Fascism is on the ballot

[David Horn]

(10-12-2020, 01:17 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-11-2020, 01:26 PM)Isoko Wrote: To be honest, I think the Republicans will tone down on Trump's racial rhetoric but they will keep key policies that work with American voters. Combating illegal immigration, "America First" economic policies, slowly withdrawing from Europe and Asia, etc. I would say that with such policies and a smart candidate, Republicans could do well in future elections.

I think Trump has done to the Republican Party what Reagan did. He has transformed what the party stands for and there is no going back. Moderate those views, include other ethnic groups rather then catering to the white only crowd and you do have a winning formula.

Trumps racial rhetoric? What racial rhetoric? As far as I know, there's nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade in this country. Trump's an older New York businessman from Queens who doesn't worry or pay attention to political correctness. In a sense, Trump is the only candidate that can keep the country together at this point. He looses. the Democrats loose most of the country and that will be very clear to everyone over the next four years. You see, the center left Republicans are nice but the center rights and the hard right aren't as nice and can do a shit load of damage and cause all kinds of problems for the Democrats without violence. So, keep that in mind. Right now, the Democrats in the middle are paying a lot lip service to portions of Trump's agenda but the Democrats in control don't care about the country and they've already made that very clear to the American people. The Democratic party is more or less a brand and a corporation of it's own device at this point. There is nothing real about it at this point. The only thing clear about it is it wants power, needs power and has to take power now and drastically change things to keep power.

I'm  amazed at how everything can be so easily turned into racism or an issue relating to race by those on the Left these days. Isoko, is your country reliant upon our country for anything important these days? If it is, you better pray that Biden doesn't win. If Biden wins, there's going to be a run on the banks and a major withdraw from the market because  no one wise or no one with common sense has an once of faith in either Democratic candidate or the Democratic party at this point.

The Republican side has minorities too. It just doesn't have as many of them as the Democratic side these days. Plus, they're viewed as our equals and aren't viewed as minorities by those on the Democratic side. The same goes for the  women on the Republican side as well.    The reason the Democratic party has more minorities is because the Left uses the fear of racism and hatred associated with racism to its advantage and it promotes racism  and teaches  minorities that they are inferior and teaches the whites are the problem  and they won't  advance or survive without them and all their special  protections and social programs and so forth. I'd say that half the country is well aware of this  since it's so easy to see and figure out these days. I actually think the people participating in the  polls are all Democrats and independents who lean Democrat and some independents who lean Republican these days.

I think you made Isoko's point for him.  If you're really that blind to the racists rhetoric -- outright in many cases -- then you've lost the ability to see anything through a lens other than your own.

[pbrower2a]

(10-12-2020, 03:40 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-11-2020, 11:35 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: "Establishment" Republicans have no real home in the Trump universe unless they sell out. Some have, and this has the potential to end some political careers. Trump has failed to recognize that some supporters are toxic.

No coalition remains intact indefinitely. Obviously some pols who win anomalous victories will demonstrate the next time how anomalous their wins were. Some will prove not up to the job and lose to an opponent who promises to be a competent replacement. Some may even prove to be crooks.

The Trump base is at most 40% of the American electorate (OK, someone like Classic X'er might assert that that base is the only part of America that is truly American). 40% might be enough for winning a nomination, but it is not enough for winning a nationwide election. Obviously the 2020 election must be over before we can draw any conclusions or lessons from it.

I'd say Trump's base is about equal to the Democratic base. So, who is a Libertarian voter more likely to support this year? Biden or Trump? We've had a lot of individual freedoms trampled on this year and there are freedoms at stake as well.

Except in super-safe bailiwicks, winning only the base is not enough. Donald Trump has little more than the core GOP support and his cult behind him. Trump has lost the political center, and even if the center is as little as 5% of the vote, then losing that part of the vote is enough to lose the election. 

The libertarian vote is small this time, and I expect libertarians to stand with Joe Biden, even if he is no libertarian, because small-government libertarianism is incompatible with fascism. 

Most of the loss of basic freedoms relates to the Trump Plague. The US leads in deaths from COVID-19, having almost twice as many deaths as the country in second place (India) which has about three times the US population. At 218 thousand deaths, we are approaching a total very close to the 100th largest city in the USA -- Baton Rouge, Louisiana, best known as either the capital of Louisiana or as the home of the Jimmy Swaggart Ministry. You know Jimmy Swaggart -- so bad that he is unintentionally funny for his malapropisms.    

Trump has called for arresting his opponent and his predecessor for crimes... whatever those happen to be. Note well: Trump's Presidency is itself unraveling. No, there are not "good people on both sides" when it comes to neo-Nazis any more than there are "good people on both sides" on such behaviors as drug-dealing, human-trafficking, child molestation, arson, or murder-for-hire.

[Isoko]

Classic Xer, 

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Look, I'm no fan of political correctness as much as the next guy but Trump has been caught making racist remarks. This just makes people think "he is a racist." 

As for Biden and a run on the banks, first of all I come from the UK and I live in Russia. Britain has its own strong independent banking system (a reason for not joining the Eurozone in the first place) so I doubt the UK would falter as much as other countries. As for Russia, Putin has been busy paying off all the debts and buying lots of gold for a rainy day and to become more independent from the dollar. So I doubt Russia would be too badly affected either. 

Secondly, there isn't going to be a run on the banks. There should have been a run on the banks in 2008. Or when Trump was elected. Or whatever. It never happened and it won't happen because its 2020 and not 1929 anymore. Different regulations, different methods, plus the magic printing press. 

Do I think America could have an economic collapse? No, but a mighty depression. However they would have to default on the debt which I think will come decades later and not anytime soon. Biden won't cause it. If anything, the stock markets will probably calm if Biden wins. 

I'll be honest, I see no major economic calamity happening when Biden wins (its not even an if at this point). In fact I fully expect nothing major to happen economics wise and things to return to a more "business as usual before Trump took over" mindset. 

As for Republicans having minorities, they do. I agree. But it's such a small fragment of the population that the GOP is basically the white party. Everyone knows that. That said, there is a future for the party but it does need to include minorities into its Conservative message otherwise the GOP is relegated to the dustbin. Which is why some sort of multiracial "Trump" party could actually do quite well there. The America First message plays strong with a lot of people. 

Honestly, when it comes to America, I'm politically neutral. Its your country, you guys figure it out. I think Trump though has been an absolute moron. I'd he was actually intelligent, he could have won quite easily. As for Biden, he is naturally not a strong candidate but even I have to confess, he has been more of a sane voice and did quite well in the debate. 

Considering Trump stated he'd like to sign an executive order banning Biden from running, I think that itself should qualify Biden to win. You don't say things like you'd like to ban the other guy from running in a democracy. You just dont.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-12-2020, 10:00 AM)David Horn Wrote: I think you made Isoko's point for him.  If you're really that blind to the racists rhetoric -- outright in many cases -- then you've lost the ability to see anything through a lens other than your own.

It is not that he is just blind to racism, he has redefined it to be the opposite of what most people mean by it. Most people when they say racist, they mean among other things that the best and most powerful jobs are reserved for your particular tribe. When Classic says racist, it mean each minority gets the good jobs more or less in proportion to the population.

He just thinks tribally that way.

[Eric the Green]

(10-12-2020, 10:00 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(10-12-2020, 01:17 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-11-2020, 01:26 PM)Isoko Wrote: To be honest, I think the Republicans will tone down on Trump's racial rhetoric but they will keep key policies that work with American voters. Combating illegal immigration, "America First" economic policies, slowly withdrawing from Europe and Asia, etc. I would say that with such policies and a smart candidate, Republicans could do well in future elections.

I think Trump has done to the Republican Party what Reagan did. He has transformed what the party stands for and there is no going back. Moderate those views, include other ethnic groups rather then catering to the white only crowd and you do have a winning formula.

Trumps racial rhetoric? What racial rhetoric? As far as I know, there's nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade in this country. Trump's an older New York businessman from Queens who doesn't worry or pay attention to political correctness. In a sense, Trump is the only candidate that can keep the country together at this point. He looses. the Democrats loose most of the country and that will be very clear to everyone over the next four years. You see, the center left Republicans are nice but the center rights and the hard right aren't as nice and can do a shit load of damage and cause all kinds of problems for the Democrats without violence. So, keep that in mind. Right now, the Democrats in the middle are paying a lot lip service to portions of Trump's agenda but the Democrats in control don't care about the country and they've already made that very clear to the American people. The Democratic party is more or less a brand and a corporation of it's own device at this point. There is nothing real about it at this point. The only thing clear about it is it wants power, needs power and has to take power now and drastically change things to keep power.

I'm  amazed at how everything can be so easily turned into racism or an issue relating to race by those on the Left these days. Isoko, is your country reliant upon our country for anything important these days? If it is, you better pray that Biden doesn't win. If Biden wins, there's going to be a run on the banks and a major withdraw from the market because  no one wise or no one with common sense has an once of faith in either Democratic candidate or the Democratic party at this point.

The Republican side has minorities too. It just doesn't have as many of them as the Democratic side these days. Plus, they're viewed as our equals and aren't viewed as minorities by those on the Democratic side. The same goes for the  women on the Republican side as well.    The reason the Democratic party has more minorities is because the Left uses the fear of racism and hatred associated with racism to its advantage and it promotes racism  and teaches  minorities that they are inferior and teaches the whites are the problem  and they won't  advance or survive without them and all their special  protections and social programs and so forth. I'd say that half the country is well aware of this  since it's so easy to see and figure out these days. I actually think the people participating in the  polls are all Democrats and independents who lean Democrat and some independents who lean Republican these days.

I think you made Isoko's point for him.  If you're really that blind to the racists rhetoric -- outright in many cases -- then you've lost the ability to see anything through a lens other than your own.

Indeed, and as for the Republicans doing damage to the Democrats in the next four years, could it match what they have already done in the last 40? I wonder what further damage could they do.

[pbrower2a]

(10-12-2020, 05:28 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-12-2020, 04:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-12-2020, 04:12 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-11-2020, 08:07 AM)Isoko Wrote: I actually do have to agree with you here Eric. Trump is very much an authoritian leader modeled on the Mussolini model. Just his own comments I have observed recently are quite frankly anti-democratic and more fitting for that of a dictatorship. The only thing preventing Trump from a total take over is Congress, the military and other aspects of American governance that still want to keep the democratic project alive.

You know, my wife the other day made an interesting comment about Trump. She said that not only is he finished but also the entire movement of populism is finished in America. The country is too attached to democracy to fully go down a populist path. Europe on the other hand is a different story and regularly flitters between democracy and populism (Liberal rulership vs strong man Conservative rulership) every so many generations. Trump would do quite well in a country such as Italy, Greece, even France or Poland. Heck, even here in Russia, they say the vast majority of Russians would vote for Trump...

Now this itself is an interesting debate. Trump himself is basically a caesar. America has had a taste of it yet still feel uncomfortable with the idea. For now. However, how long until another potential caesar comes along in America? Trump was in essence quite weak as caesar. He did not tear down Congress, do a march on Washington or try to get powerful people on his side. Yet could Trump be a test drive for future American politics?

Im not sure. As I said before, caesarism always does well in Europe after several generations. Even Britain is not alien to the caesar style of leadership as was the case with both Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher. Although they acted within democratic means, they still had policies that were very caesarish. Even Tony Blair exhibited these qualities during his Premier ship.

We will have to wait and see. My prediction for America is that the country will drop Trump but the democratic mandate is too weak and fractured to handle the future problems of the country. Too many MAGA people, too many economic problems down the line and a declining empire. Whether a caesar stops this, democracy rebounds and takes it head on or the country eventually fractured and secedes is anyone's guess.

Dude, an authoritarian leader wouldn't hand over authority to the states and their governors like he did with the COVID19 crisis.

But he would demand that the courts hold him above the law. He would announce that he plans to get rid of the ballots so that he will continue to stay in power. He would gas and arrest peaceful protesters. He would ram a justice onto the Court who will abuse and remove the rights of workers, consumers, women, voters, Nature and more. He would staff the government with unqualified and corrupt loyalists. He would demand that his Attorney General arrest his political opponents. He would not promise a peaceful transfer of power and would call on militias and soldiers to keep him there.

The Covid crisis is exactly where he needed to exert more authority, and he failed, which will result in his loss in the election.

Blah, blah, blah... You know, the sad thing is that there are millions of imbeciles and morons who believe the same as you which is why we need some more time for sorting out so to speak.

It is difficult for me to decide whether solipsism is stupidity or madness. We do not get to decide on our own what the truth is except on things that we can somehow influence or do ourselves. Maybe I can decide what dinner is tonight, but I cannot decide on my own that Donald Trump is no longer President. I cannot decide that global warming will stop. I cannot get a recording of Mozart's 28th concerto for piano and orchestra or watch a 
movie in which both John Wayne and Clint Eastwood star. I cannot turn the cat on my lap into a dog. I cannot make π or e  into rational or algebraic numbers or make a real number for which x^2 = -1. (There is such a number i for which i^2 = -1, but it is not on the real number line. I have made plenty of jokes about that number, as in "Donald Trump can expect to get 10i electoral votes from Maryland this year"). 

I have seen much in human nature that compels certain conclusions and much that allows no conclusion. Someone as egocentric as Donald Trump is someone who can do me little good. I would not want to make a business deal with him because I would get burned.  He looks out for himself and himself alone. He is a systematic liar who sees others as disloyal for failing to accept the lie and a fool for accepting it. He completely lacks empathy. He tries to make the world what he wants it to be. 

Little so elicits cynicism as does a plutocracy that demands much from the common man and offers little in return. Donald Trump is the classic exploiter who can do nobody any good except for being in his tiny circle.  

We have all seen what he does, and it is impossible to separate deeds from being.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-12-2020, 01:59 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: It is difficult for me to decide whether solipsism is stupidity or madness. We do not get to decide on our own what the truth is except on things that we can somehow influence or do ourselves. Maybe I can decide what dinner is tonight, but I cannot decide on my own that Donald Trump is no longer President. I cannot decide that global warming will stop. I cannot get a recording of Mozart's 28th concerto for piano and orchestra or watch a movie in which both John Wayne and Clint Eastwood star. I cannot turn the cat on my lap into a dog. I cannot make π or e  into rational or algebraic numbers or make a real number for which x^2 = -1. (There is such a number i for which i^2 = -1, but it is not on the real number line. I have made plenty of jokes about that number, as in "Donald Trump can expect to get 10i electoral votes from Maryland this year"). 

I did hear a story where the state of Mississippi by law declared that within the state boundaries Pi was equal to three. It did make calculation easier, but driving on hexagonal tires was kind of bumpy.

[Isoko]

Eric, 

You know, I've actually come to appreciate some of your points of view. I might not agree on everything but when it comes to astrology, you are on to something as some of what you have been pointing out is actually adding up to my own research. I'd  like to have a more astrological/occult based discussion with you at some point as I think both us could learn something.

Anyway, when it comes to your own research, I sort of agree that there will be a progressive side in the 2020s. However I disagree it will be a Western phenomenon this time around. America might do something to continue trying to improve the quality of life for people but when it comes to Europe? No, Europe is going to start trending towards populism again. Why Europe? Because deep down, they love their caesars....

However, Eastern Europe will go progressive this time around. It won't be American progressevism as as Eastern Europe is about I would say 30 years behind the West when it comes to Poland, 50 major cities in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia(50 - 70 in the rest of these countries due to lack of economic development) Plus the progressevism there isn't of a social nature but purely economical.

No idea how it will play out and how long term it will be but I do get readings that Russia itself has a very important destiny to play later on this century and into the 22nd. Something spiritual but I can't be fully sure yet. I'll tell you about that later. 

To be honest, I see your green awakening happening in the 2040s. However, it's weird but the only energy I get of this really taking shape is surprisingly in Britain. Yes, Britain. I see a lot of farming, small businesses opening, a real green economy taking shape there that inspires the world. 

America in 2040 - 2050 is very weird energy wise. I see like a light but it is surrounded in darkness. I see a declining country trying to get to grips with itself. I dunno what to make of it. 

As for Europe itself by that time, all I get is the star and crescent. I.e Islam, primarily in France and Germany. However its not actually all down to immigration but several factors. Conversion to Islam, people moving to Poland and other Eastern European countries for a better life, leaving Islam to sort of fill the void eventually. It won't happen straight away and will take decades to fully transpire but all I see is Islam. Trend seems to start in 2050.

None of this really fits into Strauss and Howe or maybe it does? Britain has a green awakening, America struggles once again like it did in the 60s and Europe has some sort of Islamic awakening? 

Anyway I'll leave this for another discussion. Just some thoughts to ponder. That's what I'm getting but maybe you have a different take on this?

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-12-2020, 03:37 PM)Isoko Wrote: None of this really fits into Strauss and Howe or maybe it does? Britain has a green awakening, America struggles once again like it did in the 60s and Europe has some sort of Islamic awakening? 

I see much of Islam centered on Agricultural Age thought. Loyalty to the tribe and traditional values. Moving into Europe would give them a far more Western perspective. If they have an awakening of sorts there, I would suspect such a direction.

[Eric the Green]

(10-12-2020, 03:37 PM)Isoko Wrote: Eric, 

You know, I've actually come to appreciate some of your points of view. I might not agree on everything but when it comes to astrology, you are on to something as some of what you have been pointing out is actually adding up to my own research. I'd  like to have a more astrological/occult based discussion with you at some point as I think both us could learn something.

Good. I guess you know my website has a lot on this. http://philosopherswheel.com. I am now updating my horoscope scores.

Quote:Anyway, when it comes to your own research, I sort of agree that there will be a progressive side in the 2020s. However I disagree it will be a Western phenomenon this time around. America might do something to continue trying to improve the quality of life for people but when it comes to Europe? No, Europe is going to start trending towards populism again. Why Europe? Because deep down, they love their caesars....

However, Eastern Europe will go progressive this time around. It won't be American progressivism as as Eastern Europe is about I would say 30 years behind the West when it comes to Poland, 50 major cities in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia(50 - 70 in the rest of these countries due to lack of economic development) Plus the progressivism there isn't of a social nature but purely economical.

No idea how it will play out and how long term it will be but I do get readings that Russia itself has a very important destiny to play later on this century and into the 22nd. Something spiritual but I can't be fully sure yet. I'll tell you about that later. 

OK. Russia is an important country. I have thought definitely that because of the need as well as planetary cycles, the USA would go progressive in the 2020s. But the Republicans are erecting a huge block as we speak, and the Democrats have not been bold enough to take them down in the past. And if Harris is nominated, progress could be cut short again. So I don't know, and you could be right.

I equate the terms populism and progressivism. I'm not sure where Europe is going, or the UK, or the east.

Quote:To be honest, I see your green awakening happening in the 2040s. However, it's weird but the only energy I get of this really taking shape is surprisingly in Britain. Yes, Britain. I see a lot of farming, small businesses opening, a real green economy taking shape there that inspires the world. 

America in 2040 - 2050 is very weird energy wise. I see like a light but it is surrounded in darkness. I see a declining country trying to get to grips with itself. I dunno what to make of it. 

I see a worldwide green Awakening in the late 2040s, as the Uranus-Pluto revolution cycle will be climaxing the movements begun in the sixties. This accords with Strauss and Howe as they see an Awakening 2T due at that time.

Quote:As for Europe itself by that time, all I get is the star and crescent. I.e Islam, primarily in France and Germany. However its not actually all down to immigration but several factors. Conversion to Islam, people moving to Poland and other Eastern European countries for a better life, leaving Islam to sort of fill the void eventually. It won't happen straight away and will take decades to fully transpire but all I see is Islam. Trend seems to start in 2050.

None of this really fits into Strauss and Howe or maybe it does? Britain has a green awakening, America struggles once again like it did in the 60s and Europe has some sort of Islamic awakening? 

Anyway I'll leave this for another discussion. Just some thoughts to ponder. That's what I'm getting but maybe you have a different take on this?

I do see awakenings and reforms in the Islamic countries through the 21st century. Younger generations will see if it happens.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-12-2020, 01:27 PM)Isoko Wrote: Classic Xer, 

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Look, I'm no fan of political correctness as much as the next guy but Trump has been caught making racist remarks. This just makes people think "he is a racist." 

As for Biden and a run on the banks, first of all I come from the UK and I live in Russia. Britain has its own strong independent banking system (a reason for not joining the Eurozone in the first place) so I doubt the UK would falter as much as other countries. As for Russia, Putin has been busy paying off all the debts and buying lots of gold for a rainy day and to become more independent from the dollar. So I doubt Russia would be too badly affected either. 

Secondly, there isn't going to be a run on the banks. There should have been a run on the banks in 2008. Or when Trump was elected. Or whatever. It never happened and it won't happen because its 2020 and not 1929 anymore. Different regulations, different methods, plus the magic printing press. 

Do I think America could have an economic collapse? No, but a mighty depression. However they would have to default on the debt which I think will come decades later and not anytime soon. Biden won't cause it. If anything, the stock markets will probably calm if Biden wins. 

I'll be honest, I see no major economic calamity happening when Biden wins (its not even an if at this point). In fact I fully expect nothing major to happen economics wise and things to return to a more "business as usual before Trump took over" mindset. 

As for Republicans having minorities, they do. I agree. But it's such a small fragment of the population that the GOP is basically the white party. Everyone knows that. That said, there is a future for the party but it does need to include minorities into its Conservative message otherwise the GOP is relegated to the dustbin. Which is why some sort of multiracial "Trump" party could actually do quite well there. The America First message plays strong with a lot of people. 

Honestly, when it comes to America, I'm politically neutral. Its your country, you guys figure it out. I think Trump though has been an absolute moron. I'd he was actually intelligent, he could have won quite easily. As for Biden, he is naturally not a strong candidate but even I have to confess, he has been more of a sane voice and did quite well in the debate. 

Considering Trump stated he'd like to sign an executive order banning Biden from running, I think that itself should qualify Biden to win. You don't say things like you'd like to ban the other guy from running in a democracy. You just dont.

The stock market will adjust and American business will adjust and the result will be a depression and the financial collapse of several Democratic states that are teetering right now. We basically have two America's functioning separately right now. It won't take much to make the split permanent and leave the Democratic states to there own devices at this point.

[Eric the Green]

(10-12-2020, 09:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-12-2020, 01:27 PM)Isoko Wrote: Classic Xer, 

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Look, I'm no fan of political correctness as much as the next guy but Trump has been caught making racist remarks. This just makes people think "he is a racist." 

As for Biden and a run on the banks, first of all I come from the UK and I live in Russia. Britain has its own strong independent banking system (a reason for not joining the Eurozone in the first place) so I doubt the UK would falter as much as other countries. As for Russia, Putin has been busy paying off all the debts and buying lots of gold for a rainy day and to become more independent from the dollar. So I doubt Russia would be too badly affected either. 

Secondly, there isn't going to be a run on the banks. There should have been a run on the banks in 2008. Or when Trump was elected. Or whatever. It never happened and it won't happen because its 2020 and not 1929 anymore. Different regulations, different methods, plus the magic printing press. 

Do I think America could have an economic collapse? No, but a mighty depression. However they would have to default on the debt which I think will come decades later and not anytime soon. Biden won't cause it. If anything, the stock markets will probably calm if Biden wins. 

I'll be honest, I see no major economic calamity happening when Biden wins (its not even an if at this point). In fact I fully expect nothing major to happen economics wise and things to return to a more "business as usual before Trump took over" mindset. 

As for Republicans having minorities, they do. I agree. But it's such a small fragment of the population that the GOP is basically the white party. Everyone knows that. That said, there is a future for the party but it does need to include minorities into its Conservative message otherwise the GOP is relegated to the dustbin. Which is why some sort of multiracial "Trump" party could actually do quite well there. The America First message plays strong with a lot of people. 

Honestly, when it comes to America, I'm politically neutral. Its your country, you guys figure it out. I think Trump though has been an absolute moron. I'd he was actually intelligent, he could have won quite easily. As for Biden, he is naturally not a strong candidate but even I have to confess, he has been more of a sane voice and did quite well in the debate. 

Considering Trump stated he'd like to sign an executive order banning Biden from running, I think that itself should qualify Biden to win. You don't say things like you'd like to ban the other guy from running in a democracy. You just dont.

The stock market will adjust and American business will adjust and the result will be a depression and the financial collapse of several Democratic states that are teetering right now. We basically have two America's functioning separately right now. It won't take much to make the split permanent and leave the Democratic states to there own devices at this point.

But, you Classic Xer are still in a state that's trending blue this year. About +9.2% Biden. So, what to do, poor Classic! Minnesota hasn't voted Republican for president since Nixon in 1972! And before that, Ike.

I was reading about McGovern vs. Nixon recently, and I noticed that some of the social issues they used to attack McGovern with, have become accepted, more or less, as settled law. They threw abortion at him, and then Rowe vs. Wade happened the following year. And legal marijuana is happening more and more. Not so outlandish an idea anymore.

[pbrower2a]

Speaking of Ike, I wonder whether Classic X'er can figure this one out:

... In this case I suggest that even if the partisan identities of the states are almost opposite in the elections involving Eisenhower and Obama, the blocks of states involved suggest that Ike and Obama got (and lost) many of the key constituencies in their elections. This, if you are aware of my posting history, is one of my favorite contrasts.

..........................

When all is said and done, I think that the Obama and Eisenhower Presidencies are going to look like good analogues. Both Presidents are chilly rationalists. Both are practically scandal-free administrations. Both started with a troublesome war that both found their way out of. Neither did much to 'grow' the strength of their Parties in either House of Congress. To compare ISIS to Fidel Castro is completely unfair to Fidel Castro, a gentleman by contrast to ISIS.

The definitive moderate Republican may have been Dwight Eisenhower, and I have heard plenty of Democrats praise the Eisenhower Presidency. He went along with Supreme Court rulings that outlawed segregationist practices, stayed clear of the McCarthy bandwagon, and let McCarthy implode.



gray -- did not vote in 1952 or 1956
white -- Eisenhower twice, Obama twice
deep blue -- Republican all four elections
light blue -- Republican all but 2012 (I assume that greater Omaha went for Ike twice)
light green -- Eisenhower once, Stevenson once, Obama never
dark green -- Stevenson twice, Obama never
pink -- Stevenson twice, Obama once

No state voted Democratic all four times, so no state is in deep red.

Although Obama is unique as President, someone has to be most similar to him in his regional appeal and in his constituencies of support. Obviously any big winner is going to have a chance to win Maine and Vermont as FDR didn't in his 46-state landslide, Massachusetts as did Nixon didn't in a 49-state landslide, and Minnesota as Reagan didn't in 1984 in his 49-state landslide. By temperament and character, and ineffectiveness in building his Party's strength in Congress, Obama seems closer to Eisenhower than to anyone else. The overlay between Obama and Eisenhower is between states voting for the Republican nominee in 1952 and 1956 and Democratic nominee in 2008 and 2012.

Both Presidents did well with people of above-average formal education. Very well. In 2012 Obama got 331 electoral votes, only seven of those from places that did not vote twice for Ike in the 1950's. Hawaii and Dee Cee weren't voting then.

[Eric the Green]

Well, you certainly have posted this comparison enough that, if Classic doesn't "get this one" he never will

You mean that Indiana and Nebraska CD2 voted for Obama in 2008, not 2012.

Even though the Republicans have been the party of money and bosses since 1896, and the Democrats the party of the people since then, with Eisenhower pretty much keeping the Democratic New Deal going, in the 1960s the race issue forced a gigantic geographical shift. Other social/cultural issues and peace and ecology issues continued to drive this change. From Massachusetts Senator John F Kennedy onward, the northeast quickly became more and more Democratic, and much of the Midwest and West followed suit in the late 1980s and 1990s. In the sixties the solid south shifted from Democratic to Republican in scarcely a decade, and stayed there most of the time from then on, except that the Democrats nominated southern governors for president in 1976-80 and 1992-96, and that way kept some southern states Democratic (especially in 1976). But even though VP Al Gore was once a senator from TN, by 2000 the shift had become complete, and the red/states blue/states division we see today solidified.

[pbrower2a]

2020 should be interesting in the context of that map. I am three weeks early in saying this, but it would little surprise me if Biden should win every state in white -- states that both Eisenhower and Obama won twice, along with (most obviously) Hawaii and Dee Cee. Iowa and Ohio are the shakiest such states. Biden has very good chances of winning Arizona, NE-02 (greater Omaha), and somewhat lesser chances to win North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas.

Ike would have likely won Hawaii in 1956 and done surprisingly well in DC (especially in 1956).

[pbrower2a]

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — Members of anti-government paramilitary groups discussed kidnapping Virginia’s governor during a June meeting in Ohio, an FBI agent testified Tuesday during a court hearing in Michigan.

Special Agent Richard Trask was part of the investigation that led to six men being arrested and charged last week with plotting to kidnap Michigan’s Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. Seven other men face state terrorism charges.

13 charged in plots against Michigan governor, police
Trask did not name Virginia’s Democratic governor, Ralph Northam, during his testimony in a federal courtroom in Grand Rapids. He said members of anti-government groups from multiple states attended the meeting.

“They discussed possible targets, taking a sitting governor, specifically issues with the governor of Michigan and Virginia based on the lockdown orders,” Trask said. He said the people at the meeting were unhappy with the governors’ response to the coronavirus pandemic.

Trask did not discuss further planning aimed at Northam.

The FBI did not brief Northam on any potential threat, according to a state official with knowledge of the governor’s briefings who was not authorized to speak publicly.

The June meeting was part of the FBI’s investigation of various anti-government groups, leading to last week’s stunning announcement that six men had been arrested for an alleged plot to kidnap Whitmer.

[Isoko]

Eric, 

I do check your website from time to time and I do feel you are predicting in the right direction. I agree with you that the 21st century will primarily be a more peaceful century. I think globalisation (thanks to covid) will slow down but we won't be entering a closed world of national rivalries either.

The reason is as you stated when I first posted here. Most people just want a good life and are still profiting from the current status quo so there is no desire to go and die for the flag so to say. 

Regarding the West and the green awakening, you actually gave me a good thought regarding this. Perhaps what I'm seeing is the birth of this new awakening taking place first in Britain and then spreading across the globe? It sort of makes sense the more I think about it because I only see Britain, at least to begin with. 

As for Eastern Europe, all I see them doing is adopting more democracy and improving their economies, but it is progressive. Russia is where it gets interesting as Russia is simply too big to join the West and too Liberal to join with China. She will have to chart out a different path which is why her time is coming although it won't be for at least another century before what I forsee as the birth of an entirely new culture taking shape here. 

As for Islam, well the problem Islam has is that it is basically at the same stage Christianity was 500 years ago. All Montheistic faiths usually tend to follow the same pattern.

I do forsee like what you predict with Islam sort of changing this century but I would say that it won't be an actual reformation which the religion needs. Instead it will be more akin to the reforms of Kemal Ataturk. However, until Islam can actually have a reformation, it will eventually go back towards caliphate mode as we now see with Erdogans Turkey. Or the taliban in Afghanistan. Or Ayatollah Khomeini and Iran. 

Islam has a long way to go yet but I do see them calming down in this century as I feel they have had their major wars and they simply want to rebuild.

[pbrower2a]

(10-12-2020, 01:27 PM)Isoko (to Classic X\er) Wrote: Look, I'm no fan of political correctness as much as the next guy but Trump has been caught making racist remarks. This just makes people think "he is a racist."

It is best that people speak as clearly and plainly as possible unless they seek some dramatic, poetic, or comic effect. Political correctness is loaded language that pretends that revolution comes from word choice. Words can express any ideas, for better or worse, and if anyone twists words into fraudulent misrepresentations of their meanings, then such is linguistic fraud. Orwell calls that Newspeak. Nazis and Stalinists were equally adept at such. Thus Sonderbehandlung , which literally translates as "special treatment", became a euphemism for summary execution instead of privileged exemption within Nazi murder units. Whitewashing a bad idea, let alone a crime, makes something no less objectionable once it is exposed.   

It is impossible to sanitize racist remarks. Among people accustomed to racist remarks are people who well catch on to any distortion of language. 

Quote:As for Biden and a run on the banks, first of all I come from the UK and I live in Russia. Britain has its own strong independent banking system (a reason for not joining the Eurozone in the first place) so I doubt the UK would falter as much as other countries. As for Russia, Putin has been busy paying off all the debts and buying lots of gold for a rainy day and to become more independent from the dollar. So I doubt Russia would be too badly affected either. 

More troublesome would be a failure of a government to bail out large, failing organizations more adept at playing politics than at turning a profit
In 2008 and 2009 the US government bailed out entities "too big to fail". The next meltdown may result in the inability of the system to bail out entities that instead of being "too big to fail" will instead be "too big to save". This is especially true with firms that have reputations for bad behavior such as corruption or that have too many connections with political figures disgraced after a huge partisan switch.  

Quote:Secondly, there isn't going to be a run on the banks. There should have been a run on the banks in 2008. Or when Trump was elected. Or whatever. It never happened and it won't happen because its 2020 and not 1929 anymore. Different regulations, different methods, plus the magic printing press.

 
The bank runs that went from sporadic in 1930 to commonplace from the spring of 1931 to the autumn of 1932 did the real damage. The sesqui-year meltdown from the autumn of 2007 to the spring of 2009 was analogous to the first half of the three-year meltdown starting with the Gteat Stock Market Crash of 1929:




Any question? Bad economic behavior gets wiped out; people start exercising good habits even when the rewards for such are slight. People start looking at the long term as an objective instead of disparaging it. Focus goes from quick bucks from speculation to long-term, low-yield investments such as investing in mom-and-pop businesses. People accept that real work pays the bills as hustles and bureaucracy fail. 

Quote:Do I think America could have an economic collapse? No, but a mighty depression. However they would have to default on the debt which I think will come decades later and not anytime soon. Biden won't cause it. If anything, the stock markets will probably calm if Biden wins. I'll be honest, I see no major economic calamity happening when Biden wins (its not even an if at this point). In fact I fully expect nothing major to happen economics wise and things to return to a more "business as usual before Trump took over" mindset.

...perhaps after Trump causes them to crash. I don't trust that b@stard to avoid taking revenge upon people that he considers as having betrayed him. This said, Biden is not going to push any speculative boom that typically ends in a financial panic like those of 1929 and 2008.  

Quote:As for Republicans having minorities, they do. I agree. But it's such a small fragment of the population that the GOP is basically the white party. Everyone knows that. That said, there is a future for the party but it does need to include minorities into its Conservative message otherwise the GOP is relegated to the dustbin. Which is why some sort of multiracial "Trump" party could actually do quite well there. The America First message plays strong with a lot of people. 

The GOP will have to go from fascistic demagoguery to a more sober conservatism. If it fails at that it will become a minor party . The Democratic party has been an unwieldy Big Tent after the demise of the Federalists in the 1820's and the Whigs in the 1850's only for the Democratic party to split into two mutual opposition parties.  

Quote:Honestly, when it comes to America, I'm politically neutral. Its your country, you guys figure it out. I think Trump though has been an absolute moron. I'd he was actually intelligent, he could have won quite easily. As for Biden, he is naturally not a strong candidate but even I have to confess, he has been more of a sane voice and did quite well in the debate.

 
It's best that we get some insight from people who have little or no stake in the partisan debate and contest.  Objectivity is a rarity in American  politics, especially when polarization approaches that of Spain in the 1930's. 

Quote:Considering Trump stated he'd like to sign an executive order banning Biden from running, I think that itself should qualify Biden to win. You don't say things like you'd like to ban the other guy from running in a democracy. You just don't.

He'd like to sign such an order, but who would enforce it? If Trump were able to execute such an order, then "you cheat and you lose" as applies to such contests as the Olympic Games would dictate that Trump loses.  There is no analogue in American politics, but there is one in the Philippines, where Ferdinand Marcos ordered that votes favoring his challenger Corazon Aquino be destroyed and not counted. Eventually the Philippine Armed Forces declared Corazon Aquino the winner.

[Classic-Xer]

(10-12-2020, 01:27 PM)Isoko Wrote: Classic Xer, 

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Look, I'm no fan of political correctness as much as the next guy but Trump has been caught making racist remarks. This just makes people think "he is a racist." 

As for Biden and a run on the banks, first of all I come from the UK and I live in Russia. Britain has its own strong independent banking system (a reason for not joining the Eurozone in the first place) so I doubt the UK would falter as much as other countries. As for Russia, Putin has been busy paying off all the debts and buying lots of gold for a rainy day and to become more independent from the dollar. So I doubt Russia would be too badly affected either. 

Secondly, there isn't going to be a run on the banks. There should have been a run on the banks in 2008. Or when Trump was elected. Or whatever. It never happened and it won't happen because its 2020 and not 1929 anymore. Different regulations, different methods, plus the magic printing press. 

Do I think America could have an economic collapse? No, but a mighty depression. However they would have to default on the debt which I think will come decades later and not anytime soon. Biden won't cause it. If anything, the stock markets will probably calm if Biden wins. 

I'll be honest, I see no major economic calamity happening when Biden wins (its not even an if at this point). In fact I fully expect nothing major to happen economics wise and things to return to a more "business as usual before Trump took over" mindset. 

As for Republicans having minorities, they do. I agree. But it's such a small fragment of the population that the GOP is basically the white party. Everyone knows that. That said, there is a future for the party but it does need to include minorities into its Conservative message otherwise the GOP is relegated to the dustbin. Which is why some sort of multiracial "Trump" party could actually do quite well there. The America First message plays strong with a lot of people. 

Honestly, when it comes to America, I'm politically neutral. Its your country, you guys figure it out. I think Trump though has been an absolute moron. I'd he was actually intelligent, he could have won quite easily. As for Biden, he is naturally not a strong candidate but even I have to confess, he has been more of a sane voice and did quite well in the debate. 

Considering Trump stated he'd like to sign an executive order banning Biden from running, I think that itself should qualify Biden to win. You don't say things like you'd like to ban the other guy from running in a democracy. You just dont.

Give me an example of a racist comment that Trump has made please. Minorities tend to vote Democratic for whatever reason and that's just the way that it is here. The Democratic party offers a lot of special perks, special protections and free passes to their minorities and the minorities who tend to support them. The Republicans are different and remain true to their American beliefs and their faith in the American way, the Republican party offers minority Americans the same opportunities and the same perks (lower taxation, economic growth and constitutional rights/ protections) as it does white Americans. To be honest, the Republican base is more culturally oriented and class oriented than race oriented these days. One other thing, you don't have to be white to be a Conservative in this country. You another foreign fool who doesn't quite grasp what it means to be an American these days. It take more than turning your back on a flag and being set up on some corporate board and given millions for doing it these days.

[Eric the Green]

Classic Xer, Democrats don't really offer "minorities" that many special perks these days. Affirmative action is not legislation that Democrats have passed lately, and it is in decline. In CA, a "majority-minority" state, we have the chance to vote it back into law this election (Prop.16). But otherwise, I don't see any race-based perks going on. They do provide some class-based protections, to the extent that they can (which has been very limited on the federal level since Reagan). Most social and anti-poverty programs have been cut, and social work is carried out by the police under Reaganomics. But since you think welfare and affordable health care are mostly given to "minorities," that shows the basic racial bias in your statement. Under Republicans, we live in an unequal society in which a few bosses own most of the wealth, and many people are not paid appropriately for their work.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=173308866679555

Republicans offer a failed economy all of the time. Lower taxes does not produce economic growth, except for the wealthy business interests (probably including you), and the "constitutional rights" they protect are limited to the right to carry assault rifles so you can parade around and intimidate people or massacre people or join a stupid private militia, and the right to discriminate against gays based on your religion.

Classic Xer, Democrats don't really offer "minorities" that many special perks these days. Affirmative action is not legislation that Democrats have passed lately, and it is in decline. In CA, a "majority-minority" state, we have the chance to vote it back into law this election (Prop.16). But otherwise, I don't see any race-based perks going on. They do provide some class-based protections, to the extent that they can (which has been very limited on the federal level since Reagan). Most social and anti-poverty programs have been cut, and social work is carried out by the police under Reaganomics. But since you think welfare and affordable health care are mostly given to "minorities," that shows the basic racial bias in your statement. Under Republicans, we live in an unequal society in which a few bosses own most of the wealth, and many people are not paid appropriately for their work.





same video:
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=173308866679555


Today, Republicans are forcing upon us a supreme court justice whom Trump has appointed specifically to rule in favor of his lawsuits about the election which have been rejected by lower courts, and thus give him the presidency even if Biden wins the election by over 350 electoral votes and a 10%-plus popular vote margin! Republicans are totally ruthless, lawless and immoral! Vote the Classic Xers out of power!

Republicans have packed the Courts with reactionaries that favor bosses over the rights of employees, customers, and the environment and climate we depend on.