Even if you liked something about Trump's policies -- like, I dunno, you're rich enough to benefit from his tax cuts -- it seems like it is objectively and obvious true that he's bad for the country.
Back in early 2001, I was doing some kind of software thing in Alabama, and I remember our client as one of those "nice" conservative types --
He was driving me back to the hotel & said something like "I'm glad we have a new president, I think the other guy was bad for the country" -- meaning specifically the sexual infidelity & impeachment --
I think I just did a noncommittal Marge Simpson grunt in response, since it was work and I thought he was being terribly inappropriate.
At some point after that, there was a guest preacher at my grandma's church who's entire sermon was about how not only was Clinton literally the worst thing to happen to our country EVER, but also --
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is actually much more narrow & specific than usually interpreted -- it's totally okay to cast stones if you don't have that PARTICULAR sin!
So if you want to know one reason I've got no respect for evangelicals, it's that the culture just expects we're all going to sit there in the pews, happy with a bad political take coupled with a bad -- and novel -- theological take.
Anyway, that's one of the things conservatives have gotten away with over the years, is just that... sanctimonious assurance that THEIR side was good and right and moral and if there's ONE thing that should change after Trump, it's that.
Not that it really matters, but I want the objective badness of Trump to stick like fresh tar to the shoes of the conservative movement.
I want it to just be understood, as a default position, that conservatives are bad people, corrupt, dishonest, mean, bigoted, and their ideas are bad for the country.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First, the right wing has been sliming Hillary LITERALLY since her husband was president, and they've basically never stopped -- that's a lot of backstory, a lot of TIME for the name "Clinton" to be a boogeyman to the right.
One of the ways propaganda works -- smear campaigns especially -- is to set you up so that a single word, like "Clinton" or whatever, can call up this big bucket of associated ideas and feelings.
Hillary had this whole character that was created for her -- she was shady! Had people murdered! Partied with Epstein! Partied with Trump!
I mean -- seriously -- I saw people use her past associations with TRUMP to discredit HER.
So, here's a thought, Team Trump keeps pursuing this angle because they find it literally impossible to imagine that the other side isn't as corrupt as they are.
Also, of course, the whole "her emails" thing delivered them the presidency in 2016, and I mostly blame the media for that.
They're just so freaking *irresponsible* with how they report on things. And I know supposedly it's all about money and clicks and ratings and whatnot but I don't actually think it is, I think it is ACTUALLY about propping up existing power structures
Kind of fascinated that people on this thread are talking about a "contingency plan" like... we need a plan either way, kids, and there's still a BUNCH of factors in play, it's not a simple toggle between "everything's okay" and "holy shit, revolution time"
I mean, one thing the damn pandemic probably should've taught us is that you can't really make plans, actually.
But the thing I keep going back to is -- why *are* the Republicans where they are, with this seemingly iron grip on our country, in spite of being a minority party with unpopular ideas?
His article is such self-serving nonsense. "While followers of Jesus are being told we cannot worship in public spaces, violent paid rioters are taking over our streets and being given license to occupy and destroy entire sections of our cities."
"paid rioters"
You mean cops? Because the only people getting PAID to start riots are cops.
Before I close this tab, I will forever be cynically amused that they showed us all the deranged spider webs made under *illegal* drugs but not the caffeine one. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effect_of…
Anti-drug propaganda in the US is so ridiculous. I mean, a spider has eight legs, no brain to speak of, will die if you cover it in dish soap... but, sure, it's super-relevant to talk about what LSD does to a spider.
Note: this was inspired by a zoom meeting where a co-worker had a spider drop from the ceiling straight toward his coffee cup, like it wanted some.
To reiterate, under the political philosophy of Reaganism, the federal government is allowed *only* these three purposes: maintain a military, siphon money and power to rich people, and prevent, by any means necessary, effective opposition to Reaganism.
Reaganism as I've defined it pertains specifically to the federal government, but as a governing philosophy it applies to states, counties, cities -- all the way down. So, Republican governors operate according to the principles of Reaganism.