A long lament.

[Not a ID]

(for instance, after the death in Charlottesville a couple of years ago).

Ah, the whole "there were fine people on both sides" thing.

One of the clips in that linked video came from that same speech.

But what the "fine people" reference actually was talking about was this:

Trump: "Those people -- all of those people – excuse me, I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue of Robert E. Lee."

Trump: "Excuse me. If you take a look at some of the groups, and you see -- and you’d know it if you were honest reporters, which in many cases you’re not -- but many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.

"So this week it’s Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

"But they were there to protest -- excuse me, if you take a look, the night before they were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.

And it seems pretty prescient given that in the BLM Riots, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson statues were some of the first to be toppled. Followed not long after by Ulysses S. Grant(he owned a slave after all).

But also toppled statues since then now also include Benjamin Franklin("another filthy slave owner"), Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln as well "because of Indigenous people's issues" regarding the latter two. At what point is it enough? If we're demanding perfection out of the people that have statues erected in their honor, then we'd best ban human statuary in general. The Slippery Slope argument proved not to be fallacious in this case.

Although I'll admit the efforts to remove a statue commissioned by freed slaves and dedicated by Frederick Douglas in the name of BLM to be one most richly ironic moments of this past year.

[calista241]

Personally, I think the roots of today's polarization stem from the Bill Clinton / Newt Gingrich agreement to remove earmarks. Earmarks required members of Congress to actually vote on bills of substance, support initiatives on the other side in order to pass their own projects.

Yeah, some stupid things were bought and built (like the bridge to nowhere), but it fostered an environment of working together in Congress. Every Democrat needed Republicans to vote for their project in a bill, and vice versa.

And I'm not sure about a civil war being fought here. Are we polarized, yes, and is there a lot of political anger, you bet. But even a low intensity conflict would not be fought here. People just want to take care of their families, put food on the table, and go to a movie or maybe out to dinner. People who attack their neighbors because of political beliefs will be spending a long time in jail. The criminal justice system, for all its faults, deters a LOT of crime.

Remember, just 4 years ago we elected the most progressive American President ever. Biden will most likely win the election this year. Who knows who will run in 2024. Nikki Haley, the odds on favorite to win the Republican nomination for 2024 at this time, removed the Stars and Bars from the South Carolina flag, and really led an economic revival of South Carolina as it's Governor. And she's an Indian American.

As Dave Chappelle said, we elected an Internet troll in 2016. And yeah, he came close to winning re-election, and he was a rude, racist motherfucker. But he also didn't get us involved in any new wars. All I heard about was the 'nuclear codes' for the first half of his Presidency. We're still here, our institutions are still running, we're not fighting any new wars, and no real permanent damage has been done. And we had close to 70% turnout to vote in 2020. If that doesn't demonstrate belief in the system, then nothing else will.

[Not a ID]

Personally, I think the roots of today's polarization stem from the Bill Clinton / Newt Gingrich agreement to remove earmarks. Earmarks required members of Congress to actually vote on bills of substance, support initiatives on the other side in order to pass their own projects.

Close, but not quite right. Newt is the right suspect though. Newt Gingrich and his friends did something in 1994 which hadn't really been done before. They centralized fundraising efforts in such a way that the national party organization became the primary source for campaign funds for Republican Congressional Candidates in 1994. That way candidates that were "well funded and safe" could move cash from their campaign war chest to the Congressional (party) fund, which would then allocate it to races it decided were important.

The Republicans won in a landslide in 1994. Both parties have been making extensive use of that methodology ever since.

Forget the congressional pork barrel bringing gub'ment jobs to the congress person's constituents. Now if the congress person finds themselves in a tight race and needs campaign funding... Well, now it becomes a question of how well you adhered to Congressional Party line to decide how willing they're going to be to give you access to those sweet sweet campaign funds.

In the 1990's every member of the United States Congress became beholden to their national party organizations in ways they never were before. Politics ceased being local for them at that point, its about keeping their peers in Washington happy so they'll help fund your re-election bid.

And I'm not sure about a civil war being fought here. Are we polarized, yes, and is there a lot of political anger, you bet. But even a low intensity conflict would not be fought here. People just want to take care of their families, put food on the table, and go to a movie or maybe out to dinner. People who attack their neighbors because of political beliefs will be spending a long time in jail. The criminal justice system, for all its faults, deters a LOT of crime.

They're still rioting and smashing things in Portland. I fully expect they're going to continue to do so regardless of who the official winner is. They also know that the Biden Admin is likely to leave them alone(as will likely pressure the US Attorney's office to drop charges), something the Trump Admin wasn't doing, especially after they deputized the Oregon State Police(and I think some of the Multnomah County Sheriff's Department) as Federal Officers, enabling the Feds to prosecute crimes they otherwise wouldn't be able to when the County DA declines to prosecute.

I am kind of curious to see how long the Democrats are going to let that continue to happen before they start to crack down on them instead of doing their catch and release game while leaving it to see how Trump responds(as he appears to be on the way out, despite his protests to the contrary). If BLM and AntiFa keep their destructive activities to the areas they've been doing things, nothing of any note will happen on the wider stage. If they try to include communities that voted Trump in those destructive activities, all bets are off.

I'd almost be inclined to consider odds on how long it will take after Biden is sworn in for a Federal Building to be attacked by rioters and burned, and which city it happens in. "Of course" it'd have to be right-wing extremists, it isn't like Portland just went through several months of BLM trying to ransack and burn some federal buildings.

Edit to add:
And the Party of Love, Tolerance, and acceptance:
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1324807776510595078

Is anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future? I foresee decent probability of many deleted Tweets, writings, photos in the future

AOC is the gift that keeps on giving to Conservatives.

Oh and someone replied with:

trumpaccountability.net

Because building lists of people to blacklist always works out well for the groups that enable and encourage such behavior. And such blacklists never ever in recorded history have ended up with very bad things happening.

[valinor89]

Let me share a point of view from someone from Europe about the current and recent USA.

Tor start with, Biden would be considered to be from the at most centrist in most states here, for reference Obama would be slightly left of center. In spanish politics the firt would be from the centrist current of the PP while the second from the PSOE. Trump is just seen as a clown that would be fun if he was a caricature of a president, but is damn scary as he actually means what he says. He is seen as an obstinate liar and a psicopath who disregards human rights for all who don't think like him or even disagree with him. He is also seen as unpredictable, one day saying something and the next day saying the oposite.

WARNING: if you think the USA is the bestest country on the universe stop reading here, you will not like what follows.

You know that slogan "America first"? Well, Trump might have been the first to say it but is has allways been like that for most of what the USA has ever done. Trump is just very "In Your Face" about it, and while historically being an ally of the USA mostly prevented being screwed by it, Trump just screws everyone equally, even his own compatriots. He has sistematically alienated every ally the USA has ever had and made friends with some of the worst people on earth, to later also screw the over. Even China external diplomacy seems reasonable nowadays, you know they are going to screw you but they at least use lube and a bit of foreplay.

On another tangent, from our European perspective going to the USA is not safe at all, no matter where you come from. Sure our police might treat you badly and screw your day but generally you do not fear death as a result. To be honest, death by police arrest also has happened here, but it is a very rare ocurrence.
On the other side of the coin you can be mugged, robbed or even sexually assaulted (less comonly than in the USA, by the way) but being killed is SOO rare it is BIG news. A police oficer firing a gun? Also news! Heck any gunfire is news!

Another view is that if you are not insured or are rich having a health problem while in the USA might as well have the same result that if it were to happen on a "third" world country. And speaking of first world countries... while as a whole the USA is a rich country it is unbeliable that such big parts of it's population is soo poor as to look almost like they live on a third world country. No wonder there is such insecurity ans societal upheaval when such a big part of your society lives in squalor.

An oh boy do we also have extremists in Europe and our fair share of violent protests, but guess what? At least in my country (Spain) no one has died in a protest since 1979. What happened in France last year in the yellow jacket protests was soo shocking as to be unheard of in an European country...

Wrapping up, please USA fix your shit, because no one else can and as the biggest "democratic" country in the world you are sure giving a very bad example.

[Not a ID]

On another tangent, from our European perspective going to the USA is not safe at all, no matter where you come from. Sure our police might treat you badly and screw your day but generally you do not fear death as a result. To be honest, death by police arrest also has happened here, but it is a very rare ocurrence.
On the other side of the coin you can be mugged, robbed or even sexually assaulted (less comonly than in the USA, by the way) but being killed is SOO rare it is BIG news. A police oficer firing a gun? Also news! Heck any gunfire is news!

The risk of death by police is very overblown, in any given police interaction the cop is at more risk of being seriously harmed than the person they're interacting with. It's part of why they're so forceful in their responses at times. That's partly a police problem, but more broadly it speaks to much larger social problems in general, the police shouldn't need to be operating constant fear for their own lives either.

If you're not waving around anything that looks like a deadly weapon, you're not likely to get shot. If you're not mouthing off at the cop, you're not likely to have any problems. It is amazing how many people in the US think doing that is a great idea.

Another view is that if you are not insured or are rich having a health problem while in the USA might as well have the same result that if it were to happen on a "third" world country. And speaking of first world countries... while as a whole the USA is a rich country it is unbeliable that such big parts of it's population is soo poor as to look almost like they live on a third world country. No wonder there is such insecurity and societal upheaval when such a big part of your society lives in squalor.

If you need medical care in the United States, you're going to get it. Whether or not you can afford to pay the bill after getting that care is an entirely different matter. As to living in third-world squalor, having has occasion to see what that is like in person... The only group in the United States that has right to claim that kind of experience would be the Native Americans, and a number Native tribes don't get to make that claim for that matter. And they even have government assistance programs uniquely tailored to them which nobody else can get.

As the bad joke goes about people wanting to see what socialism would look like in the United States: Visit an Indian Reservation in NE Arizona or South Dakota, or ask a military veteran about the Veteran's Affairs administration.

Wrapping up, please USA fix your shit, because no one else can and as the biggest "democratic" country in the world you are sure giving a very bad example.

I'm hoping it doesn't, but something tells me it is going to get a whole lot worse before it begins to get better.

But at least P.T. Barnum v1.1(alpha) is on his way out of the White House. Too bad for those that think that's going to be the end of the problems. He wasn't the problem, he was merely a symptom.

And it seems millions of Americans across the country have absolutely no clue about what is going on right now. They got rid of the Garbage fire, but their Utopia ushered in the Democratic Party has a problem, despite winning the Presidential Popular Vote by a large margin they lost the balance of the "down ticket" races. Republicans made gains in House, will likely retain control of the Senate, and managed to expand their control of various state governments. Even worse, CNN exit polling indicated a little less then 2/3rds of the people who voted for Biden were voting for him, they were voting against Trump. So up to 1/3rd of that nearly 75 million person vote tally he amassed has "unknown politics" for him to address, they could be moderates, they could be Republican Never-Trumpers(which is reflected in the "down-ballot" of several states), or they could be extreme left-wingers who voted Biden to ensure Trump went down. In any case, those are people the Democrats, or at least Biden, cannot rely on for support moving forward, the 70 million people who voted Trump on the other hand are something the Democrats have to be wary of in 2022. Trying to "capitalize on their victories" such as they were, is likely to earn a strong rebuke in 2022, and Presidential midterms practically never go well for the President's party. Playing hardball with the Republicans is only likely to guarantee a Republican majority in Congress 2 years from now, the Democrats only hope is for the Republicans to anger the voter block Trump unearthed.

[Fawks]

I'm sorry but the Left does not have the moral high ground, and neither does the Right. Both sides are completely fucked, I don't foresee a reconciliation between the two sides, and meanwhile countries like China, Russia, and Iran are rubbing their hands together in collective glee.

imthejman85, I Agree. Who knows maybe it is truly the Democrats who have been in cahoots with russia and china. (cough, Hillary... cough Biden)

[kyli]

.
On another tangent, from our European perspective going to the USA is not safe at all, no matter where you come from. Sure our police might treat you badly and screw your day but generally you do not fear death as a result. To be honest, death by police arrest also has happened here, but it is a very rare ocurrence.
On the other side of the coin you can be mugged, robbed or even sexually assaulted (less comonly than in the USA, by the way) but being killed is SOO rare it is BIG news. A police oficer firing a gun? Also news! Heck any gunfire is news!

My perspective on the police situation is a lot different. If people try and name individual cases of police brutality or anything really, just to tell you how huge of a problem it is, then it likely isnt a huge problem. Oh the individual cases might be problematic, but it isnt systemic. Like shark attacks, every case might make it into the news, but the fact that every case is in the news, is proof of how rare it is. Not every car accident in a big city makes the news. I'd challenge you to find an instance of police brutality against a black person that didn't make the national news this year. I'm not saying there aren't cases that weren't reported or that they aren't racist cops or racist people or police brutality and no problems exist. What I am saying is that the issues aren't systemic and tearing down the biggest, freest, and allow me to say, least rasist country ever in the history of this planet, is not going to solve anything. Because if the problems are systemic, then putting dems in charge of a rasist system won't change that its rasist. Unless its only rasist when republicans are in charge. Oh yea, that's it.

As for guns, I'm willing to wager that perhaps excluding this year (because it's been a sh*tshow) violent crime in most parts of the USA, guns included, isnt much higher then most other European countries. One thing that will always stand in the way of dictators and tyrants in the USA is, so long as it exists, the 2nd amendment. Its purpose was never for hunting or style what just because, but to prevent government tyranny. I found it somewhat hilarious that the same people screaming hysterically that Trump is going to declare himself president for life and become a dictator, (and yes, there are people saying that), they also want to get rid of the 2nd amendment that is there to allow Americans to protect themselves from just that.
And this perspective comes from a center/right libertarian (not the party, but the fundamental definition) Canadian.

[Not a ID]

I'm not saying there aren't cases that weren't reported or that they aren't racist cops or racist people or police brutality and no problems exist. What I am saying is that the issues aren't systemic and tearing down the biggest, freest, and allow me to say, least rasist country ever in the history of this planet, is not going to solve anything. Because if the problems are systemic, then putting dems in charge of a rasist system won't change that its rasist. Unless its only rasist when republicans are in charge. Oh yea, that's it.

The more ironic part of that is where all of these deeply racist cops happen to be found.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin? Democrat since 1960.
Minneapolis, Minnesota? Democrat since 1961 except for 1 day on December 31, 1973.
Chicago, Illinois? Democratic for nearly a century(1931).
Atlanta, Geogria? Democrat controlled for over a century(1879).
New York City? Rudy Giuliani was mayor as a republican for 8 years(1994-2001), followed by Michael Bloomberg who was elected mayor as a Republican before becoming an Independent and ultimately running for PotUS as a Democrat in 2020.. Prior to Rudy? you have to go back to 1970 where the mayor of the time also pulled a Bloomberg, switching from Republican to Democrat between terms.
Denver, Colorado? Democrat since 1963.
Seattle, Washington? Last Republican mayor left office in 1969.
Portland, Oregon? Last Republican mayor left office in 1980.


But don't worry, the Democrats are going to fix the racist police department problems, just give them time, those racist Republicans have very deep and tenacious tendrils that just refuse to let go in those cities, so deep it takes multiple generations to root them out.

Or maybe the Republicans aren't the problem, but simply the scapegoat?

[jeffreyC]

Kamala Harris has a history of not respecting the rights which the US Constitution protects.
Kamala Harris has a history in California as a gun grabber.
From 21 January 2021 onward she can declare Joe Biden is mentally unfit to continue in the office of President and take over as Acting President.
Her doing so could trigger the second civil war.

For this reason alone I would have rather had Trump win, as the lesser of two evils.

If you add up all the deaths of US service personnel from hostile actions except the Civil War and compare that to the death toll of the Civil War the number from the Civil War is still larger.

[kyli]

Well she might wait 2 years. If she became president before 2023, she could only run once more. But if she closes out the last 2 years or less of the Biden presidency, she can run twice more I believe. But I personally dont think she stands a chance at running and winning as an actual presidential candidate. Although anything is possible with how polarized the US has become.
Donald Trump got the 2nd most votes of any presidential candidate in an election ever, the most going to Joe Biden. In 2020 Biden got 81 million plus, Trump got 74 million plus, and Clinton got around 65.53 million in 2016, but the 3rd most is in 2008 when Obama got just under 69.5 million. The Republican claim of widespread voter fraud hasn't been proven and even if it happened, I'm not sure it can be proven at this point, post election. I'm all for full investigations into every credible case, not because I think it will overturn anything, which I honestly think it won't, but because of transparency and future faith in elections. Democracy cannot survive without both and stay a democracy for long. And if the Democrats have credible cases of voter fraud they wish to bring to the court, I say bring them forward. Less voter fraud is a good thing no matter what. However, the Democrat narrative going into the election wasn't voter fraud, but instead, voter suppression. I think the unbelievable record turnout the numbers above show, throughly discredits the widespread voter suppression narrative. And yes, in a election where over 155 million people voted, you can probably find cases of almost anything happening just based on statistical probability, but the key word is widespread.

As a side note, I know some people's opinions of me and anyone else who writes political comments online, right or left, can cause a lot of hate and division. That's why I usually avoid it. It's easy to vilify people you don't know online when they have different opinions and life experiences. That's all too easy when you don't know anything about a person except what a few online comments on controversial topics will tell you. While I certainly disagree with Fel on some political issues, there are some I can agree with, and as an individual and especially as a son to his mother. I have nothing but respect.

[Not a ID]

From 21 January 2021 onward she can declare Joe Biden is mentally unfit to continue in the office of President and take over as Acting President.
Her doing so could trigger the second civil war.

I was worried about that, until I read the relevant section of the the 25th Amendment. If anything, there actually is a reversed problem potentially in play.

In order for the President to be involuntarily removed by way of the 25th Amendment, it requires a 2/3rd majority vote on the part of both the House and the Senate.

Even worse for Kamala at that point, especially if she tries it before the November 2022 election, she might open herself up to being impeached for having made the attempt should the Republicans get a majority in the House and grow their control in the Senate.

Well she might wait 2 years. If she became president before 2023, she could only run once more. But if she closes out the last 2 years or less of the Biden presidency, she can run twice more I believe. But I personally dont think she stands a chance at running and winning as an actual presidential candidate. Although anything is possible with how polarized the US has become.

A Biden resignation on January 21st, 2023 is certainly an option which would set her up as the incumbent in 2024 with the ability to run twice. But I'd generally agree that using that tactic is more likely to backfire than help, for what could probably be a list of reasons. Top of the list would be loss of the "voting for the first female president" as that would have already happened given she'd already be President at that point.

[sheilarmedlam]

I have been a Democrat and I have been a Republican. To tell the truth, I voted for Trump twice...not because I like the man, or even respect him, but because I liked the idea of a president that panders to the people, not other politicians. Honestly, I hate our government. There are NO good politicians. Every single day, I am more and more disheartened by the people that are supposed to be the caretakers of our country. They are all a disappointment. I think this last stimulus bill was a good example of how our politicians think of us... They passed out millions of dollars to themselves and other countries with only a minimum actually going to the American people or economy. I honestly think we would have been better off with no money being given out. The world is definitely strange now. I never thought I would see a time where announcing what party you support automatically determines if someone likes or respects you. It is sad and confusing.

On a more positive note, I find myself rereading all your books for the hundredth time, Fel. They bring me comfort in these troubled times and offer a wonderful escape. I have never understood why you don't sell them. You are one of the best authors I have ever read. I recommend your books to everyone that loves to read. You have gotten me through many stressful situations.

Peace and love to you all, no matter what party you support!

Sheila Medlam