#take someone else to represent the Republicans if you want

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

One more from (mostly) climate journalist David Roberts:

"I haven't written much about politics since the debate, mainly because I'm so overwhelmed by disgust & contempt toward this country's media & commentariat that it has rendered me inarticulate with rage. Twitter probably doesn't need more rage. I do just wanna make one point tho.

To be clear up front: I don't give one tiny hot fuck who the Dem nominee is. I truly don't. Biden's fine. Harris is fine. A warm puddle of vomit is fine. *There is no conceivable resolution to the nomination fight that could change the basic calculus of this race.*

Preventing a fascist takeover of the US is my top priority--as a journalist, as a voter, as a human. If it isn't yours too, you should feel bad about yourself. If you haven't made the stakes of this election clear to everyone within the sound of your voice, you should feel bad.

But I'm not gonna rant. [breathes deeply] Just gonna make my one point, which is this: the idea that that the process of jettisoning Biden & choosing someone else will go well -- will be *allowed* to go well -- is a deeply deranged fantasy.

The idea that Dems will do this & will end up feeling unified, that Harris will come out popular, that "the dynamics of the race will shift," all of that ... fucking deranged. Deranged in such a perfectly characteristic Dem way.

"This person/policy/slogan/approach has been irredeemably slimed by Republicans & a hostile media -- let's throw it overboard!" That's the Dem way. Always with this starry-eyed hope that they can reset, start over, get it right this time.

Just as one example -- other people have aggregated these -- there have been "calls" for every Dem nominee of the last 30 years to step aside. Dems practically delight in abandoning their own people, policies, & principles in response to bad-faith pressure. They f'ing love it.

But, as I've been saying for, oh, 20 years now, the situation is structural. The current situation is an outcome of a particular incentive structure & that structure will remain exactly the same if Harris takes over the ticket.

For centrists, journalists, pundits, *even Dem electeds*, the way you prove you are a Reasonable, Serious Person in DC is by shitting on Dems. For the left, the way you prove you are a true radical is by shitting on Dems. For the right ... well, obviously.

Everyone's professional incentives are to shit on Dems. Dwelling on Trump & his fascist movement -- however justified by the objective facts -- just doesn't bring that juice, doesn't get the clicks & the high-fives, doesn't feel brave & iconoclastic. It's just ... no fun.

So, say Biden stepped aside in favor of Harris tomorrow. How long until the vapid gossips we call political reporters find something wrong with her, some alleged flaw they just have to write 192 stories about? How long until the hopped-up mediocrities we call pundits ...

...find some "counter-intuitive" reason that the new Dem ticket is flawed after all? How long until the irredentist left gets over the temporary thrill of its new Harris memes & remembers that she's a cop & turns on her? How long before the ambient racism & misogyny in the US...

... lead center-leftists to conclude that, sure, they'd support a black woman, just not *this* black woman? In other words: how long before everyone reverts to their comfortable, familiar identity & narratives?

About 30 f'ing seconds, is my guess.

Dems uniting, feeling good, telling a clear story, receiving credit for their accomplishments--all of that is *impossible* in the current environment. It won't be allowed. Dems can punch themselves in the face all they want, abandon whoever they want, apologize all they want...

... they simply will not be allowed to turn the page & start fresh, because everyone's incentives remain the same. If they did that, elites, including media elites, would have no choice but to openly & frankly grapple with Trump & what he represents & they *don't want to*.

Everyone feels comfortable shitting on Dems -- it's just a cozy professional space. You get to feel brave & independent (just like all the replacement-level pundits around you) with zero risk.

Yes, it's abysmal, contemptible cowardice on a genuinely embarrassing scale ...

... but it is what it is & we should have no illusions that it will change with a change in the top of the ticket.

As @whstancil has been trying to tell you people (good god how he tries), the information environment is thoroughly corrupted.

@whstancil For some reason, left pundits are pathologically averse to acknowledging that fact. And so they grasp at these straws -- if we could just get rid of Biden, we could have a reasonable conversation! Yeah, sure. You absurd summer children.

@whstancil This election is not a choice between two individuals, it's a choice between worldviews, between futures. Do we want to continue down the path to multiethnic democracy or do we want to impose a white patriarchal Christian autocracy?

@whstancil At stake is the entire federal civil service. The machinery of state built since WWII. Freedom & dignity for millions. Yes, democracy itself. That's not an exaggeration. Yet this country's elites have utterly failed to convey those stakes to the populace. A *grotesque* failure.

You can not look at this extraordinary media freakout this last week and not psychologize, not see all kinds of displacement. They can't or won't be serious about Trump & so they are fucking *giddy* at having permission to scold Dems again. Their safe place.

Anyway, my point is just: none of this will change if Harris replaces Biden at the top of the ticket. The idea that the media -- with these soulless careerist court gossips in charge -- will allow it is just fantasy. They *need* Dems in disarray & so they will engineer it.

The US is right on the precipice of falling into bona fide fascism & *the vast majority of the voting public doesn't even know it*. That speaks to a deeply diseased information environment. Until Dems do something about that, all their self-flagellation will buy them nothing.

Not knowing what else to do, Dems shit on their own

(Rebecca Solnit)

[1stpoliticalcartoons]

“South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem’s bid for Donald Trump’s VP slot on the Republican ticket blew up in recent days, unless the Trump team grossly underestimates how much Americans love their dogs and other animals.

Ahead of upcoming release of Noem’s new book, “No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward,” The Guardian news outlet obtained a copy, and the biggest revelation appears not to be what’s wrong with politics, but what’s wrong with Noem.

Noem, who served in the South Dakota House of Representatives and the U.S. House of Representatives prior to becoming governor, is also a hunter. Guardian writer Martin Pengelly reports that Noem writes in the book about her 14-month-old (still a puppy) wirehair pointer named Cricket.

These dogs require vigorous exercise and can be rowdy and highly exuberant when not exercised sufficiently, particularly when young. They need a confident owner.

Cricket was a female with an “aggressive personality” who needed training to hunt pheasant, wrote Noem. So Noem took Cricket out on pheasant run with other older dogs for training. But, young girls just want to have fun. Cricket was “out of her mind with excitement, chasing all those birds and having the time of her life.”

After the outing, which Noem considered ruined by Cricket, she stopped to talk with a local family, and Cricket, apparently not secured in Noem’s truck, escaped and headed for the family’s chickens. Chaos and chicken death ensued. Cricket was just having fun, with no idea of what was about to befall her.

“I hated that dog,” Noem recounts in the book, finding young Cricket “untrainable,” “dangerous to anyone she came in contact with” and “less than worthless … as a hunting dog.” Noem appears to place the blame for that on the dog, not herself.

Summary execution from Noem was near.

After her day of frolicking and joy, Cricket was then led by Noem to a gravel pit where she was executed.

By then, perhaps all fired up to dispatch any creature that didn’t fit Noem’s view of acceptable behavior, Noem shot a male goat she viewed as “nasty and mean,” because it wasn’t castrated (again, whose fault was that?), and who chased the kids and smelled “disgusting, musky, rancid.”

The goat also met his unnecessary fate in the gravel pit, in a story that sounds like the South Dakota version of Tony Soprano.

Since the Guardian story and wide pick-up of the animal executions, Noem has not backed down on her position that the story was an illustration of making “tough, challenging decisions.” Defining the dog as a “working dog,” seems to justify for her the act of putting it down. But the more Noem responds to what the majority of people see as indefensible, the bigger the hole she digs for herself in her own gravel pit.

Death for these animals was the only option in her mind? What about rehoming, sending the dog to training with someone else? How about letting the goat have its own enclosed space and keeping the kids away? Could the goat still be neutered? Would a hose down have helped with its smell?

As a potential VP pick, the concern is that her judgment is this poor. We’ve already endured nearly four years of a president and VP with poor judgment – this country can’t endure more.

Noem’s story reminded me of a friend who said when he was an older teen, he took Halloween candy from the younger children. Even as a grown man, he didn’t seem to recognize that what he had done as a teenager was wrong. He still thought taking candy from kids was funny. And like Noem, he didn’t have any awareness that it was a story you don’t tell other people because it reflects very poorly on him.

Mahatma Gandhi, who used nonviolent resistance in the campaign he led to obtain independence for India from British rule, said, “The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” Noem doesn’t pass the sniff test.”

[lavylesby]

Trans Day of Remembrance

Trans Day of Remembrance was yesterday, Nov. 20th.

For those of you who don't know, this day (not to be confused with Trans Day of Visibility) commemorates and mourns those who've been killed for being transgender. It was started after this woman, Chanelle Pickett...

...was killed in 1995 by a man named William Palmer. Her twin sister, Gabrielle, who was also a trans woman, testified that Palmer had known about her gender for a long time. Yet he pretended to be enraged after inviting her (and Gabrielle, though she didn't go) to his home in the early morning for sex. Her body was found later that same day. (You can read more about this here.)

4 years later, Trans Day of Remembrance was officially created in 1999. Over its 25 year span, people have been given more of a voice to speak out against transgender violence and related crimes against the LGBTQIA+ community as a whole, though it hasn't always been smooth sailing. As trans people get more visibility, so do the haters.

Take this woman, Sarah McBride, as an example.

She's the first transgender member of the House of Representatives, from Delaware. Despite this achievement, she's also the target of a new bill banning trans people from using the correct bathroom, in government buildings.

Which, why are transphobic people's go to thing the bathroom? Zeroth of all, trans women are women, and trans men are men. PERIOD.

First of all, you don't know who I am. I'm going to use it and you'll probably never see me again. You're not in the stall with me when I'm using the bathroom.

Second of all, why do you want the imagery of thinking that someone pees out of a vagina vs. a penis (or anything else, in the case of intersex people)? What's that doing for you?

Third of all, you don't even consider the fact that some people get surgery, though it doesn't make someone more or less trans if they don't have surgery. That's their choice.

Fourth of all, a trans person is SO MUCH MORE than a bathroom!!

Fifth of all, you claim that the Republican Party is supposed to be Christian—where in the Bible does it say you should ban trans people from using whatever bathroom that aligns with them? And why should being Christian or otherwise religious be synonymous with being hateful against LGBTQIA+ people, or other minorities?

Anyway…

I hope that you do whatever you can to be supportive of trans people. Don't tolerate hate when you see it. Block it, or gently educate people. Saying things like "she thinks she's a girl but she's a man" and "you're manipulating children" and "men can't get pregnant" is extremely hurtful, harmful, and childish. And also, if you have a loved one who's trans, or you're trans yourself, be kind to them and yourself. If you're hurting, allow yourself to hurt. Allow yourself to mourn, to take refuge in days like Trans Day of Remembrance, and whatever safe spaces you may have. But also remember that you are not alone, and you matter, and no matter how hateful, violent, and discriminatory people are, you have a voice. And you can use it.

I will do whatever I can to make a safe space for people, whatever I do in life. And you should too. :)

[clarkes-and-god]

"Dad, do we have to do this? If they've not been answering your calls, maybe it's not worth it, I don't think they're going to do anything."

"I've spent almost $1000 on flights to get us here, I'm missing a golf trip, and I don't know what we're going to do with you if this boy doesn't man up and take some responsibility. We're at least trying this."

"We're busy, I'm not interested in buying anything."

"Moriah, it's Maximus, you and your husband haven't been answering my calls so I thought we'd pay you a visit. Are Natan and your husband home?"

"Fine, come in. I'll go get them."

"What on Earth do you want? I don't even know how you got our numbers, and you've been bothering us for weeks. How do you know where we live?"

"Do you really have no idea why we might want to see you? Look at her! And I did try to tell you when I called, but you decided not to listen, clearly. I explained the situation to Farris and Mira and they were more than happy to give me your numbers and address."

"I'm sorry she's gone and got knocked up, but I don't see how that's our business. We'll be praying for her."

"Maybe your son can tell you why it's your business."

"I didn't do anything with her, I swear! I don't know what that whore told you, but it wasn't me."

"I'm not a whore! You didn't even tell me we were doing that, I wouldn't have done it if I knew that's what it was!"

"But we didn't do that! I think?"

"You shouldn't have been doing anything with that little whore! This is why me and your father-"

"I think it's too late for that now, Moriah, they've clearly slept together. Now, can we stop calling my daughter a whore and figure out what your son is going to do about it?"

"I'm not doing anything about it. Even if I did do that with her, I might not be the dad. Maybe she did it with someone else."

"You're definitely the dad, Natan, I hadn't done anything like that before."

"But you clearly can't keep your legs closed, why should I believe you? You were flirting with me, it's your fault you got pregnant!"

"Natan, you do work in politics, don't you? Republican party?"

"I mean yeah, I knock on doors and stuff but I don't really see how that's related to what we're talking about."

"Well, I'm a senator down in Willow Creek, and maybe it wouldn't be great for your career if the representatives up here heard about you getting my daughter pregnant and refusing to take any responsibility for it."

"So I was thinking if I put a little money towards a ring and rent for a house, you might want to do something about this?"

[arizonaconservativegal]

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Here's the thing with the push to remove Trump from the ballot on the grounds of committing an 'insurrection' - it's not just about Trump. Frankly I think it's a hell of a stretch to say that anything Trump has done qualifies as an insurrection or rebellion and I would argue that using this section against him when he has not been convicted of anything or even charged with insurrection is a violation of due process. But again, it's not just about Trump. If the left is allowed to remove Trump from the ballot because of January 6, they will try it on all Republican candidates, either on the grounds that they participated directly or that they gave 'aid and comfort' to those who did.

Did you donate money to a legal defense fund or to Trump's campaign after J6? Did you retweet something questioning the election? Did you like a post from someone who was at the Capitol that day? Did you vote for a politician who did? Will you refuse to formally denounce the protestors when the media questions you on it?

"Oh come on," you might say, "that's ridiculous. 'Aid and comfort' means something specific. They can't just apply to it everything like that." Yeah, I would have said the same about 'insurrection' a couple years ago. And yet here we are.

The worst part is they don't even have to win the lawsuits to win the fight. They just have to keep us tied up in never ending legal battles over it. Just think about what that means. They can drain our campaigns of resources and keep our candidates stuck in a courtroom all year instead of on the campaign trail. They'll scare off all potential supporters because no one wants to be the next one in the crosshairs. And judges apparently can put a gag order on you so you can't even defend yourself publicly while the media is free to write all the borderline libelous headlines they want. They don't have disqualify you to defeat you. The threat and accusation is enough.

I'm not generally prone to catastrophizing about politics but this is one that genuinely scares me. I'm not worried about losing an election, I'm worried about losing the country. If one party is allowed to do this to the other, what are we left with? Single-party rule until someone else decides to take control by methods more forceful than a ballot box. If the left thought what happened before was an insurrection, well... let's just say I don't want think anyone wants to see what a real insurrection looks like.

[gentil-minou]

Hi, I just wanted to say thank you for voting third-party. I know a lot of folks have said third-party votes are wasted, but with the way things are going, I'll probably vote third-party, too, and it's nice to know there are other people out there who care more about following their beliefs than standing by a broken system.

Maybe this will be the election people realize it's not a waste.

(Also, I'm sorry folks are being nasty in your inbox. Hope things get better soon. On all counts.)

<3 <3 <3

Thank you for also voting third party!! I used to do it more back when I first started voting because I actually believed in the democratic process, until I was disillusioned by a rigged system and started voting blue because it felt like I had no choice.

Every year I voted blue I had to convince myself "this is fine. This is better than the other guy" even though I knew their warmongering policies and how they leaned too close to the center for comfort. Voting Clinton and Biden last couple cycles felt like I had to, because I was able to wear the blinders long enough to gaslight myself into thinking I actually wanted them as my president. Because I had to or else I'd "waste my vote"

I refuse to do that anymore. Now I realize I'd waste my vote by giving it to someone who would rather see us dead than lose their money and power. I'd waste my vote giving it to a broken system.

The people shaming everyone to vote blue act like I'm voting for Trump by default if I don't vote Biden, and look i followed the same rhetoric in 2020. I'm sure if you go back in my posts I said the same thing.

But the line was crossed somewhere around the minute I learned my money funded the deaths of thousands, and always has. The line was crossed when I learned the president I called into power cares more about his military pet project than life. The line was crossed when I realized Biden is old enough to remember when Palestine was it's own free nation but refuses to, because he follows the age old American tactic of "This land is my land, actually, not yours"

So yeah I'm done with feeding into a system like that.

And here's the thing about this newest generation of voters: they are soooo powerful and they are so much braver than I was at their age. They know that meaningful movement and cooperation can overtake a corrupted system. The Dems and Republicans are both terrified of them because they know they're not as easy to indoctrinate into their philosophy.

I genuinely believe that if we can use the millions and millions of people who voice support for Palestine to also put their vote towards someone else, like Claudia in the socialist party who I've been keeping an eye on or the representatives that have actually backed up calls for ceasefire, like Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar and I'm proud to say my own rep, who are trying to move the dem party to a place that actually represents me.

If millions back a third party candidate, that says something. It says we aren't going to fall into the traps laid by the generations before us. It's says we are going to fight for what we believe in.

Revolution does not happen in a year or two. It takes a lifetime. And if there's anything that I've learned from Palestinians it's that the cause for a truly free world is worth fighting for no matter how many decades it takes.

[muslimintp-1999-girl]

How can you help Gaza/Palestine in Israel? I know of the click-once-a-day donation site and the boycott list, but what else can someone do to help? Is there any groups, or anything you can do to participate in to help?

1. If you're an American, you need to call your Representatives, and not vote for either Democrats or Republicans, also knowing which senators etc the AIPAC (pro Israel org/lobby) funds might be helpful. The biggest political & military aid comes from the US & therefore the pressure should be the strongest by the allies there.

2. @/ Pal_action on twitter is an excellent account to follow & support. It takes actions to shut down Elbit systems, one of the major weapons manufacturing industries that supplies Israel weapons. It is mainly based in the UK, but they have activists in other parts of the world like Japan too.

3. Follow the BDS list of boycott. Boycott Disney, Starbucks & McDonald's as well. (Tho I understand that you're already doing that).

4. Uninstall/don't use Israeli apps. There are many apps like Fiverr & Wix that are Israeli & I think we should be boycotting those too if we could. (There's a list on my pinned post).

5. @/careforGaza on twitter is a non-profit charity in aid of helping the needy families of Palestine.

6. @/Mirna_elhelbawi on twitter provides e sims for Gaza/Palestine and Sudan.

7. Follow & support Electronic Intifada on YouTube and Twitter.

8. Following journalists on ground and non Palestinian investigative journalists helps too, spread their videos so more people are aware/up to date.

Palestinian reporters on twitter: @/azaizamotaz9 , @/wizardbisan , @/byPlestia

Non Palestinian journalists on twitter: @/davidsheen , @/AbbyMartin , @/dancohen3000 , @/MaxBluementhal

(David Sheen's YouTube channel is extremely informative too & I would recommend it to people wanting to educate themselves)

[mybookof-you]

I enjoyed the piece above. It makes some good points. I take issue with the unfair accusation that Joe Biden does not care if he loses. It gets my attention, but it does not hold it. So, I remain unconvinced that Joe Biden is not the man deserving of being the President of the United States for another term.

World leaders have agreed that President Biden is capable of conducting official business and that he continues to do so. I see that he is old and, like so many elderly, is slower than he used to be and not as quick on the draw as he once was. My ninety-year-old father in law isn't as quick on his feet as he used to be. He has to think a little longer about what he is saying. What hasn't changed are his convictions, values, and actions: his integrity.

Does being elderly mean President Joe Biden is not capable of hitting his target? I don't think so. He has clear goals and what he stands for is openly shared. When he speaks I never wonder, "What is he thinking really?" I have faith that he means what he says, because his actions line up with his words.

Former President Trump, on the other hand, is a smokescreen. He doesn't have to prepare for debates, because his strategy is to ridicule and punish at whatever cost it takes. His bets are covered. He can make stuff up, lie, and spew ugliness he doesn't even believe in. It doesn't matter, because that isn't what his wealthy supporters are looking for. They are looking for the candidate who will do what they say, what they want, and what they pay for. Donald Trump is available to the highest bidder. So, he can say this. He can say that. His supporters are ultimately okay with him saying or doing whatever else he wants as long as Trump first and foremost does what they demand.

I try not to freak out when I see him hobnobbing with Hungarian authoritarian yet president of a democracy, Victor Orban. Amongst countless other vague and not-so-vague connections and elbow-rubbing activities that get into the news, I am flabbergasted at the conduct of the Trump elected majority of the Supreme Court. That entity used to be Holy in my eyes, but it has been desecrated and shat upon. Gone are the days of the noble and valuable discourse of intelligent truth seekers. Now it is the guns of the elite that make the playbook that judges follow. Money talks, and those in positions of power are getting paid well. I try not to freak out, but it looks really bad for the lower classes which I inhabit.

The one comfort I can hold onto is that empires of the powerful and rich seldom last forever. There will come a day of reckoning, but I would prefer that the looming empire of Trump's supporters does not come to fruition. So, how do you battle a candidate who does not say anything of value? Someone who is clearly not out to represent anyone or anything but his own interests and well-being? You can't. All you can do is be yourself, and President Joe Biden has done just that all these years in our service, and I think he can be himself for another four years. Plus, we have a smart and strong vice-presidential candidate in the wings should President Biden be incapacitated in any way. And, that, dear voters, is what has extremist Republicans shitting their pants. They will do whatever they can to take her down, because they know she is bad news for them. Those of us wanting policies and agendas to continue in the direction they have been under the leadership of our current president, Joe Biden, need to stand their ground.

[mariacallous]

There are lies, there are damned lies, and then there is George Santos’s CV. In the short time that he has been in the public eye, the 34-year-old Republican congressman from New York has been accused of fabricating almost every facet of his life. During his election campaign, Santos claimed to be a “proud American Jew” whose grandparents “survived the Holocaust”. After being challenged on this, however, Santos clarified that he was raised Catholic and argued that he had always said he was “Jew-ish”. Emphasis on the ish.

What else has he lied about? Well, how long have you got? His education and work history appear to be fabrications. He has said his mother was working in the World Trade Center on 9/11, yet records show she was in Brazil. He has said that he “lost four employees” in the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Florida, but the New York Times has not been able to verify these claims. He has also claimed to have been a college volleyball star (unlikely) and a producer on Spider-Man (untrue). No one is even sure what Santos’s real name is.

I could go on and on with the lies, but I need to get to the scandals. There is the scandal about his former life as a drag queen in Brazil, which he originally denied, then appeared to admit. (To be clear: the only outrageous thing about his alleged drag-queen past is that he is now active in a party that demonises and wants to criminalise drag queens as part of a broader anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.) There is the $365,000 in campaign funds he can’t account for. And then there are the multiple dog-related scandals.

Last week, Politico reported allegations that Santos spent 2017 cruising around Pennsylvania’s Amish Country buying puppies from dog breeders with cheques that bounced. (I know that cheques haven’t been widely used in the UK since about 1492, so this story sounds suspicious to British ears, but Americans still use them.)

A few days after allegedly writing $15,125 in bad cheques to breeders, Santos held an adoption event at a pet store in New York. It’s not clear if he made money from this, but adoption fees can range from $300 to $400. Santos was charged with theft by deception, but those charges were dropped when he claimed his chequebook had been stolen.

The other dog-related scandal? The congressman is accused of promising to raise funds for a homeless man’s dying dog in 2016, then taking off with the money.

I am not sure how Santos still has a job as a lawmaker, but, as he becomes more and more of an embarrassment, his party colleagues are gradually turning against him. Fellow New York congressman Nick LaLota last week called Santos a “sociopath”. The Utah senator Mitt Romney, meanwhile, described Santos as a “sick puppy” and said he “shouldn’t be in Congress … if he had any shame at all, he wouldn’t be there”.

It turns out Santos doesn’t have any shame. On Wednesday, he told reporters that he is the real victim. “It’s not the first time in history that I’ve been told to shut up and go to the back of the room, especially by people who come from a privileged background,” Santos said of Romney’s remarks. “I think it’s reprehensible the senator would say such a thing to me … it wasn’t very Mormon of him.”

If Santos were a one-off, his antics might be amusing. But there is nothing remotely funny about a political system that has allowed someone such as Santos to get as far as he has. Indeed, Santos may not be the only fabulist in the Republican party: the Washington Post reported last week that Representative Anna Paulina Luna, who was recently elected as a Republican congresswoman in Florida, also appears to have fabricated a lot of her biography.

She, too, has claimed Jewish roots, but, according to her own family, her grandfather reportedly “served in the armed forces of Nazi Germany”. If true, these allegations would suggest that the only qualifications for a successful career in the Republican party are an active imagination and no moral compass whatsoever.

[phantomspren]

I was just going to put this in tags but I'll put it here.

This is why I'm uncomfortable when people make sweeping generalizations about conservatives/Republicans.

On a fundamental level, I do disagree with the political beliefs that lead people to holding those labels.

But at the same time, there's such a huge difference between someone who is Republican because they think that we should have lower taxes, and someone who is Republican because they think rich white men are the only people worthy of rights.

When we make those blanket statements of "every Republican is racist" or whatever, we're making it less likely that those people are going to do stuff like this. Often it leads to people doubling down on their beliefs, even if they are inherently harmful.

You also have people like my mom. She is a registered Republican, born and raised in Idaho, super super Mormon.

She's a registered Republican because she thinks that society should be built to promote the family and help families thrive.

But she also supports universal healthcare.

I tell her all the things I think are cool about Harris and Walz and she's always like "wow, yeah, that is really cool!"

She's a high school teacher and because of that now supports gun control.

She doesn't give a shit that I'm aroace. (Haven't talked about gender stuff but I'd feel pretty comfortable bringing it up at this point to be honest.)

The thing is that the public/left awareness of the Republican party has shifted, following the people who are in power. Because those in power are getting more extreme.

There are people who have always held really extreme right-wing beliefs.

There are people like many who are voting for Trump who used to be less extreme, but have followed those in positions in power in gradually making their views more extreme.

There are those like my mom and dad who have some not great but far more reasonable beliefs who feel like the Republican party no longer represent them.

It's important to talk about those problematic beliefs that people like my parents hold, but at the end of the day they are genuinely good people. They've got internalized racism and homophobia and misogyny just like everyone else, but they're still good people.

Honestly even most hardcore Trump supporters are good people. (My grandparents voted for him! They're some of the kindest people I know!)

But if we just throw everyone under the label of "Republican" and then assume that includes things like homophobe, white supremacist, etc, you're going to end up with a lot of people who don't want to get behind what you're behind.

It's so much better, in my experience, to build a report, built trust, try to genuinely understand where the other person is coming from. I've talked to my Trump voting grandparents about trans people and they listened to me. I may not have changed their minds, but they have at least seen that other side from someone they respect.

That's going to go a whole lot more good in the long run than just calling them Republican and never talking to them again.

Of course there's more nuance than this, and if someone has like genuine beliefs that. Really really not great. Dump their ass. It's not worth it. There's a difference between someone who's a white supremacist because that's what they deeply believe, and someone who's just parroting what they saw elsewhere. The later deserve time and understanding, because they have the potential to turn into the former but aren't there yet.

And of course there are people like my mom. If she took a political compass quiz it would tell her she's liberal, hands down. Still a registered Republican.

Anyways, these are thoughts I've had for a bit and maybe I'll write something later that's a bit more planned out. Hope that makes sense.

And there's just a ton of nuance here that I can't get into because I've almost hit my time limit on Tumblr and I need to go take an exam. Plus it's dumb to expect me to elaborate on every possible way this could be misinterpreted. Just assume I kinda know what I'm talking about please, unless I accidentally said something blatantly incorrect. O7

Please vote tomorrow.

Be compassionate.

Imagine those around you complexly.

Think about my mom. :p

Have a cat picture for the road.

i'm a huge fan of Republicans, conservatives or however you want to be politically labeled choosing country over party. please let me see more stories. it's a brave thing to do this. even if you voted for him in both 2016 & 2020 but you changed your mind now, WELCOME. it's a massive deal to get out of any cult successfully & MAGA is no different. being filled with anger & hatred, & fear is intoxicating & honestly easier than choosing to do the right thing. i'm glad you saw the light.

check your registration status often & don't stop talking about Project 2025. they can pretend they're distancing themselves from it as much as they want but it's absolutely their policy. we can do this though if we just show up & VOTE. we got this 💙

[bllsbailey]

More Tales From the Swamp - Here's Where a Missing Congresswoman Was Found

The current state of the United States Congress is nowhere near what the Founding Fathers had in mind. The idea was that people would go to Washington, D.C. to represent the people of their district or state for a term or two. Then they returned home to give someone else a chance to serve who may have fresh ideas, and also so those returning would now be forced to live under the laws they enacted. That is clearly not what is happening today. In Texas, one Congresswoman went missing; the place where she turned up will make you despise the swamp even more.

The missing Congresswoman in question is Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX), who represents Texas' 12th Congressional District, which includes the Fort Worth area west of Dallas in Tarrant County. Granger's last known vote in the House appears to be in July when she voted "no" on HR8998, a bill that would reduce the salary of Deputy Assistant Administrator for Pesticides Program Ya-Wei (Jake) Lee to $1. Since then, she has no recorded votes. 

READ MORE: Pelosi and McConnell: The Bipartisan Problem of Political Stagnation

A local Dallas area newspaper decided to get to the bottom of the mystery. They called both her district and Washington D.C. offices, and the call went directly to voicemail, asking that callers leave a name, number, and message. A reporter from the paper then went to Granger's district office and found it locked up with no employees inside and a window in the front door covered. When employees of the building where the office is located were asked about Granger's office, they stated that they packed up and closed the office before Thanksgiving. At this point, the mystery of the missing Congresswoman might make a bit of sense, as Granger was retiring at the end of the Congressional session. Did she want to get started on packing early before the holidays?

If only that were the case. Here is where things take a disturbing turn. The newspaper discovered that Rep. Granger was now the resident of a local memory care and assisted living home and had been for some time after she was found confused and wandering around her neighborhood. Assistant Executive Director for the memory care/assisted living home, Taylor Manzeil, confirmed that Granger was a resident, saying, "This is her home."

Bo French is the Tarrant County Republican Chairman. He stated the obvious about this crucial time for Republicans in Congress, who need every vote.

“The lack of representation for CD-12 is troubling to say the least. At a time when extraordinarily important votes are happening, including debt ceiling, disaster relief, farm bills and border issues, Kay Granger is nowhere to be found. The margin in Congress is razor thin and the lack of a Republican vote representing CD-12 disenfranchises 2 million people. We deserve better." 

Granger's constituents are also concerned about Granger's absence in Washington. But the biggest question is, why has this situation gone on as long as it has, with no one appearing to notice or even care? 

It appears that this is just another example of those in Washington on both sides of the aisle hanging onto power until they are literally incapable of doing so. It is exactly the kind of thing that the American people clearly said in November they are tired of. My colleague, Teri Christoph, recently reported on a Wall Street Journal report detailing the fact that Joe Biden's mental condition was even worse than what Americans were witnessing for themselves. Earlier this month, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) fell during a GOP lunch. McConnell, 82, sustained a cut on his face and a sprained wrist. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 84, recently fell and broke her hip, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, 90, passed away while still in office.

Meanwhile, in Texas, Congresswoman Granger and her staff get a "vacation," courtesy of the taxpayers, until the new Congress is sworn in on January 3, and the residents of District 12 have no representation. Americans don't really care which side of the aisle the Swamp tales are coming from; they just want them to end.

ALSO READ: Bombshell WSJ Report Confirms What We All Knew: The Dems Lied Through Their Teeth About Biden's Senility

[astropithecus]

Four years ago, I didn't expect Joe Biden to win. He was too old, too moderate. But I held my nose and voted for him, like the DNC told me to. Trump's historically poor handling of COVID bought us a brief window of time, and Biden won. After January 6th, I said we needed to pack the courts, abolish the electoral college, prosecute traitors, mandate vaccines, subsidize higher education, and deplatform misinformation - or else Democrats would never win another election. The Biden administration did none of that, they focused on meaningless things like "creating jobs" instead.

At 2022 midterms, after the "blue wave" failed to materialize, I expected a new Democratic candidate to emerge. Obviously the DNC wouldn't be so dumb as to run Biden again after an ineffectual two years and a clear mandate from the people that they felt failed by Democrats. Yet, the next two years zipped by and Democrats did literally nothing while reproductive rights were dismantled under their noses. Never forget America lost access to abortion while a Democrat was in the White House, not a Republican. Donald Trump didn't end reproductive freedom in America, Joe Biden did, with his timidity and inaction. You chose him to represent your interests, he chose not to show up. And yet as the next two years slipped by, no one stepped forward to take his place.

By 2024, political analysts had said for years that Biden could never win a race against Trump again, but the DNC nominated him anyway. When it became obvious mid-campaign that his cognitive decline was severe, the DNC violated the democratic process and nominated a new candidate without holding a primary. A candidate that struggled to voice a single unwavering policy stance during her short campaign. Then they had the nerve to tell voters who had spent the last four years saying "defund the police" to vote for a state prosecutor. They told voters who spent the last four years saying "black lives matter" to vote for a black woman that publicly absolved Biden of his responsibility in perpetuating segregation in American schools. They told voters begging to "end the genocide" in Palestine to vote for someone that just called the people dropping bombs "allies."

Donald Trump didn't end reproductive freedom in America, Joe Biden did, with his timidity and inaction. You chose him to represent your interests, he chose not to show up.

Republicans want you to believe you're helpless. They want you to believe racism and sexism and other things you can't change are the reason Donald Trump was elected. It's not true, though, the DNC lost because they've spent the last eight years being frightened to "establish a precedent" or "incite Trump supporters" or "face legal challenges." The GOP runs on the message that America can be better, and they have a plan. To be certain, it's a terrible plan. But you don't beat fascism on a platform of "we promise not to do anything that might hurt the fascists' feelings." Americans on both side of the aisle know the system isn't working. Trump promises to tear it down and make something new. The DNC wants you to be neutral on a moving train and uphold the status quo; go to work, pay taxes, make their donors rich, and don't complain too much. Meanwhile, if they have to sacrifice a few of your rights to appease the GOP, they find that an acceptable trade-off.

Republicans want you to believe you're helpless. They want you to believe racism and sexism and other things you can't change are the reason Donald Trump was elected. It's not true..

I am disappointed we will have another four years of Cheeto Mussolini, but I can't say I really expected anything to be different if Harris had been elected. From Mueller to J6, Democrats showed us again and again they're not capable of holding criminals responsible for breaking the law. The overturn of Roe v. Wade shows us it doesn't matter if a Democrat is in the White House, the DNC isn't willing to protect Americans' constitutional rights. All it requires for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing, and the Biden administration proved the DNC has refined "doing nothing" into an art form.

America is losing - not just because Republican voters keep falling for it, but because the DNC refuses to fight back.

I don't want to be callous toward people that feel lost and afraid about a GOP supermajority, but the truth is that whatever you're scared Republicans are about to do (Project 2025, for instance) they were going to do no matter who was in the White House. Harris wasn't going to save us any more than Biden did. The one thing we can be certain of after the last eight years is that the DNC is more interested in appeasing Fox News anchors than their constituency.

I don't really know if we'll have an election in 2028. I expect by then we'll have something similar to Russian elections, where the government makes a show of allowing people to vote but the winners are decided ahead of time. We'll be past the point by then where the problems can be solved from a voting booth - Russia's goal since they started their far-right misinformation campaign in 2014. Since then America has been fighting a war - a war of propaganda, supply chain disruptions, election tampering - orchestrated by remnants of the KGB that know Russia can't defeat the West with military strength. America is losing - not just because Republican voters keep falling for it, but because the DNC refuses to fight back.

Incremental change is a privilege

However, I do know if American democracy survives the next four years, Harris is the last time I'll hold my nose and vote for someone I don't believe in. I don't think I'm alone. White middle-class Democrats take note - Harris shows a Democrat can't win an election without socialists, without queers, without leftists, without women, without blue collar workers, without people of color. The more the DNC tries to prove to Republicans they're not the party of gay blue-haired cop-hating Marxists that Fox News says they are, the more leeway they give fascists to hurt the people that need your support - the people you need showing up to the polls in order to win an election. Incremental change is a privilege; while straight white liberals pander to the middle with wishy-washy seat-filler candidates, people die.

[jim-fetter-illustrations]

Fact Checking ain't so good if your part of the corruption!

Did ya know there are literally hundreds of Fact-Checking agencies in the United States alone that check claims about everyone from religious leaders to what politicians tell their Constituents,.... which are the people politicians and leaders have been elected to represent,.......... YOU basically!

And no religion or political party endorses any of them,..... Yeah, hard to believe but true none-the-less!

Why is that???,.......... I mean when ya think about it you would think a fact checking agency would be a good reputable place to endorse to further the future of your candidate???

But none do, because if you endorse a fact checking agency you would have to be of irreproachable character yourself, and otherwise it would be a case of “The pot calling the kettle black”, which is an idiom that means when someone accuses another person of a fault that they also have.

So that's why no political party and no religion will endorse a fact checking agencies, ............ because they all lie to their Constituents, followers and supporters.

You'd think the news agencies would fact check everything for their viewers, but they also won't endorse any fact checking agencies and would rather persuade you to believe their so called facts so you support who they support, and they do that because of who OWNS them....... that has a political agenda not particularly yours!

But there is one news reporting agency that has their own fact checking source, and they broadcast it almost every day,.......... they are owned mostly by their listeners who support them,......... they are called N.P.R.,

National Public Radio, an American public broadcasting organization headquartered in Washington, D.C.

But both republican and democratic parties don't really endorse NPR, because they can't control what they report about, or what they say about politics, so they are frowned upon by political leaders as well as religious leaders for being a potential bad source,.... again because NPR can't be Bought like all the other news agencies are.

Thank goodness most people don't listen to NPR and are told by the powers that be,.....they are somewhat of a communist flavor of kool-aid......... so leaders can sigh a relief that most people won't get the real news and only the news they can control to the masses because fact is most of The U.S. press, like the U.S. government, are corrupt and troubled institutions,...... vicious cycles of mutual manipulation, mythmaking, and self-interest for profit agencies, .....................and welcome to capitalism folks!

These are the facts no one else will tell you, because really you don't want to know the facts if they make you feel like a dumbass, so most people prefer to remain blissful and in the dark so they can feel good about themselves and not realize that they are a pathetic human being for doing nothing to change things for the better.

That's my take on it anyway, and if your not part of the cure you might as well be cut out and disposed of just like any other biological garbage!

Like

Comment

Share

[tardistimeladyyeah]

This.

I also think a lot of Rights Theory supporters have some expectation that there is the perfect candidate out there when there will never be.

Supporting the Rights Theory in this US election may result in MORE overall harm to not just Americans, but Palestine and anyone else in the middle east.

Republicans have said time and time again how much they want someone to just end everything over there (blow everything up). Based on that language, they are not interested in a ceasefire.

And sure, you can say that Democrats do the same by allowing funding for Israel to get through. HOWEVER, Democrats want to work on a ceasefire. It's also important to know that if you are upset with how your representative(s) are handling the situation, you can talk to them about it. Call their office. Write a letter. There are ways to change things without telling people not to vote in an extremely consequential election.

Even though it may be tempting, I wouldn't recommend voting for a third party right now because that's how Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 Electoral College (for non-Americans, she did win the popular vote, however, the US Constitution mandates an electoral college. The electoral college assigns a number of votes to certain states based on the population of the state obtained by the US Census that takes place every ten years. So, if a presidential candidate wants to win the presidency, they must win 270 electoral college votes. This means that, even if a candidate wins the popular vote, they can still lose the electoral college which is what determines who won the presidency). Voters didn't like Trump or Clinton, so they voted for Jill Stein instead. In swing states that went to Trump like Michigan and Arizona, if Clinton was able to get more people who ended up voting third party, she would have won. So, by voting for the third party candidate, they gave Trump the victory.

Maybe they'll come a day you can vote third party and that candidate will have a chance (most likely through ranked-choice voting, where people rank their choices for their most favorable candidate to their least favorable candidate) and when we won't have to worry about the electoral college holding more weight than the popular vote.

Personally, it doesn't make sense to me to sacrifice the rights and existence of Palestinians (yes, they matter a lot in this election because, as I've said before, one party wants to blow everything up and the other wants a ceasefire) and people with uteruses and LGBTQ+ people and the concept of freedom for all itself because you don't like how anyone has handled one thing. It's a lousy excuse to sacrifice the rights and wellbeing of everyone because one issue wasn't being handled correctly. And yes, that issue involves human rights. However, once again, one side wants to blow everything up and the other wants peace. They want to talk about this and hopefully they'll listen to the concerns of their constituents (do it peacefully by peacefully protesting (vandalism is not considered peaceful protest, so don't engage in that either). They'll listen to you if it's peaceful. If not, they won't) and include those in ceasefire talks.

Also, not voting isn't peaceful protest (because I'm sure people are making that argument). It's willingly dismissive of all of the other issues (in addition to the issue you care about and all of the logistics and international relations and stuff) that America faces. Remember, people with uteruses are suffering under abortion bans in red states. Those bans are considered human rights violations. Trans people are struggling to access healthcare. Immigrants (including Palestinians) are under attack every day in the US. Teachers are struggling to teach because they have to walk on eggshells because they may lose their job if one parent complains about one book or one lesson. Gun violence is still a huge problem. Obviously, don't forget about Palestine, but don't forget about the other issues you say you care about. It's important to call a genocide a genocide (especially when it clearly is a genocide) and it's important to vote people in who will work towards a solution because everyone deserves a safe home on this planet. But, we can't do anything when our own rights are stripped away and when there is no longer anything to save over there.

There is no one candidate that will ever meet all of your policy wishes. That's just how it is. Vote Harris/Walz to get somewhere besides bombs.

Okay fine. I teach an ethics course and I just keep seeing all of this discourse on whether or not to vote in the upcoming US presidential election and I just wanted to lay a few things out here.

People who are saying they will abstain from voting because they see voting for anyone as supporting/endorsing genocide are operating from a Rights Theory perspective.

Basically, Rights Theory posits that you should never take any action that could violate someone else’s rights. EVER. The balance of benefits and harms does not matter. There is NOTHING that can justify taking away the right to, for example, life.

And I think that’s where these anti-voting folks are predominantly coming from. They see voting as endorsing/enabling genocide, full stop, and therefore it is morally indefensible EVEN IF IT WILL RESULT IN LESS OVERALL HARM.

People who are arguing that you SHOULD vote, and vote for Biden specifically, are operating from a Utilitarian Theory perspective.

Utilitarianism is all about balancing benefits and harms, and essentially prioritizing overall harm reduction. They recognize the harm the system is creating, but are willing to participate in the system because through doing so they can ensure that various harms are minimized--certainly not eliminated, but reduced, and, importantly, made easier to eliminate eventually.

Through utilitarianism, we can actually make people's fundamental rights EASIER to defend! But a lot of people are so caught up in the idea of moral purity, and Rights Theory, that they're willing to let their inaction erode people's rights because at least they aren't actively participating in the system. (they are still passively participating, however, and we can argue about inaction being a form of action, but I digress)

Point being, VOTE. Because of Utilitarianism, but also because, if you believe in the inalienability of people's fundamental rights? Voting will make it much easier to protect those in the long term, and that's frankly more important than you getting to feel exempt from an exploitative system you are nonetheless inherently a part of and complicit in.

[necarion]

I do not think that the UK's Republicans know how much (or little) the change will affect their country's national identity. Like, on first glance, these changes feel like they'd be small. You're just changing an unelected head of state for either the PM or some other elected head of state. Daily life will be the same. The people who make decisions will be the same! You'll just love your country and not have to care about your monarch.

To be clear, I'm not actually advocating for or against the British Monarchy here, I'm just spitballing some Chesterton's Fence ideas.

As a stupid change: the United Kingdom's name would change. Like, sure. If Irish Unification happens, it will go from "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" to "The United Kingdom of Great Britain". But that still remains the UK. If the monarchy goes, you're changing passports, anything that asks your citizenships, the damn web URL domains. In a lot of ways, this is trivial. People get used to changes in names, and places that have undergone revolutions have done it. But it would be systemic. If other countries threw out their monarchies, almost everything would stay the same. The demonym of someone from Sweden or the URL wouldn't change if it went from "The Kingdom of Sweden" to "The Republic of Sweden" because everything is just Swedish. But the UK is 4 countries wearing a trenchcoat and so they'd end up having to replace everything to handle that change.

How the rest of the world sees the country. Other than the legacy views of British imperialism, probably the biggest international sense of UK is that it has a Queen King. What other monarchs do the world care about? The King of Saudi Arabia matters internationally because they're an active head of state/government with whom people need to negotiate because of oil/geopolitics. There are a ton of minor ones in the middle east that matter for the same reason. People in America are generally surprised that Belgium/Netherlands/Nordic countries have kings and queens still. Japan has an Emperor still, but he's super irrelevant on the world stage and is like the 30th thing you think of with Japan. But, like, "King of England" is integral to that national perception. People talk to him because there is soft power, yes. But what else does England have?

Another aspect to their election. You don't really have to care about your head of state if they're a monarch. But you'd have to add another election if there became a President/Prime Minister republic, and that suddenly adds a different form of political contention. For the most part, the UK has a decent system where you have to care about basically one national election choice: who you want for your parliamentary representative. "We have to give a shit about something else huge" changes elections quite a lot.

As a different note, I do not remotely think that taking away the monarch would calm any sort of weird local nationalisms. But I'm not sure that the thing that would replace "I love our King as a symbol of our country" would be a better and purer political sentiment. Patriotism turns out to be a very powerful political urge, and it's entirely possible that funneling it into following the royals on TV is a good thing.

[rennyji]

Nikki Haley-the sharp candidate with heart

the sharper candidate

I saw the state of the presidential GOP primary race on television today, given by Nikki Haley.

I do not mean to put pressure on one candidate over another, but we need someone sharp, and able to finish sentences and perspectives, as does Nikki Haley, or someone equally good who measures to the bar of hard work she set.

Something I extracted from her speech is her immense spirit for wanting to take on the uphill battle of not just becoming President of the United States, but on a more preliminary level: the nominee for the Republican Party.

What she's doing, and quite a lot at that, is what she is willing to do, just to become the "nominee of her party," even when the odds/statistics are stacked against her.

She shows grace and eloquence in speech and demeanor. It alludes to mental sharpness. She doesn't sound on low volume like Joe Biden, and she completes a thought, unlike Donald Trump.

Biden and Trump symbolize brain dullness. If there is a minimum age to become President (I think 35, so that a person has some life experience), shouldn't there be an age limit, as well, to address biological/genetic mental acuity?

On Trump completing a thought, this is what he said after winning one of the primaries - the quote is from The Daily Mail from his speech:

--- The quote:

"'These are very dishonest people and you're always fighting that, and just a little note to Nikki: She's not going to win,' Trump said. 'But if she did, she would be under investigation by those people in 15 minutes and I could tell you five reasons why already. Not big reasons. A little bit of stuff that she doesn't want to talk about. But she will be under investigation within minutes,' he said, introducing suspicion without specifying any particular inappropriate conduct."

My take: Now if Trump is so confident in his accusation, why doesn't he list the five reasons Haley should be under investigation? Who are "those" people? And really? "15 min?" And if they're "not big reasons," what is the accusation? It's how Trump talks. He makes a claim, walks a little backward, and gives no specification, after. What his supporters seem to like is his vengeful tone, which seems synonymous with raising America from the dead.

But what his supporters need to remember? Enthusiasm only last for so long, whether its sourced in vengeance or something else. What lasts is conviction and will power. Nikki Haley believes in her ability, she believes in this country, and she exercises immense will power to win support to her cause. Haley shows she can go the distance, that "she will be here" today, as well as "tomorrow", not just for the duration of the enthusiasm.

Today, 2/20/2024, when Trump got off the plane in - I think - South Carolina, he said, Nikki Haley? "...We had enough of her." Just at that, his supporters indicate their approval. But "enough of what?" What's the topic?

Trump never specifies. And his supporters don't care.

Everyone views the Reagan administration in high regard. If you were to look at the warm presence of Reagan congratulating someone or empathizing with someone, is he more like the vindictive Trump or the sociable Nikki Haley? Did the GOP just settle on someone who carries the most sway with people for a quick win? Seems like they settled for the quicker option to carrying out their agenda, from what's seen with the minimal progress in the House of Representatives, since the ousting of the Speaker and the endless Continuing Resolutions. Did the GOP give up on the substance or content of one's character for just the idea or notion of MAGA? Whose more likely to do the work of making America great again?

I'll be honest. I like Trump's drive to influence crowds and his determination in saying things like "we're going to drill" in Alaska. But did he actually build the great beautiful wall on the southern border, that he touted, and did he get Mexico to pay for it? All that influence and determination...and yet, Trump left the wall to be built under the Biden Administration, through restriction of funds allocated to building a wall, through the Impediment Act. And What kind of a wall was ultimately built? Not one made of solid stone, but of removable wooden pillars. If Trump did what he said he was determined to do, would it have resulted in the border crisis under the Biden administration?

Regarding Trump's influence of crowds... those people who fought to overturn the election under his suspicions - aren't they in jail while Trump returned to his life and endured his court cases? What about his lawyers? Did they get paid? What about the mayors, and congressman that supported him? Didn't he turn on them? What about Fox News contributors who suggest something to help him in his day to day chaos? Despite daily loyal support, doesn't he lash out against them on True Social or Twitter, by calling them RINOs? Some of those contributors, just yesterday were facing "fakes" accusations on Twitter, for constantly supporting him without the slightest Thanks.

***

If you can't express a difference of opinion to a leader, causally or comfortably, then you have what Alexei Navalny and his family went through in Russia.

If I need help because my car stopped working in the middle of the road, who's more likely to call me a cab: Donald Trump or Nikki Haley?! Who is likely to continue the argument on when life begins, or the "life of soul" (more than the body) begins - Haley, a mother of two? Or Trump, connected with two recorded infidelities and a related lost recent court case?)

Who is likely not to separate children from parents, when deporting illegal immigrants - Haley or Trump?

Who is likely to help their neighbor in countries across the world like Ukraine and Israel - Haley or Trump?

Who addresses China's potential to hack America's power grid - Haley or Trump? Haley.

---

Biden? The gaffs are endless. You often see him wander from one direction of the podium to another, unsure of where to go, or forgetting where to go. This is after 8 years as VP and 4 years as President.

He was asked today, 2/20/24, "Who would you rather run against: Nikki Haley or Donald Trump?" He apathetically says, "He doesn't care."

And that's the thing. He is a well intentioned, accomplished individual. However, from such statements, from his low volume, especially in comparison to the enthusiasms of Trump, it's hard to wonder if he cares enough for action. Maybe Biden's tired... When asked about closing the border, Biden was heard saying "Congress doesn't give me the money." So that's it? You gave up? You have to assume he did, because for the past year alone, there's 5000 asylum seekers daily, according to an average, where there could be a total of 25000 asylum seekers, weekly. How can there be that many asylum seekers, weekly, for just this past year alone?

Then the current administration, that doesn't have money to close the border or build The Great Wall, finances health care, credit cards, & housing for asylum seekers, while San Francisco, alone, is lined with native homeless people on its streets.

---

Nikki Haley is a candidate, who chooses to, and can, appear on CNN and Fox News, whereas Trump may not be CNN's favorite, and Fox News is conversely supportive of her contender. Nikki shows she can lead both parties, or both sides of the isle, just by being able to make comfortable appearances on both channels.

She is toiling away for a position, that her contender, Donald Trump, believes is assured to him.

While Trump uses non-mandatory court appearances to not debate or campaign, Nikki Haley is slaving away for a belief, a hope, a dream. Isn't that the process towards the American Dream? I heard in some shape or form, that the American Dream is money, power, & respect. While Trump rides on the praises of his affluence or the image of money, Haley clearly seeks the "respect," earning the power (and consequently the money/perks) of the Presidency. She makes this clear by standing her ground and knowingly going against statistics.

It reminds me of something I heard, growing up. I had a second cousin who was quite talented in academics. Me? My focus, was not that good. My second cousin became comfortable in what he saw as a sure thing to getting A's. We were a competitive pair. He felt so comfortable over the edge he had over me, he started taking it easy. I continued to toil away. I realized if my focus wasn't good, I can still do equally well by notating and memorizing everything the teacher said. I became acquainted with the saying, "When talent doesn't work hard, hard work beats talent." That semester, and every semester after, I was on the Dean's List, while my second cousin got second honors or less.

In the case of my second cousin, and maybe Donald Trump, when things seem like a sure thing, you kind of coast by. For something like an election, you're not showing that you really want to take on a task, that revolves around leading and helping others.

For the evangelicals and Middle America that somehow rise to Trump,

Is it Trump, from sitting idly/playing victim of the government, or Haley toiling away,

that composes the individual who made 10 coins, 20 coins? Who is coasting by, burying the one advantage, the one coin, they currently have?

Who is the "persistent servant" of the people, who should get the Blessing of Victory from the Divine Master?

---

The infamous 14th Amendment used against Trump says:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

My take:

Everyone gets hung up on the word "insurrection." Trump may not have said, "overthrow the government," but he did instigate a "riot." By now, with his derogatory sayings of court clerks and others, Trump knows those people are going to fall victim to the hate of his supporters. His supporters are a passionate group. They have fire and that's as clear as day. I think it's safe to say, Trump knows of their passion. When he encourages a rigged election notion, he should be cognizant and responsible to expect the kind of reaction received in that fateful January.

That being said, I get hung up on the word "officer of the United States."

Maybe Trump sees himself as Putin. Maybe, just for the 1st day, he wants to be a dictator so that he can "drill, baby, drill" in Alaska to lower gas prices.

However, from his mannerisms, I don't think he, like others, realize that the office of the President is not King or Dictator, but an office of service to the people. It is not an office for praises and glory, but of humility.

In my opinion, the office of the President is the epitome of the line: "officer of the United States."

If the Christ figure, believed as God, in Christianity, can lower Himself to wash the feet of His disciplines, the President, is and can be, an officer of the people. Even if Christ were to be a character in a story, His humble action of washing feet extends into applicable reality.

---

If Trump is talent, because of his influence, Nikki Haley is hard work. Trump, just yesterday, was debuting his sneakers, while Nikki Haley was still trying to indicate why she is the better candidate. Again, "when talent doesn't work hard, hard work beats talent." "Heroes come and go, but legends never die."

Heroes make headlines, but legends make history.

Haley knows the numbers. But she still faithfully continues out of conviction.

Trump is saying things like "if Nato members don't pay what's owed, then he will encourage oppressors to rage against them."

A leader, especially the American President is not a tyrant, but a figure of compassion. Haley embodies the latter.

When I write about something, it's usually because it's something thought provoking, that doesn't require much thought: it just flows.

Writing my support of Nikki Haley, is not something I had to think about, especially if you're seeing me type this as I'm typing. It just flowed, from all the things I've seen and heard. I don't have to think about whether she is the right candidate. On people's minds, there is Biden, Trump, Haley. Only Nikki Haley makes sense.

I do not mean to put pressure on one candidate over another, but we need someone sharp, and able to finish sentences and perspectives, as does Nikki Haley, or someone equally good who measures to the bar of hard work she set.