• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trump's Second Term

This demonizing of centrists really pisses me off. MAGA cultists are NOT centrists, they are right-wing. By definition, a centrist is someone "having moderate political views or policies." I'd rather have a moderate in Congress or the WH than a MAGA cultist any day of the week.
It's worth noting that what you quoted did not claim that MAGA cultists are centrists. You take issue with the prediction that self-described centrists will act in the same way as MAGA cultists in this instance? Okay. Feel free to object. I'd like to say please don't make your objection something that doesn't really apply there, though.
 
Australia is certainly a country where this did not happen. In our most recent federal election, the right-aligned crashed and burned, and the moderate-right had a hand in their demise by aligning against them.
And yet your moderate right is busy sucking up to Donald Trump.

The parties of the centre have driven the overton window way to the right over the last thirty years, simply by chasing after the lunacies of the right and aping their language and actions.

Back in the eighties it would have been sheer lunacy for Labouf politicians to come out in favour of the racism based immigration policies they are loudly cheerleading today, and they most definitely wouldn't be the pro-capitalism shills self-described centre parties are now.
 
Back in the eighties it would have been sheer lunacy for Labouf politicians to come out in favour of the racism based immigration policies they are loudly cheerleading today,
Labor has never been in favour of "racism based immigration policies" (although they learned the hard way that any relaxation in the hard stance against "boat people" would lead to large numbers of illegal immigrants coming over by boat).

and they most definitely wouldn't be the pro-capitalism shills self-described centre parties are now.
They most certainly were "pro-capitalism shills". Since the 1980s, all major parties have done the bidding of global corporations.
 
Now apparenlty Dubai has been attacked. Looks as if Donnie has started a regional war.
I will shed no tears over the Ayallatoh, he simply got a taste of his own medicine but this was a bonehead play.
And I had to laugh at the claims that Iran is a democracy.........
 
How would Catholics in particular, and Christians in general, take it if a Muslim Country bombed the Vatican and killed the Pope?
I was raised Catholic...I suppose I'd be ok with it if there were good evidence the Pope were slaughtering thousands of protestors.
 
Back in the eighties it would have been sheer lunacy for
Labouf politicians to come out in favour of the racism based immigration policies they are loudly cheerleading today, and they most definitely wouldn't be the pro-capitalism shills self-described centre parties are now.
They've never been known to Shia way from controversy.
 
Or whether it is a dictatorship. I think that really depends on your definition of dictatorship. It elects the president like the US. It elects a parliament.
Most dictatorships have elections. The defining feature is that the ruling government decides who can be elected. Right now U.S. president Trump toys with various ideas to ensure that only his supporters can be elected. In Iran all candidates are vetted to ensure that only supporters of the dictatorship are elected.
There was one president of Iran, Khatami, tried to make some few changes, but failed, and of course he was not allowed to become president ever again: the office of president in Iran is more like the French prime minister who only has the function of executing policies that his boss, the president, has decided, and of course to take the blame if anything goes wrong. The difference between the two systems is of course that the French president cannot decide how the parliament looks like, and he can be removed in an election.
 
Most dictatorships have elections. The defining feature is that the ruling government decides who can be elected. Right now U.S. president Trump toys with various ideas to ensure that only his supporters can be elected. In Iran all candidates are vetted to ensure that only supporters of the dictatorship are elected.
There was one president of Iran, Khatami, tried to make some few changes, but failed, and of course he was not allowed to become president ever again: the office of president in Iran is more like the French prime minister who only has the function of executing policies that his boss, the president, has decided, and of course to take the blame if anything goes wrong. The difference between the two systems is of course that the French president cannot decide how the parliament looks like, and he can be removed in an election.
So more like China or USSR or other 'single party' states. Is China a dictatorship (is a dictatorship the only alternative to democracy?). Technically just as e.g. Brehnez or Khrushchev were subject to the supreme soviet so the supreme leader of Iran is subject to the council of experts.

The Iranian president is a moderate and opposed Khamenei on a number of political issues. It is more likely than rather a regime change that power will swing more to the presidency and parliament. So rather than a regime change we may see the regime remain the same just the head of the regime change.
 
Most dictatorships have elections. The defining feature is that the ruling government decides who can be elected. Right now U.S. president Trump toys with various ideas to ensure that only his supporters can be elected. In Iran all candidates are vetted to ensure that only supporters of the dictatorship are elected.
There was one president of Iran, Khatami, tried to make some few changes, but failed, and of course he was not allowed to become president ever again: the office of president in Iran is more like the French prime minister who only has the function of executing policies that his boss, the president, has decided, and of course to take the blame if anything goes wrong. The difference between the two systems is of course that the French president cannot decide how the parliament looks like, and he can be removed in an election.

Some dictatorships start with a free and fair election. They then change the system and have mock elections, or they just don't bother.

If I was an American, I would now be very worried that Trump is positioning himself to be a dictator.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom