a particular political race to eliminate the possibility of a political candidate winning less than 50% of the vote in a winner take all election system.
Twenty years ago, when my wife was in college (after a factory career when every N H corp she worked for moved off shore) I was astounded to hear her spouting Reagans bushwa. She said her economics proff believed in trickle down. I met him at graduation and was amazed that he looked like a nice guy who probably still recreated with abandon. The college is still in N H but I'm hoping he
s been offshored.
So, you are saying it's just coincidental and Biden had nothing to do with it? And for those who don't make much money in this world just have to suffer due to this coincidence?
I definitely agree that Oil Companies are "for profit", and that is a good thing. There is a lot of good that has come from capitalism. I did read the article you sent, thank you.
I believe we all need to be good custodians of this earth for this generation and all future generations. But, I definitely do not think we should nationalize Oil companies.
Do you believe that all the farmland belongs to all of us too? How about the forests? What shouldn't be nationalized?
It is beyond comprehension to me how the GOP continues along the path it set in 2016 and maybe a few years prior. HOW do you vote for any of them when there is no policy? They spout hatred and nonsense constantly and also get nothing done. Thank you for this well-rounded view as I feel like someone is finally saying the quiet part out loud.
Here in Canada in elections at all levels of governance it’s seems always to be a toss up. At the federal level there can be four or five party’s running and they each may have some good ideas along with bad ones. Many times when I voted it’s like holding your nose and picking the lessor of the bad ones. There may be someone you think is quite good but your nervous about voting for them because of the way it may devide the votes and someone else you don’t like sneaks up the middle. Quite often the person or party that wins say after they have been voted in that they’re speaking for the people but that’s not true. When a low percentage of people show up to vote in the first place and the other party’s votes add up to more then the winning party then the winner is not speaking for the people. This is not unlike the total of the popular votes in the states where the party with the most votes ends up loosing. There’s got to be a better way.
We do need a 2 party system that functions properly. I think most Americans know this and that is why the midterms usually favored the opposing party. What we didn’t pay attention to was the long game that republicans were playing.