GBear4Life said:

---

I'm wondering if the electorate is actually more polarized than ever. Technology (internet, social media, 24hr news cycle, instant access to information around the globe, everybody has a platform, etc) certainly makes the polarization that exists more visible and apparent to all of us, and probably pushes the ideological fundamentalists farther apart (more polarized), but I'm curious as to whether, overall, this idea of polarization isn't concentrated among a minority of citizens.

---

Most Congressional districts are uncompetitive now. That wasn't always the case. Some of that is on gerrymandering, but mostly it's because the polarization is real. Urban vs. rural.

It is time for Trump to be peppered with these questions relentlessly:

1) Why do your policy and diplomacy decisions align with Russian interests even when against American interests?

2) Will you testify before Congress under oath?

3) Will you release your taxes as you promised throughout your campaign?

4) Why do you only govern to the Americans who may vote for you rather than serve the country in its entirety?

5) Will you resign your office for the good of the country? A CEO steps down when their leadership creates instability and internal discord, they have accountability for the organization as a whole and put that interest above their own career rather than scapegoat and deflect responsibility, why don't you?

It's time for him to be pressured to resign.

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'm wondering if the electorate is actually more polarized than ever. Technology (internet, social media, 24hr news cycle, instant access to information around the globe, everybody has a platform, etc) certainly makes the polarization that exists more visible and apparent to all of us, and probably pushes the ideological fundamentalists farther apart (more polarized), but I'm curious as to whether, overall, this idea of polarization isn't concentrated among a minority of citizens.

---

Most Congressional districts are uncompetitive now. That wasn't always the case. Some of that is on gerrymandering, but mostly it's because the polarization is real. Urban vs. rural.

---

Makes sense. The urban vs rural divide I suspect is largely a perceived cultural divide, whereby one of the parties is perceived to be anathema to them.

sycasey said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Fascism has to be looked at in historical context. It was a reaction to global spread of communism and regarded as a last stand of conservative elements against a global communist takeover. As such it promised a return to glory either real or mythical, nation first, expansionism to recover "lost territories" and a renewal of moral purity. Italy, Spain and Germany all incorporated these memes but with different economic nuances- many though incorporated many worker rights that Bernie Sanders could only dream of in an attempt to provide an alternative to communism- at least until they were elected.

---

This would seem to carry some parallels with our current polarization.

---

Yes and no. There is no alternative to global capitalism which is why lamentations about its decline are amusing. But the country has been in serious decline for a while- middle class income stagnation for decades, falling life expectancy, great increases in suicide and drug addiction, homelessness, violence, loss of faith in institutions, loss of community, etc . Just because there is no alternative the election of a game show host shows you that people are looking for any kind of different vision than the two parties have offered.

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'm wondering if the electorate is actually more polarized than ever. Technology (internet, social media, 24hr news cycle, instant access to information around the globe, everybody has a platform, etc) certainly makes the polarization that exists more visible and apparent to all of us, and probably pushes the ideological fundamentalists farther apart (more polarized), but I'm curious as to whether, overall, this idea of polarization isn't concentrated among a minority of citizens.

---

Most Congressional districts are uncompetitive now. That wasn't always the case. Some of that is on gerrymandering, but mostly it's because the polarization is real. Urban vs. rural.

---

Makes sense. The urban vs rural divide I suspect is largely a perceived cultural divide, whereby one of the parties is perceived to be anathema to them.

---

When it comes to voting, perception is reality.

"I watch this guy Steve Kerr, and he was like a little boy," Trump said. "He was so scared to be even answering the question. He couldn't answer the question, he was shaking. He didn't know how to answer the question. He'll talk about the United States very badly."

Trump has nothing better to do than spew hate and push lies all day long. Nice leadership.

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

This talk of capitalism destroying Democrats and moderates versus the extremes really suffers from recency bias. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have essentially the same platform as Harry Truman (national health care, super cheap college education, social security expansion, etc.). Truman is considered a moderate.

Far from destroying capitalism, FDR and Harry Truman and the other Democrats of the era saved capitalism in the mid-20th century when laissez-faire capitalism was intent on destroying itself and giving ground to the real extremes of communism or fascism.

---

Truman might have been considered moderate during his time, just like his historical participation in KKK was not viewed as disqualifying. Times have changed. Even though Truman's racist banter might have been viewed as moderate, even the less offensive banter from Trump is clearly racist (I agree it is racist). I will not argue, as you have, that what was moderate then is moderate now, and that Trump is even more progressive than the president you claim is still moderate.

Times have definitely changed. Milton Friedman's perspective in the 70s, the change from defined benefits to defined contribution with most of the ownership resting with institutional investors investing for retirement accounts, quick dissemination of information, easy trading, more robust disclosure required by the SEC, Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank as well as required fiduciary duties of institutional investor in voting their shares increasing executive and director accountability, and significant wealth generation (most of the people here would have been viewed as disgustingly rich during Truman days). What Warren is proposing with the Federal charter would destroy wealth for most of the middle class and upper middle class and not just the rich. Her wealth tax is not workable and would require maybe your wife to sell her diamond ring to pay taxes on the value of the ring.

While not exact comparison, it would be like using the current cost of medical expenses to justify that hospitals and doctors should be guided by a board comprised 40% of untrained patients and that the medical practice strategy should be driven by directives from patients. While we agree that cost of medical services is high and there are some bad doctors, I doubt giving patients controlling voice in the medical practice is the way to go and I refuse to say doctors are evil. It seems like a destructive populist strategy that sounds good but won't work.

Look, you and I come from completely different perspective on what is right for the country. I don't doubt you love your country just like I love my country, and I want what his best not only for this generation but for generations to come. Like you, I want my children to have at least the same opportunities that I have.

Having said that, you and I will never agree. We may benefit from the same wealth creation, but our approach to discharging our social responsibility is different. Let's be honest. You and I are both wealthy by any reasonable global standards. It seems like you feel guilty about your wealth. I don't feel guilty but I do feel the need to share with others on a more personal level through living a moderate lifestyle significantly below my income level and sharing my wealth with charitable organizations that I believe are efficient and effective with donations. It isn't about greed with me. I give more than what even Warren or Sanders would say I need to give (just to the government instead of to private non-profit). I just happen to believe that freedom of choice to do good instead of being forced and being able to reward more efficient organization with purpose I agree with are essentially important to me. Just as an FYI, I focus on donating to fund support for assistance to homeless, STEM training for inner city kids, and providing food for the poor, all the things I would hope progressives would support.

We don't need to go around in circles arguing the same thing over and over. We are different. That's a great thing about a diverse society. You can't want a diverse society and not accept that there will be diverse perspective. I don't want you to necessarily think like me. I will grant that you can certainly be a good person who loves his country even if you think what is right diverges from my view.

Good day, Dajo.

---

I see a lot of unsubstantiated fearmongering in your talk of Warren's policies. You say my views come from guilt, which makes me laugh. I say your views come from fear.

Otherwise I agree with you, we'll have to agree to disagree.

blungld said:

---

It is time for Trump to be peppered with these questions relentlessly:

1) Why do your policy and diplomacy decisions align with Russian interests even when against American interests?

2) Will you testify before Congress under oath?

3) Will you release your taxes as you promised throughout your campaign?

4) Why do you only govern to the Americans who may vote for you rather than serve the country in its entirety?

5) Will you resign your office for the good of the country? A CEO steps down when their leadership creates instability and internal discord, they have accountability for the organization as a whole and put that interest above their own career rather than scapegoat and deflect responsibility, why don't you?

It's time for him to be pressured to resign.

---

I can't tell if you are being serious or not. You know the answers to all of these questions.

One other thing I would note is that CEOs rarely step down for the benefit of their company at the expense of their own career. Typically they've been told to step down or be fired and they call it a resignation to save face, not unlike what sometimes happens when executive branch officials are separated (*cough* Bolton *cough*). If you want Trump to step down voluntarily you will need to offer him a very nice retirement package. I think that might be coming from congress at some point soon but given how awful Trump is they may not give him the gentleman's way out that Nixon enjoyed (resignation followed by pardon from his crimes rather than impeachment followed by prosecution).

dajo9 said:

---

I see a lot of unsubstantiated fearmongering in your talk...

---

Strange, this seems to be mostly what these incessant OT threads are peddling.

GBear4Life said:

---

I'm wondering if the electorate is actually more polarized than ever. Technology (internet, social media, 24hr news cycle, instant access to information around the globe, everybody has a platform, etc) certainly makes the polarization that exists more visible and apparent to all of us, and probably pushes the ideological fundamentalists farther apart (more polarized), but I'm curious as to whether, overall, this idea of polarization isn't concentrated among a minority of citizens.

---

Polls that have tracked levels of liberalism and conservatism for decades are showing both sides moving away from each other and becoming more fervent in their positions. The number of moderates is shrinking dramatically. The data backs it up.

Another interesting point is that there is substantial polling data that indicates tribalism in issue belief. Leaders and parties taking positions are pulling constituents in that direction. Not people pulling leaders. This happens on both sides. For instance, acceptance of same sex marriage rapidly increased as mainstream democrats came out for it. Russia has moved from eternal enemy of conservatives to having a much more positive view based on Trump.

Essentially, subconsciously or not, if a person's "team" adopts a position, they adopt it.

When you understand that, it puts politicians who take expedient positions or positions that are for their own benefit in a more severe light.

Put another way: do you think technology is the primary reason for the increase in tribalism, polarization, animus etc.

Though it was over 10 years ago, I perceived the gay marriage issue one of people pulling leaders.

blungld said:

---

I'm serious. Of course I know the answers, but I think he needs to be pressed in more direct terms and to state the obvious--which he just might.

As far as CEOs resigning--you are right. And I was referring to the "spin" and supposed philosophy of leadership they champion of responsibility and accountability. I know they never resign because of the publicly stated principles, but I want Trump to be put on the spot for those types of alleged values.

I think a "resign package" is probably where this is headed. I will be furious if it includes absolving his family and the enablers in Congress and for him to retain his gained wealth. He deserves jail and bankruptcy. This package had better include an admission of guilt and a gag order where he can not continue to rally his base and stir trouble with tweets and talks of coups and Deep States (a held sealed indictment on his money laundering, etc) if he makes another friggin peep.

---

If your satisfaction depends on Trump making truthful statements, you are never going to have it. I don't even think Trump pretends to have the sorts of values that you are talking about - he is unabashedly about himself first and foremost and barely pays lip service to anything else any more.

I like where you are going with a gag order but I honestly can't imagine him making an admission of guilt. The only way for a package to work would be if it was in the form of a non-prosecution agreement with the DOJ. You can't attach conditions to a pardon (at least I don't think you can) but an NPA certainly can and I think having to comply with a gag order would be more difficult for Trump than jail time.

I find it inherently unbelievable that Rudy Giuliani, son of a convicted felon, jailbird and enforcer for the Mafia, is even genetically capable of engaging in the type of criminal conduct currently under investigation by the SDNY. THIS HAS DEEP STATE CONSPIRACY WRITTEN ALL OVER IT! MAGA!

Agreed. Totally exhausting. I am haven't been this worn out since my 50th, and last marathon. And that was back in 2014. Every day there is more BS. Give up and end it already.

Hopefully this is what the death throes of a political career looks like:

Trump supporters yell 'lock him up' about Joe and Hunter Biden

https://mol.im/a/7560411


...and if the flotsam and jetsam that supports him feel raw about it when tRump is removed by impeachment conviction, 25th Amendment, or the ballot box, then the National Guard will be waiting.

"Ladies and gentlemen, submitted for your consideration, one Donald J. tRump, POTUS, and ..."

*None of the tRumps have the required intelligence to be funny (other than to be laughed at). Those are cult member laughs, the same giggles they emit during Saturday morning cartoon viewing.

blungld said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

blungld said:

---

It is time for Trump to be peppered with these questions relentlessly:

1) Why do your policy and diplomacy decisions align with Russian interests even when against American interests?

2) Will you testify before Congress under oath?

3) Will you release your taxes as you promised throughout your campaign?

4) Why do you only govern to the Americans who may vote for you rather than serve the country in its entirety?

5) Will you resign your office for the good of the country? A CEO steps down when their leadership creates instability and internal discord, they have accountability for the organization as a whole and put that interest above their own career rather than scapegoat and deflect responsibility, why don't you?

It's time for him to be pressured to resign.

---

I can't tell if you are being serious or not. You know the answers to all of these questions.

One other thing I would note is that CEOs rarely step down for the benefit of their company at the expense of their own career. Typically they've been told to step down or be fired and they call it a resignation to save face, not unlike what sometimes happens when executive branch officials are separated (*cough* Bolton *cough*). If you want Trump to step down voluntarily you will need to offer him a very nice retirement package. I think that might be coming from congress at some point soon but given how awful Trump is they may not give him the gentleman's way out that Nixon enjoyed (resignation followed by pardon from his crimes rather than impeachment followed by prosecution).

---

I'm serious. Of course I know the answers, but I think he needs to be pressed in more direct terms and to state the obvious--which he just might.

As far as CEOs resigning--you are right. And I was referring to the "spin" and supposed philosophy of leadership they champion of responsibility and accountability. I know they never resign because of the publicly stated principles, but I want Trump to be put on the spot for those types of alleged values.

I think a "resign package" is probably where this is headed. I will be furious if it includes absolving his family and the enablers in Congress and for him to retain his gained wealth. He deserves jail and bankruptcy. This package had better include an admission of guilt and a gag order where he can not continue to rally his base and stir trouble with tweets and talks of coups and Deep States (a held sealed indictment on his money laundering, etc) if he makes another friggin peep.

---

Trump's danger right now isn't Ukraine. It's Syria and Turkey. There is clearly enough to impeach and convict if Congress and the Senate want to. It is up to the Republicans. Trump's danger is that things like getting rolled by Erdogan have the Republicans so up in arms that they use Ukraine as a pretext...I mean suddenly discover how bad his crimes really are. If they turn, it will be fast and unanticipated. There will be a new revelation as there always are under Trump and suddenly it will be the worst thing ever in the eyes of a lot of Republican politicians. I wouldn't count on it. The politicians have proven to be too fond of their jobs. As long as Senators are mostly in places where the primary is their main election and they don't have to answer in the general, they will not stick their neck out to be chopped off by the base. That is the price of the partisan climate.

Trump will never resign. If it happens, I still think it is my scenario. The Republicans come to him and tell him they will vote him out if he doesn't withdraw from the race for 2020. He says he's sick of it. Blames the Democrats. Finishes his term in exchange for not being the first president kicked out of office. But that would take the Republicans having a back bone or playing a very good bluff. I have no doubt if they can get him out without it looking like their fault, they'd do it in a second.

I'm of two minds on Trump post-White House. Half of me really, really wants to see his crimes exposed and for him to pay for them assuming they are what I think they are. (To be clear, I only want him in jail for actual crimes). The other half of me thinks if he is convicted and jailed, no matter how legitimately, it will be a precedent and will be used. Bill Clinton never should have been impeached and that was flat out a response to Nixon. I'm not sure I want to go down that path.

I think what gets to Trump is humiliation. I think he might learn that as soon as he has nothing to give anyone, he will find himself abandoned and alone. If he doesn't walk out of the White House a martyr, it will happen faster than he thinks.

sonofabear51 said:

---

Agreed. Totally exhausting. I am haven't been this worn out since my 50th, and last marathon. And that was back in 2014. Every day there is more BS. Give up and end it already.

---

Congrats and good for you on the exercise regimen and strong health!!

Is there anyone left that still believes tRump has access to the Nuclear Football?

bearister said:

---

Is there anyone left that still believes tRump has access to the Nuclear Football?

---

They have put this on his desk in case he asks.

bearister said:

---

Hopefully this is what the death throes of a political career looks like:

Trump supporters yell 'lock him up' about Joe and Hunter Biden

https://mol.im/a/7560411


...and if the flotsam and jetsam that supports him feel raw about it when tRump is removed by impeachment conviction, 25th Amendment, or the ballot box, then the National Guard will be waiting.

---

A substantial % of the national guard is pro-Trump and pro-racist. They'll play patty-cake with protesters like they did with the Bundys.

Cal Junkie said:

---

bearister said:

---

Hopefully this is what the death throes of a political career looks like:

Trump supporters yell 'lock him up' about Joe and Hunter Biden

https://mol.im/a/7560411


...and if the flotsam and jetsam that supports him feel raw about it when tRump is removed by impeachment conviction, 25th Amendment, or the ballot box, then the National Guard will be waiting.

---

A substantial % of the national guard is pro-Trump and pro-racist. They'll play patty-cake with protesters like they did with the Bundys.

---

The Academi contractors will be brought in. Erik Prince's loyalty goes to the highest bidder.

Ex-Ukraine ambassador in withering attack on US diplomacy under Trump

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/11/ukraine-ambassador-marie-yovanovitch-trump-state-department?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Hope Rudy has insurance for bus accidents.

What Rudy is toxic, asks the obese orange turd? Like OMG...how freakin' ironic.

In any case, this reads more and more like a mobster crime novel. In this case the henchman Rudy figures he can make a few bucks on the side because, you know...the Trump Crime Family doesn't pay, so he schemes around. But wouldn't you know it, the mob boss can't call an audible, like this...

Trump lawyers go to jail. Beware shady barristers!

Watch the rats turn on each other as they scurry to get off the U.S.S. Flaming Turd as more information and disclosures are made. Who is going to cut a deal first?

Tip of the iceberg.

Matt Taibbi is always good for throwing a grenade into a discussion.

We're in a permanent coup

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/were-in-a-permanent-coup

Matt turned a couple of my favorite phrases ever in a piece about the financial collapse of 2008:

"The world's most powerful investment bank," wrote the journalist Matt Taibbi about Goldman Sachs, "is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money."

Man who thought John Bolton would emerge a hero or patriot given his usual hardcore chickenhawk position. Well the old dude came through, in the face of blatant corruption.

Quote:

---

The latest domino to fall is John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser. The New York Times reports that in July, Bolton grew so alarmedby efforts to pressure Ukraine to launch "investigations" into Joe Biden and his son that he instructed an aide to alert White House lawyers.

That aide is Fiona Hill, a former senior White House adviser on Russia and Europe. Hill testified about this exchange with Bolton to House investigators as part of their impeachment inquiry. Hill told them that Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney had run what The Post callsa "shadow" campaign to pressure Ukraine to do Trump's political bidding.

"I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up," Bolton reportedlytold Hill to tell White House lawyers.

Crucially, this eruption came after a meeting in early July at which Sondland made it clear that the goal of this shadow campaign was to get Ukraine to revive investigations into Burisma, the company on whose board Biden's son Hunter sat. This confirmed for Bolton that the goal was to leverage Ukraine into acting as Trump's weapon against Biden that is, by manufacturing smearsdesigned to debilitate him in the 2020 election.

That made Bolton go "ballistic." And on another occasion, Bolton described Giuliani, one of the scheme's ringleaders, as "a hand grenade who's going to blow everybody up."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/15/john-boltons-eruption-shows-that-trumps-defenses-are-collapsing/

---

[url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/15/john-boltons-eruption-shows-that-trumps-defenses-are-collapsing/][/url]