political labeling is hurting the discussion

[HanAholeSolo2.0]

trumps election was a rejection of leftism (not the same as liberalism) and was not an endorsement of traditional republican conservatism - which showed its true colors too.

we are really missing the point if we allow ourselves to get herded into traditional binary left right dem rep liberal conservative lines.

trump himself is not the point. if you are paying attention, liberalism is being subverted by leftism and republicans have been shown to be all talk when it comes to free speech, healthcare reform, border security and actual tax reform.

the energy being spent trying to subvert the presidential election is a very dangerous path that people fail to see because we are lied to in the comforting language of team politics.

we are really missing the point if we continue to make this about trump specifically. the election simply reflected the rise of populism and rejection of identity politics and assault on free speech.

undermining or reversing the results of that election isn't going to turn the heat down on that stuff or make it go away.

 

[GunsOfFrankEaton]

This.

 

[Rdcldad]

the energy being spent trying to subvert the presidential election is a very dangerous path that people fail to see because we are lied to in the comforting language of team politics

this will prove to be the crime in the russia investigation

it's a free shot by the dems to subvert an election and will of the people

trump re-election will be the recompense

 

[CowboyJD]

So Trump against the Uniparty....or populism vs. leftism.

Still sounds pretty binary.

How about some of the less extreme beliefs and positions of populists are good ideas (some less so), but they take it too far when they pose the debate in terms of a existential culture war for the soul of American?

 

[CowboyJD]

this will prove to be the crime in the russia investigation

it's a free shot by the dems to subvert an election and will of the people

trump re-election will be the recompense

"trump himself is not the point."

 

[Rdcldad]

"trump himself is not the point."

let me rephrase it's a free shot to subvert an election and will of the people

 

[HanAholeSolo2.0]

So Trump against the Uniparty....or populism vs. leftism.

Still sounds pretty binary.

How about some of the less extreme beliefs and positions of populists are good ideas (some less so), but they take it too far when they pose the debate in terms of a existential culture war for the soul of American?

i specifically am not advocating for trump in this thread. nor am I exactly advocating for populism.

however it is worth noting, is it not, that a preponderance of the political will to move against trump seems to be tolerant of, and in some cases openly supportive of restricting free speech, delegitimizing elections and reframing every policy debate into "phobic" terminology reducing loaded words like racism, fascism and nazism into meaningless generic insults.

im ok with being on the correct binary side of that. being a republican or democrat? not so much. i don't think trump specifically is the answer. but the election of him instead of jeb or hillary hopefully is. and it's results need to be respected. and efforts to usurp him need to be pointed out and criticized.

i personally don't care for trump but he's an anathema to the illusion of choice and we should embrace the opportunity to stop picking rhetorical sides and protect the constitution.

liberals on this board should be proud of being traditional free speech liberals and denounce social justice warrior leftists who tweet bumper sticker philosophy directly at trump like morons.

conservatives need to abandon the neocons and regroup around libertarians who in turn need to realize they are a critical ingredient than a stand alone party.

If people on this board had to sit around a round table without sides and talk about ideas and policy without political labeling, we would all be shocked at how few of us would be legitimate pariahs and how much political common ground we have.

 

[shortbus]

Great post.

 

[JimmyBob]

Still sounds pretty binary.

Amen. Some good points in this thread (Han), but it still comes down to winning at any cost.

 

[Rdcldad]

i specifically am not advocating for trump in this thread. nor am I exactly advocating for populism.

however it is worth noting, is it not, that a preponderance of the political will to move against trump seems to be tolerant of, and in some cases openly supportive of restricting free speech, delegitimizing elections and reframing every policy debate into "phobic" terminology reducing loaded words like racism, fascism and nazism into meaningless generic insults.

im ok with being on the correct binary side of that. being a republican or democrat? not so much. i don't think trump specifically is the answer. but the election of him instead of jeb or hillary hopefully is. and it's results need to be respected. and efforts to usurp him need to be pointed out and criticized.

i personally don't care for trump but he's an anathema to the illusion of choice and we should embrace the opportunity to stop picking rhetorical sides and protect the constitution.

liberals on this board should be proud of being traditional free speech liberals and denounce social justice warrior leftists who tweet bumper sticker philosophy directly at trump like morons.

conservatives need to abandon the neocons and regroup around libertarians who in turn need to realize they are a critical ingredient than a stand alone party.

If people on this board had to sit around a round table without sides and talk about ideas and policy without political labeling, we would all be shocked at how few of us would be legitimate pariahs and how much political common ground we have.

my apologies if i'm missing the point
or off the mark

but are we not having this conversation if trump didn't put forth the effort to become elected president?

it's like hey it's great we've come to this point in the discussion

without respecting what got us here

 

[CBradSmith]

i specifically am not advocating for trump in this thread. nor am I exactly advocating for populism.

however it is worth noting, is it not, that a preponderance of the political will to move against trump seems to be tolerant of, and in some cases openly supportive of restricting free speech, delegitimizing elections and reframing every policy debate into "phobic" terminology reducing loaded words like racism, fascism and nazism into meaningless generic insults.

im ok with being on the correct binary side of that. being a republican or democrat? not so much. i don't think trump specifically is the answer. but the election of him instead of jeb or hillary hopefully is. and it's results need to be respected. and efforts to usurp him need to be pointed out and criticized.

i personally don't care for trump but he's an anathema to the illusion of choice and we should embrace the opportunity to stop picking rhetorical sides and protect the constitution.

liberals on this board should be proud of being traditional free speech liberals and denounce social justice warrior leftists who tweet bumper sticker philosophy directly at trump like morons.

conservatives need to abandon the neocons and regroup around libertarians who in turn need to realize they are a critical ingredient than a stand alone party.

If people on this board had to sit around a round table without sides and talk about ideas and policy without political labeling, we would all be shocked at how few of us would be legitimate pariahs and how much political common ground we have.

Very good post and observations.

 

[CowboyJD]

i specifically am not advocating for trump in this thread. nor am I exactly advocating for populism.

however it is worth noting, is it not, that a preponderance of the political will to move against trump seems to be tolerant of, and in some cases openly supportive of restricting free speech, delegitimizing elections and reframing every policy debate into "phobic" terminology reducing loaded words like racism, fascism and nazism into meaningless generic insults.

im ok with being on the correct binary side of that. being a republican or democrat? not so much. i don't think trump specifically is the answer. but the election of him instead of jeb or hillary hopefully is. and it's results need to be respected. and efforts to usurp him need to be pointed out and criticized.

i personally don't care for trump but he's an anathema to the illusion of choice and we should embrace the opportunity to stop picking rhetorical sides and protect the constitution.

liberals on this board should be proud of being traditional free speech liberals and denounce social justice warrior leftists who tweet bumper sticker philosophy directly at trump like morons.

conservatives need to abandon the neocons and regroup around libertarians who in turn need to realize they are a critical ingredient than a stand alone party.

If people on this board had to sit around a round table without sides and talk about ideas and policy without political labeling, we would all be shocked at how few of us would be legitimate pariahs and how much political common ground we have.

My name is CowboyJD, and I support this post.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

First, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. This narrative of some watershed event is iffy. The big schism is within the right side of the spectrum imo. "Left" has never been particularly organized or homogeneous. It's nothing new -- Will Rogers even talked about it. "I'm not a member of an organized political party -- I'm a democrat" or something like that.

however it is worth noting, is it not, that a preponderance of the political will to move against trump seems to be tolerant of, and in some cases openly supportive of restricting free speech,

What? Trump has openly advocated changing the first amendment. I haven't heard anything like that from the left. Mirror and gaslight, gaslight and mirror.

delegitimizing elections

Let me get this straight: Trump claimed for months that the election was rigged. He wins, and now "delegitimizing elections" is a hallmark of the left. He also claimed that he won the popular vote (plainly didn't) and that millions of fraudulent votes were cast (they weren't). On top of that, there is no controversy whether Russia had a propaganda campaign going the whole time to support Biff. This is fact-free gaslighting and the usual Kremlin-style narrative/disinformation. What a crock of shit.

reframing every policy debate into "phobic" terminology reducing loaded words like racism, fascism and nazism into meaningless generic insults.

. How many years have we heard that consistent mantra of fascism and socialism from the right against Obama? And with all due respect, wanting a military parade for the inauguration, constant gaslighting, call to amend the first amendment to protect Trump from criticism, building walls, the nepotism, accusing opponents of being pedophiles.... that sounds like fascist S.O.P.'s to me.

You're also parroting from the alt-brah proud boys site, I see. Congrats on being from the west. Did you get a rabbit punch initiation? Feels good to belong, doesn't it?

 

[Rdcldad]

First, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. This narrative of some watershed event is iffy. The big schism is within the right side of the spectrum imo. "Left" has never been particularly organized or homogeneous. It's nothing new -- Will Rogers even talked about it. "I'm not a member of an organized political party -- I'm a democrat" or something like that.



What? Trump has openly advocated changing the first amendment. I haven't heard anything like that from the left. Mirror and gaslight, gaslight and mirror.



Let me get this straight: Trump claimed for months that the election was rigged. He wins, and now "delegitimizing elections" is a hallmark of the left. He also claimed that he won the popular vote (plainly didn't) and that millions of fraudulent votes were cast (they weren't). On top of that, there is no controversy whether Russia had a propaganda campaign going the whole time to support Biff. This is fact-free gaslighting and the usual Kremlin-style narrative/disinformation. What a crock of shit.



. How many years have we heard that consistent mantra of fascism and socialism from the right against Obama? And with all due respect, wanting a military parade for the inauguration, constant gaslighting, call to amend the first amendment to protect Trump from criticism, building walls, the nepotism, accusing opponents of being pedophiles.... that sounds like fascist S.O.P.'s to me.

You're also parroting from the alt-brah proud boys site, I see. Congrats on being from the west. Did you get a rabbit punch initiation? Feels good to belong, doesn't it?

bored on sunday morning and tapped view ignored content

you lost me at popular vote

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

bored on sunday morning and tapped view ignored content

you lost me at popular vote

LOL

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

if you are paying attention, liberalism is being subverted by leftism and republicans have been shown to be all talk when it comes to free speech, healthcare reform, border security and actual tax reform.

Republicans have been full of shit for at least two generations. Saying that they've suddenly showed their true colors suggests a dazzling lack of awareness imo. It's been going on for years. For YEARS I heard house republicans scream about repealing obamacare, and knowing full well it could not happen absent a new president. Meanwhile, not one substantive, realistic proposal. The lies about Iraq? The "cut taxes and revenue increases" lie. And do you know who their constituency is that fell for it, over and over? Conservatives.

Now, surprise surprise, that same demographic is biting off on another ludicrous narrative. Objectivity is not a vice, brah.

All that said, I legitimately want to explore some of this. How is "liberalism being subverted by leftism"? I looked at some proud boys rambling this sunday a.m. and they are totally full of shit with their historical "facts" but I'm going to listen and open my mind. I look forward to this. Hopefully the argument isn't founded on revisionist history.