for god's sake can we please primary biden, please

[Jwb]

it matters i think because it's good to make the fringe right seem fringe - right now they use confusion to attract joe sixpack -

also i don't want to talk to you like you're part of a monolith

in fact, trans people take every approach imaginable and many a variety and many are non-political

i mean just like any group every individual has their own brain

some of those people are non-negotiable but some are flexible- people believe things one day then claim they never believed it the next

if there's a messaging problem maybe it can be improved upon and maybe there's too much orthodoxy

it used to be like everyone thought all gays were super flamboyant- then it was like dink (double income no kids) and suddenly a lot of (not all) corporate america loved them some gay

the image changed, now i think the typical whoever don't see gays as a monolith but as individuals

i know you express a lot of concern about the political climate and i hear you there's huge cause for alarm but i still think you're actually proof of the progress and whether you wanted it or not i think that's why we love you on here - we should or i should love you the same trans or not but i can't help but love you more because you're a living representive of the inclusive world i want to live in but i also know i have to respect it's not your duty to be an avatar for something for me

it feels related to me the way many poor whites in the rural wherever are presented as hating blacks and voting against their financial interests as long as their whiteness is acknowledged

but i have been in the boonies a pretty lot - granted i'm white but i also think the ultra bigoted redneck is largely a social media fiction but the fiction is so widespread that they feel under attack

that's part of the reason why i'm so into the southern white trash thing

those cunts cannot define my culture i define my own fucking culture not twitter or cnbc or anyone that isn't me

and yes i'm going here again

it starts with loving the poor and economic justice

randon as fuck i know

don't you think the image of gays changed largely due to increased exposure, normalization, etc?

I think it was that much more than the idea of gay rights activists dialing back their rhetoric.  If anything,  i remember the same conversations about how people were fine with gays but resented having it "shoved down their throats" (pause) in the form of pride parades, Will and Grace, queer eye for the straight guy, etc. Gays really never dialed it back but eventually it just became common place and open enough that it was no longer a dirty little secret that could be openly despised by the mainstream. Then we move in to the stage where people are forced to conceal their hate.  Which is progress.

I sorta agree with the idea that it really doesn't matter that much atm the specific arguments being made in favor of trans rights. They have the spotlight from people who don't value their input. I.E. the influencers and pundits and politicians that will make a career off of it.

Those people will keep banging that drum until they eventually lose the culture war.  They aren't going to be argued out of it.

The average joe six pack, on the other hand,  listens to those people.  Eventually they stop listening as much over time, as the culture moves on.

I'm not saying don't make whatever type of argument.  But really you might as well stand on "trans women are women" if that's what you believe rather than sugar coat it cause in effect that moves the goal post a little further in your opponents direction. Makes it so that on the one extreme you have a fairly moderate take and on the other end you have a fairly far right take.

[Jwb]

I disagree that it's not about charisma. Charisma is only part of the equation though. Just look at how well Kamala or Bloomberg did in the Dem primaries compared to the other candidates.

I'm not sure if Trump's trial balloon suggestion of not doing the debates is serious or not. But I doubt it's because he fears he's 'going to get wrecked'. I just think he knows that with his sizable lead right now, assuming it remained that way up until the first debate, he'd have little to gain, and a fair bit to lose. This assumes the debate even happens. If the only people polling high enough to qualify are Chris Christie, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Nikki Haley (assuming DeSantis doesn't run), all in the single digits, would the RNC even hold the debate? Would it be worth it for Trump to show up and put himself in a position where he'll be the complete focal point for the other candidates to try and attack and criticize? Of course, if they hold the debate and he decides to skip it, he'll face accusations that he's a coward who's afraid of the other candidates - but if he's dominating polls, would that even matter?

Charisma might not be a big deal when you're running for governor, but as a national candidate for President, you'll have a difficult time getting people to go out and vote for you without it. And if DeSantis can't sharpen his image and presentation, people are going to view him as the uncharismatic tribute band for Donald Trump. And not many are going to want to go out and vote for the tribute band when they could instead see the original act.

Even if DeSantis is a better debater in an academic sense, when he's in front of a national audience with Trump throwing jabs and personal attacks and jokes at him, do you think he's going to come out of that looking better? Or will he fumble and crumble, and look weak and ineffective compared to Trump?

Ron DeSanctimonious is probably only the warm-up nickname. If he gets in the race and on that debate stage, there will be more - especially if he answers questions like this:

Meatball Ron? Bobblehead Ron? There's many options. Trump is shameless, so these kinds of tactics don't really work well against him. But he has an impressive ability to hone in on the weakness and vulnerabilities of others and drink from that well until it's dry, e.g. John Kasich's table manners:

i agree charmisa is important but let's not forget biden basically won on an anti Trump platform and had 0 charisma.  If you can rally your base against the common enemy,  you can get by without it.

Problem being that while the GOP keeps flirting with people like DeSantis based on the idea Trump has too much baggage,  they fundamentally don't hate Trump.  In fact they still sorta like him,they just resent the baggage. So i don't think that Trump will provide the same benefit to DeSantis that he did to biden.  But all this to say i think things are pretty much up in the air at this point.  It's a pure guessing game.  If i were forced to bet right now,  I'd bet on biden getting his second term. I'm not at all confident in that but i haven't seen anything from either Trump or DeSantis so far that would make me change that bet.

[Toy Revolver]

don't you think the image of gays changed largely due to increased exposure, normalization, etc?

I think it was that much more than the idea of gay rights activists dialing back their rhetoric.  If anything,  i remember the same conversations about how people were fine with gays but resented having it "shoved down their throats" (pause) in the form of pride parades, Will and Grace, queer eye for the straight guy, etc. Gays really never dialed it back but eventually it just became common place and open enough that it was no longer a dirty little secret that could be openly despised by the mainstream. Then we move in to the stage where people are forced to conceal their hate.  Which is progress.

I sorta agree with the idea that it really doesn't matter that much atm the specific arguments being made in favor of trans rights. They have the spotlight from people who don't value their input. I.E. the influencers and pundits and politicians that will make a career off of it.

Those people will keep banging that drum until they eventually lose the culture war.  They aren't going to be argued out of it.

The average joe six pack, on the other hand,  listens to those people.  Eventually they stop listening as much over time, as the culture moves on.

I'm not saying don't make whatever type of argument.  But really you might as well stand on "trans women are women" if that's what you believe rather than sugar coat it cause in effect that moves the goal post a little further in your opponents direction. Makes it so that on the one extreme you have a fairly moderate take and on the other end you have a fairly far right take.

that's fair and square i think

many gay men fighting their way into the upper middle class was the tipping point to widespread acceptance though - legal gay marriage came because the wealth bought legitimacy but how they got there and were able to stay there while out of the closet took efforts from all fronts - radical and moderate and boring pain staking piece by piece legislation

the more we discuss trans rights the more i see the usefulness of the word cis - whether it's used as a pejorative or not it brings honesty and clarity to the conversation

trans women are women is fine and makes sense but "trans women are cis women" doesn't however the distinction between trans and cis while fluid at the bottom line they're binary terms

[SGR]

i agree charmisa is important but let's not forget biden basically won on an anti Trump platform and had 0 charisma.  If you can rally your base against the common enemy,  you can get by without it.

Problem being that while the GOP keeps flirting with people like DeSantis based on the idea Trump has too much baggage,  they fundamentally don't hate Trump.  In fact they still sorta like him,they just resent the baggage. So i don't think that Trump will provide the same benefit to DeSantis that he did to biden.  But all this to say i think things are pretty much up in the air at this point.  It's a pure guessing game.  If i were forced to bet right now,  I'd bet on biden getting his second term. I'm not at all confident in that but i haven't seen anything from either Trump or DeSantis so far that would make me change that bet.

I wouldn't say that Joe had zero charisma, I think that's underselling him a bit. He had more charisma when he was younger, when he could sell his ice cream and corn pop stories without fumbling the words as much, but he certainly is more likable than Kamala or Bloomberg (low bar as that might be). I'd also say he's more likable than Elizabeth Warren too, who always came off to me like a humorless schoolmarm.

For his 2020 run though, Biden, unlike DeSantis, had the luxury of already spending 8 years in the national spotlight as Vice President. Regardless of who the GOP nominates, they'll be vilified by the D-leaning media (just as the R-leaning media vilifies the Democrat candidate) - and DeSantis probably has more that he can be vilfied for than the other non-Trump GOP candidates. Without the proper amount of charisma and personality, I don't think he's going to be able to win moderates over in the face of the villification. He'll just be a younger version of McCain or Romney in terms of personality with a policy prescription closer to Trump.

[Toy Revolver]

I'd also say he's more likable than Elizabeth Warren too, who always came off to me like a humorless schoolmarm. 

i don't remember her being at all funny but i love her politics and it was her that greatly expanded bankruptcy laws to combat predatory lending

and she doesn't seem so creepily power hunger like the worst boss you ever had like hillary

i'm not saying you're wrong but i like her but pochahantas was a hilarious nickname

[Rubber Soul]

i don't remember her being at all funny but i love her politics and it was her that greatly expanded bankruptcy laws to combat predatory lending

and she doesn't seem so creepily power hunger like the worst boss you ever had like hillary

i'm not saying you're wrong but i like her but pochahantas was a hilarious nickname

I supported Warren in 2020. She's quite likable on the late night circuit and is more than willing to make fun of herself.

And it was refreshing to support a woman who seemed more worried about the direction of the country than her own personal ambitions.

[Toy Revolver]

And it was refreshing to support a woman who seemed more worried about the direction of the country than her own personal ambitions.

heavy emphasis on seemed to but yeah i think i have some vague memories of casual interviews - i mean i didn't HATE her - for me that's pretty good 👍

[Jwb]

I wouldn't say that Joe had zero charisma, I think that's underselling him a bit. He had more charisma when he was younger, when he could sell his ice cream and corn pop stories without fumbling the words as much, but he certainly is more likable than Kamala or Bloomberg (low bar as that might be). I'd also say he's more likable than Elizabeth Warren too, who always came off to me like a humorless schoolmarm.

For his 2020 run though, Biden, unlike DeSantis, had the luxury of already spending 8 years in the national spotlight as Vice President. Regardless of who the GOP nominates, they'll be vilified by the D-leaning media (just as the R-leaning media vilifies the Democrat candidate) - and DeSantis probably has more that he can be vilfied for than the other non-Trump GOP candidates. Without the proper amount of charisma and personality, I don't think he's going to be able to win moderates over in the face of the villification. He'll just be a younger version of McCain or Romney in terms of personality with a policy prescription closer to Trump.

i mean there were like 20 people on stage in 2020. A few of them were bound to have less personality than Joe Biden but that's really not saying much to me.  But sure, 0 charisma might be hyperbole but he's been a fucking bore and a stuttering prick for as long as i remember.  I don't even remember anyone liking him when he was Obama's VP. He used to be known as a gaffe machine and a liability even back then from what i recall.

[SGR]

i mean there were like 20 people on stage in 2020. A few of them were bound to have less personality than Joe Biden but that's really not saying much to me.  But sure, 0 charisma might be hyperbole but he's been a fucking bore and a stuttering prick for as long as i remember.  I don't even remember anyone liking him when he was Obama's VP. He used to be known as a gaffe machine and a liability even back then from what i recall.

I don't know about right now, but before he was elected in 2020, I remember seeing a poll that showed that black women absolutely loved him and trusted him.

[Toy Revolver]

I don't know about right now, but before he was elected in 2020, I remember seeing a poll that showed that black women absolutely loved him and trusted him.

i was gonna say that!

black women loved him - idk now but it's not like they're going to vote republican (although it's a hillary move to ignore your base - hispanics, in her case)

[Toy Revolver]

WWIII on the Installment Plan
The Invention of a Wartime Presidency to Save the Biden Administration

DENNIS KUCINICH

WWIII on the Installment Plan
The Invention of a Wartime Presidency to Save the Biden Administration

DENNIS KUCINICH
MAY 4, 2023


Has the Russia-Ukraine war blown up the global nuclear order? - Bulletin of  the Atomic Scientists
Illustration by Thomas Gaulkin
Yesterday's attempt to attack the Kremlin with a drone strike, supposedly to assassinate Vladimir Putin, is being pinned on Ukraine. But this is a proxy war of the U.S. versus Russia, and no one is fooled. Ukraine is a simply a U.S. pawn and can make no major moves without checking with Washington.

The U.S. has successfully muzzled its energy-starved allies in Europe from even objecting to, let alone investigating the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline.  Europe is stuck with the skyrocketing cost of U.S. supplied replacement fuel.

The destruction of Nord Stream followed well-publicized mock U.S. nuclear strikes targeting Russia and the equally provocative shipment of depleted-uranium munitions transferred to the Ukraine battlefield through our "special relationship" with the British government. The Russian government has publicly warned that the use of such weapons, as were used by the U.S. in Iraq and Syria, will lead to escalation.

The Biden Administration has done everything it could to incite a hot war directly between the U.S. and Russia, sacrificing Ukrainian youth and the majesty of Ukrainian cities.

The drone strike and the depleted uranium transfer are made to look like the West is somehow succeeding in the battle which, for all intents and purposes, will soon come to an end— with a phony declaration of victory of sorts (definitely not for Ukrainians). Then the infernal Enemy Engine will pivot its wrath and venom towards CHINA.

Get ready for a parceling out of some of the manufactured hate that has been reserved for Russia and President Putin -- to hate China and President Xi, and to suffer a fully-machinated Red Peril.

One need only to look at the "Down Under" Australian press' frightful China fear-mongering to know what we in the 'Up Above' can expect.  This has been well chronicled by Caitlin Johnstone, whose Substack posts are a must read.

The Biden Administration, having unsuccessfully diminished the Russian economy with its broad sanctions, and having failed to defeat the Russian military, will soon lead us to believe that the same geniuses in Washington, London and Belgium who brought us the war in Ukraine, will somehow succeed in holding in check China, or perhaps even toppling President Xi, through military means.

The depraved thinking that resulted in approximately $140 billion wasted for the war in Ukraine and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers, countenances even greater opportunities in the East.

Witness:  The U.S. has brought Australia, South Korea, Japan into an alliance against China and is pressuring the Philippines and Indonesia to join in as we ship arms to Taiwan. The intent is to bait China, to try to make Taiwan the next Ukraine, while coordinating submarine patrols amidst risible plans to send ships from the EU to patrol the Straits of Taiwan.  If China did something similar in our sphere, Congress would declare war.

The geographically-confused North Atlantic Treaty Organization, (NATO) ever ready to be the U.S.' wrecking ball, now considers China "a threat to global security." Remember, China has brokered a peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and attempted to do so in Ukraine.

Remember, the U.S. has 800 military bases abroad and China has zero.

Remember, China is holding almost a trillion dollars of US debt.

So, what is this all about?  The White House, which bet on the forbearance of a nuclear-armed Russia, in a conventional proxy war in Ukraine, is similarly counting on the forbearance of nuclear-armed China in a conventional war over Taiwan.  Thus is the horror of unfettered brinkmanship.

NBC News obtained a memo in January where a four-star general instructed his logistical command of nearly 50,000 to get ready for war with China by 2025.  His charges were told to further prepare by getting their "legal affairs" in order and to engage in the calisthenics of war, by firing an ammo clip often at a target and to aim for the head.  Is this just hysterical puffery?

The 2022 National Security Strategy of the United States identified China as the greatest military and economic threat to the United States. Forget that Mr. Biden voted for China trade, NAFTA and the WTO, all which sharply eroded America's strategic industrial base of steel, automotive, aerospace and shipping and ultimately set the stage for China's rise as a world power.  Forget that we have shipped high technology to military labs in China – and the Ukraine.

While the US continues its military muscle-flexing globally, incurring rising resentment in its continual challenges to the very idea of national sovereignty, China has focused instead on economic expansion, assisting in economic development throughout the world and strengthening the capacities of nations to support their own interests.  China has played the long game, while US leaders have played the wrong game.

So, with only sanctions as a tool, the US has limited options to respond to China, except for war.

If the Biden Administration continues to ramp up for war against China, it could mean the end, not of China, but of the United States itself.

China and Russia are not natural allies, to say the least.  However, with NATO encroachment, the placement of missiles on Russia's border, the war in Ukraine, the blowing up of the Nord Stream pipeline, the U.S. has pushed Russia into China's waiting arms.

As a result of the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, together with the saber rattling over Taiwan, we have forced a once unthinkable China-Russia alliance whose combined manufacturing, energy production and offensive capabilities exceed that of the US.

A US war with China will not only bring in Russia on China's side, but likely India, Brazil, and Iran.  That is, if such a war were "conventional," meaning not nuclear.  However, the idea of containing such a war to conventional weapons is pure fantasy.

The Biden Administration's cyclopean foreign policy will be the ruin of us all.

There is not a shred of diplomatic skill exhibited by the Sullivan-Blinken-Nuland troika.  They pull away from treaties.  Engage in continual provocations.  Recklessly spend hundreds of billions of taxpayers' dollars on military adventures.  It's escalate, escalate, escalate.   The defense contractors, the war profiteers as FDR rightfully called them, cash in and the rest of us lose.

The average American family has seen nearly $100,000 of its wealth spent on regime change adventures since 2001, with highly negative results for our country and the world.  The U.S. is viewed in many circles as the greatest threat to world peace. Alarmingly and poignantly, the national debt is close to $100,000 per person in America.

While the Biden Administration plans for a hot war with China in 2025, the White House will use cold war psychology now, for the 2024 election season, to scare the bejesus out of even the most pacific U.S. voter.  And, with the help of the American media, which has largely been reduced to a posse of electronic spear carriers, we will be afflicted with every 'alarm of struggle and flight' appropriate to cowing Americans into silence and compliance. 

President Biden, like President George W. Bush in the Iraq War, will seek to burnish his Commander in Chief status as a war-time president, beginning in the later part of 2023.  Going into 2024, the American people will be told not to change presidents in the middle of a manufactured war.

Unless held in check by the voters, President Biden's foreign policy handlers are merrily leading America and the world down the path of World War III.  New Hampshire, are you listening?

[Trollheart]

What the fuck is this? US attacked the Kremlin? Drone strike? Why is this not on the news?

And how Russia-slanted is that piece? Blaming the US for the war? Like, Biden invaded Ukraine??

[Toy Revolver]

What the fuck is this? US attacked the Kremlin? Drone strike? Why is this not on the news?

And how Russia-slanted is that piece? Blaming the US for the war? Like, Biden invaded Ukraine??

the united states would never have tolerated the expansion of the equivalent to what the expansion of nato is to russia

plus there's this:

https://apnews.com/article/8f1e003990cb434afa0980707e471396

The new nuclear deterrence effort calls for periodically docking U.S. nuclear-armed submarines in South Korea for the first time in decades, bolstering training between the two countries, and more. The declaration was unveiled as Biden hosted Yoon for a state visit at a moment of heightened anxiety over an increased pace of ballistic missile tests by North Korea.

Really??? We need to bring nukes into Korea?

That is insane. Way past Trump, too. Full on bonkers.

and wtf is this

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/04/europe/kremlin-drone-attack-analysis-intl/index.html

How the Kremlin drone attack hands Russia an opportunity

so i guess it is in the news although maybe the article i quoted mischaracterizes the event

I don't know enough to say I agree with what's in that article but I respect Kucinich and at the very least think he should be heard.

Also, it's my understanding that America has already put $250 billion into this war. I can say unequivocally I'm against that. If Europe cares y'all can deal with it. England and France are plenty capable of blowing shit up.

And in general how is Biden's Cold War level of Hawkishness going unchecked? Constant confrontation with China and all this bullshit about Taiwan. That's not even remotely our business.

[SGR]

Cold War? I don't think I'd even say it's cold. You don't think we've got American soldiers over there in Ukraine helping them fight Russia?

Who you think was responsible for the drone?

Ukraine, as Russia claims, in a hamfisted attempt to kill Putin?

The USA, in an attempt to either stress test Russia's anti-drone technology or as an excuse to provoke Russia, expand the war, and make arms dealers richer?

Russia in a false flag, to give them an excuse to expand the war and target Zelensky directly?

Russian dissidents who disagree with Putin, want him dead, and want the war to end?

[Psy-Fi]

And in general how is Biden's Cold War level of Hawkishness going unchecked? Constant confrontation with China and all this bullshit about Taiwan. That's not even remotely our business.

The level of misinformation, disinformation and propaganda coming from the mainstream American media, The US military, and US elected officials against China is at a level I've never seen in all the years I've been living in America. They seem hellbent on bullying, threatening and provoking China at every opportunity. I think Taiwan is just a convenient pawn for America to play against China in their geopolitical games to try to continue to dominate the world with American military power. Worth noting that the USA currently has military bases in 85 countries located outside of the US while China currently has just 1 military base located outside of China.