HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » shanen » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

shanen

Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 253

Journal Archives

How to brand the Republicans properly? GOP = HATE

Not every Republican is a hater, but every enthusiastic Trump supporter is. I'd be interested in meeting a counterexample, but I'm not holding my breath.

More to the point, the Republican brand has been hijacked. Today's angry mob led by Con Man Donald has NO relationship to the progressive Republican Party led by Honest Abe or the pragmatic governing GOP of Teddy or Ike. It's become an angry and partisan insurgency, and if they can't have their way they'll just make lots of noise and prevent the government from doing anything. There are real problems that need to be solved, but absolute obstructionism is not the solution to anything.

So how to hold them to account? How to make sure the GOP goes completely down the drain so a REAL 2nd party can take over that important job. You can't have meaningful elections without at least two viable choices.

Exhaustion of the Donald campaign by security briefings?

Just had a weird idea of how to destroy Trump's campaign:

Require him to UNDERSTAND the daily security briefings they are giving him.

They would give the identical briefing to Hillary, and then ask her a couple of questions about it. Of course she will answer immediately and accurately.

When Trump got the questions, he would be stumped, but he would be allowed to ask the briefing officer for help. Then more help, and more help, and usually wind up using the rest of the day getting to the point where he could answer the questions. No time left for campaigning. Game over.

Oh wait. It would probably backfire. When would the Donald have time to say and tweet all those stupid things? Just by keeping him away from mics and keyboards it might allow some people to delude themselves about his presidentiality.

Is there any category of Trump supporter who can feel shame?

Can't find a matching discussion, so I'll pose the question... Based on my observations, there seem to be four main legs of Trump's little high chair: (1) Government haters, (2) Hillary haters, (3) Bigots, and (4) Racists. Can any of them feel shame at supporting the Donald? If so, how can the shame be increased?

P.S. No matter what Trump thinks, the cute little high chair is not a throne.

P.P.S. A poll on which leg is thickest would have been interesting, but the economic model is not attractive. I've already donated to Bernie, and I don't regret it though it was hopeless, but I'd prefer to buy solutions, not just throw money at a website. How about solution projects after the articles (or linked to related threads), and if enough members support the project it would get funded and DU would get a tithe (after holding the money until then) for project planning, publicity, and reporting on the results.

Cyberattack against South Carolina flag?

Anyone know what's going on there? Try searching for the South Carolina flag, and that is NOT what you'll see in most of the image results. It must be some kind of cyberattack, but I can't even figure out how it's being done, though I can sort of guess who might be behind it--unless some crazies want to frame some other crazies, perhaps hoping to change the topic.

What I can say is that it is NOT a transient, but has been persisting for at least 4 or 5 hours now, and that it is visible in Texas and elsewhere. I dared to peek at some of the severs, and it actually looks like it's changed there, but such a massive server attack would surely be in the news by now... Must be something at a different level of the network?

Question submitted by shanen

The text of this question will be publicly available after it has been reviewed and answered by a DU Administrator. Please be aware that sometimes messages are not answered immediately. Thank you for your patience. --The DU Administrators

Democratic lawsuit against the neo-GOP Hastert Rule?

In case you need the background, the Hastert Rule became neo-GOP policy to obstruct Clinton. It says that will of the majority be damned, the only majority that the neo-GOP cares about is themselves.

Why doesn't the Democratic Party file a lawsuit against the Hastert Rule? Isn't that rule a violation of their oath of office? Surely the Democratic Party should have the legal standing?

P.S. I insist that today's neo-GOP party should not be confused with the GOP or original Republican Party. Brand corruption.

I still believe in the power of jujitsu, and now is the time to cut the neo-GOP off from the GOP

I actually think this might be the last opportunity to work to break the lunatic fringe off from the real Republican Party. I am fundamentally opposed to one-party rule, and the neo-GOP is destroying America's second party--and refusing to consider that possibility. I think the Democrats should propose some RATIONAL legislation that will draw the rational wing away to build a viable second party. Here are two suggested jujitsu issues:

1. States rights for marijuana laws. This is a head splitting issue for a lot of rational Republicans, and will even confuse a lot of the neo-GOP lunatics, while the Libertarians will be glad to go along, and the Democrats should join in as late as possible. The drug laws are fundamentally crazy, but it would be amusing to hear President Obama's explanation as he is "forced" to sign the legislation that lets states legalize marijuana if they want to--and I bet that a LOT of them would want to as soon as that became an option.

2. Normalize diplomatic relations with Cuba. Only the most extreme lunatics can claim that Castro or Cuba poses any existential threat to America, but the rational politicians understand they need to start making nice with the Latinos. Most of them think they're all the same, just like the Asians. Who can tell the Cubans apart from any of the others?

Surely Superstorm Sandy had SOME effect on the election?

I am surprised not to see any discussion of this topic here. I have been thinking about it fairly continuously since the election.

Just because Rove and Romney are pathological liars, that doesn't mean they won't sometimes mix some true words in with their streams of lies. I really think that we should be attempting to consider REALITY, even when parts of it get linked into the right-wing reality distortion field.

Short summary: I think the election never should have been close because President Obama should have pinned Romney against his right-wing nuttiness so strongly that he couldn't pretend to move to the center. As the campaign actually developed, Romney was making a three-week play to the center, and Sandy crushed it. Romney's lie-of-the-week was that Obama was weak, ineffective, and too partisan to lead America. Then Superstom Sandy arrived, and suddenly Obama got a week of free publicity showing him as strong, effective, and quite bipartisan. Obviously the reality had not changed an iota, but Romney didn't have time to create fresh lies and the supporting ads.

My own belief is that Romney had at least a billion dollar advantage over President Obama, though I'm not sure we'll ever get the full tally on those mostly secret funds. However, with the week of free publicity and the loss of airtime for his attack ads, Romney's money advantage was cancelled. I'm not sure if Romney could have bought the election, but I am sure that he thought he had found enough attack-ad-persuadable suckers to swing the deal his way.

My longer rant on the topic:

http://anti-dubya.blogspot.jp/2012/11/luck-of-obama-but.html

If Trump had the brains god gave a Fig Newton, he would donate his $5 million to Sandy relief. NOW.

More accurately (because of the title character limit):

If Donald Trump had the brains that god gave a Fig Newton, then he would donate his $5 million to Hurricane Sandy relief. YESTERDAY.

Instead, I suspect that Donald Trump is trying to figure out how to blame President Obama for Hurricane Sandy. His conspiracy nuts are sure that the storm came from Kenya just to give free publicity and offset Romney's money advantage. The problem is explaining why they targeted the Atlantic City casinos so accurately.

Not that the Donald is worth the mention or discussion, but just continuing my angry venting from Twitter. It's really hard to believe that anyone so stupid can still have any money left, on the increasingly strained belief that he does have any assets above his debts.

If the Donald was smart, I expected him to withdraw his endorsement of Romney. He didn't have to go as far as endorsing President Obama, but just withdrawing his endorsement of Trump would have given him a pretense to claim relevance. He could have used the third debate as an excuse, claiming that Romney is now a moderate and not worth his support. If Romney wins, Trump is just another rich stuffed shirt among many, though I'm sure Trump is already being ignored as a stupid annoyance. However, if Obama won after Trump yanked his endorsement, then Trump would still be a hero to the nuts of the far right, while he would also be a kind of weird hero to some people on the left who thought he had that much influence.

RATINGS.

Oh yeah, one more thing. Revenge. If the Donald has ever had any business dealings with Romney, I'm sure he got skinned, and badly. Romney did not collect $250 million by being a nice guy.

Anyone else noticing problems on Twitter? Possible dirty tricks?

Anyone else having any fresh problems on Twitter? I had noticed a sudden increase in the number of probable trolls, possibly paid, from the Romney supporters, and suddenly my account has been suspended again... I don't think it's a prominent anti-Romney account or anything, just a couple of hundred followers, but I've been trying hard to be a nuisance and deflater of neo-GOP fantasy bubbles.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »