Resolved: Trump Era Republicans Are Uniquely Bad in American Political History

[ponderingturtle]

Or the Head of the DOJ.

Exactly. Theocracy is something that republicans are at least comfortable being associated with.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Exactly. Theocracy is something that republicans are at least comfortable being associated with.

Part of the viewpoint that everyone is a sinner is the belief that fear -- either of God or an authoritarian society that will carry out his will -- is the only thing that can keep the sinners under control.

 

[phiwum]

Or the Head of the DOJ.

I didn't deny that some Republicans are theocrats. I denied that they're all theocrats or hankering for a return to slavery.

It's the wholesale painting of ther opposition as evil that is bad. It wouldn't be so bad if I thought literally all or most were evil.

 

[luchog]

I didn't deny that some Republicans are theocrats. I denied that they're all theocrats or hankering for a return to slavery.

It's the wholesale painting of ther opposition as evil that is bad. It wouldn't be so bad if I thought literally all or most were evil.

So in the interests of fairness, can you tell us which Republicans are currently actively opposing Trump; actively opposing the influence of the Koch Brothers, Jeff Bezos, ALEC legislation, and various other big-money PACs and oligarchs; actively opposing massive tax breaks and refunds for the superwealthy and megacorps, while maintaining high taxes on the working and middle class; actively opposing attempts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act and Social Security; actively opposing legalized discrimination via "religious freedom" legislation; actively opposing private, for-profit prisons, for-profit healthcare, and for-profit education; actively opposed rolling back environmental and consumer protection legislation; and actively opposing the growing power of the Christian Evangelical/Dominionist lobby in the party?

Some members of the GOP may not be actively evil -- like, for example, the flagrant racist oligarch toady Mitch McConnell -- but passive evil is just as devastating in the long term as active evil. I'm definitely not seeing an active opposition to the active evil in the GOP.

For example, the GOP's efforts to roll back the ACA. The party split, but not between evil vs. not-evil; but between evil vs. more-evil. One half of the party wanted to roll back the ACA and reduce healthcare availability by going to a replacement which was a purely for-profit system, and the other half wanted to roll back the ACA, and then discuss whether to set up a replacement system, depriving millions of Americans of any healthcare at all in the meantime.

That's been the way with every other vote, whether it's taxes, SSA, economic stimulus, whatever. And that's not even getting into the problems of judiciary appointments being effectively unanimously confirmed despite glaring problems with their records.

Even if they're not all theocrats or yearning for a return to slavery/feudalism; the few that aren't are not putting up much of a fight against the majority who clearly are.

 

[Belz...]

Even if they're not all theocrats or yearning for a return to slavery/feudalism; the few that aren't are not putting up much of a fight against the majority who clearly are.

Who is in favour of returning to slavery and feudalism, specifically?

 

[xjx388]

This would be like me saying Democrats are evil because they want to rob the rich to give free stuff to everyone else. IOW, you don’t like their politics so you frame it as evil. I’ve been guilty of the same in the past and what’s funny is that it was my interactions with people here that caused me to see things differently.

Too many here want to stifle that kind of beneficial interchange. You want to talk about posters without talking to posters. That strikes me as more divisive and destructive than the alternative.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I didn't deny that some Republicans are theocrats. I denied that they're all theocrats or hankering for a return to slavery.

Yep and not all nazis really wanted to exterminate the jews, they liked the return to national prestige and power, so it is not fair to so demonize all nazis.

Nope, doesn't wash. Why do republicans get a pass for the policies of their party but not nazis? I mean sure they might not be for it, like not everyone who voted for trump is a racist, but they are all fine voting for one. Same thing applies here.

 

[phiwum]

Yep and not all nazis really wanted to exterminate the jews, they liked the return to national prestige and power, so it is not fair to so demonize all nazis.

Nope, doesn't wash. Why do republicans get a pass for the policies of their party but not nazis? I mean sure they might not be for it, like not everyone who voted for trump is a racist, but they are all fine voting for one. Same thing applies here.

I guess there's a big difference. Genocide was an actual policy of the Nazi regime. They actually implemented that policy. They really did genocide the heck out of some folk. It was neither hyperbole nor metaphor.

The GOP has not announced plans for a literal theocracy or return to slavery. I mean, I have been busy so I could have missed it, but I don't think so. I'm talking a literal theocracy, not a government that has a strong bias towards Christianity and even attempts a Muslim ban, both really bad things but not, you know, theocracy. Not really.

So, when the Republican announce their intent to install a literal theocracy or go back to the fine ol' days of slavery, I'm totally with you. Until then, your post is just more useless exaggeration.

 

[luchog]

So, when the Republican announce their intent to install a literal theocracy or go back to the fine ol' days of slavery, I'm totally with you. Until then, your post is just more useless exaggeration.

So as long as they do in in the background while pretending they're not doing it, like the US government did with the genocide of the Native American peoples, then you're fine with it?

 

[uke2se]

I guess there's a big difference. Genocide was an actual policy of the Nazi regime. They actually implemented that policy. They really did genocide the heck out of some folk. It was neither hyperbole nor metaphor.

The GOP has not announced plans for a literal theocracy or return to slavery. I mean, I have been busy so I could have missed it, but I don't think so. I'm talking a literal theocracy, not a government that has a strong bias towards Christianity and even attempts a Muslim ban, both really bad things but not, you know, theocracy. Not really.

So, when the Republican announce their intent to install a literal theocracy or go back to the fine ol' days of slavery, I'm totally with you. Until then, your post is just more useless exaggeration.

At that point it won't matter whether or not you're with us, because it will be too late.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I guess there's a big difference. Genocide was an actual policy of the Nazi regime. They actually implemented that policy. They really did genocide the heck out of some folk. It was neither hyperbole nor metaphor.

The GOP has not announced plans for a literal theocracy or return to slavery. I mean, I have been busy so I could have missed it, but I don't think so. I'm talking a literal theocracy, not a government that has a strong bias towards Christianity and even attempts a Muslim ban, both really bad things but not, you know, theocracy. Not really.

So, when the Republican announce their intent to install a literal theocracy or go back to the fine ol' days of slavery, I'm totally with you. Until then, your post is just more useless exaggeration.

Except for all those who have on theocracy.

 

[phiwum]

At that point it won't matter whether or not you're with us, because it will be too late.

Yeah, best to start demonizing your opponents early, just in case. Good point.

 

[uke2se]

Yeah, best to start demonizing your opponents early, just in case. Good point.

It's not a matter of "just in case". We aren't making **** up about Republicans. We are simply noting the policies they push and the words they say. It's become rather obvious what they want.

They have shown us who they are.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It's not a matter of "just in case". We aren't making **** up about Republicans. We are simply noting the policies they push and the words they say. It's become rather obvious what they want.

They have shown us who they are.

But you can not take them at their word over who they are. It is like there is nothing deploarable about voting for an open racist, or sexual predator. Calling such things depolrable or immoral or even just pointing out that because they voted for a white supremacist they voted for a white supremacist is right out. That is all poisoning the well and portraying the party as evil even if it is all factually correct.

 

[Horatius]

I guess there's a big difference. Genocide was an actual policy of the Nazi regime. They actually implemented that policy. They really did genocide the heck out of some folk. It was neither hyperbole nor metaphor.

But they also didn't advertise that policy. They actually went out of their way to hide what they were really doing from the general population. It was all "labor camps" and "deportation to Palestine" and "resettlement in the East", anything to give a figleaf of cover to what they were really doing.

 

[phiwum]

But they also didn't advertise that policy. They actually went out of their way to hide what they were really doing from the general population. It was all "labor camps" and "deportation to Palestine" and "resettlement in the East", anything to give a figleaf of cover to what they were really doing.

Fair enough, though their antisemitism was rather more overt than any pro-slavery leanings of the Trump administration.

 

[luchog]

It's not a matter of "just in case". We aren't making **** up about Republicans. We are simply noting the policies they push and the words they say. It's become rather obvious what they want.

They have shown us who they are.

And they continue to show us who they are.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

So in the interests of fairness, can you tell us which Republicans are currently actively opposing Trump; actively opposing the influence of the Koch Brothers, Jeff Bezos, ALEC legislation, and various other big-money PACs and oligarchs;

Donald Trump, who claims to be a Republican, has been actively opposing the highlighted individual for some time now.

 

[luchog]

Donald Trump, who claims to be a Republican, has been actively opposing the highlighted individual for some time now.

Smoke and mirrors.

Trump has been actively disparaging and complaining about Bezos because of ostensible political differences, and because Bezos owns a newspaper which is highly critical of Trump. But what policies or legislation have Trump or the GOP enacted to oppose Bezos, which have had any kind of negative impact on Bezos' wealth or power? None. While at the same time giving huge tax breaks to billionaires like Bezos, further cementing the political power of the super-wealthy.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Smoke and mirrors.

Trump has been actively disparaging and complaining about Bezos because of ostensible political differences, and because Bezos owns a newspaper which is highly critical of Trump. But what policies or legislation have Trump or the GOP enacted to oppose Bezos, which have had any kind of negative impact on Bezos' wealth or power? None. While at the same time giving huge tax breaks to billionaires like Bezos, further cementing the political power of the super-wealthy.

In partial answer to your highlighted question:

• Trump threatened antitrust actions against Amazon, which appeared to do some small temporary damage to the value of Amazon stock.
• Those threats continued for months.
• Trump declared he would "take a very strong look" at a ten-billion dollar contract that was expected to go to Amazon. Following that threat and a review by acting Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, that contract went to Microsoft instead of Amazon.

That list could be expanded.

Donald Trump is not the ideological creature you imagine him to be. Trump's policies favor the super-wealthy because Trump is a super-wealthy narcissist who is out for himself, not because he cares about "cementing the political power of the super-wealthy" in general. Jeff Bezos is just one example of a super-wealthy person whose political power Trump has opposed. There are other examples; a list of such examples would correlate quite well with a list of wealthy persons who have criticized Trump.