Florida has a governor that has, by all reasonable accounts, done an impressive job governing his state.
But the guilt by association that attaches to him for actions in 2018 is just too much to ever forgive.
.@JonahDispatch doesn't live in Florida. He has literally no dog in this fight practically speaking. But he was offended by campaign behavior so he won't bestow forgiveness.
You told everyone who either voted for Trump or, like me, who voted for neither major party candidate in the last two elections that they were at best making a huge mistake and, more likely, were actively complicit in anything bad to come out of the Trump administration.
Fine. Then you should feel the weight of every life ended in a womb over the forty-eight months of Biden's term.
White supremacists can believe wrong things that aren't actually tied directly to their noxious racial ideology and other people can believe those same wrong things without being white supremacists.
Just think of a Venn diagram of stupid and it oughta clarify things.
The Capitol riot didn't happen because a bunch of people wanted secure the power and position of whites as the "master race." No, it happened because credulous idiots believed lies fed to them by a power-hungry psychopath and his moronic cronies.
This is tough.
All of these movies feature incredible music. However, I think that only one of them brings the big guns in the beginning and that's Prince of Egypt.
I'm literally getting chills just thinking about the song as I sit here typing.
The Democrats were already threatening to expand the Court, admit new states, retool the Senate, and dump the EC 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 RBG passed. Why in the hell would we take them seriously in some Frenchian compromise, then?
After Kavanaugh, what could possibly possess @DavidAFrench to think that they will play fair?
He says this isn't "unilateral disarmament." It sure sounds like it to me.
Genuine questions for all the Anti-Trumpers/Conservatism Conservers/Lincoln Project-ers/Bulwarkians:
Where precisely is the line past which your support for Democrats will not extend? What norms would they have to violate before you would say they're as bad as/worse than Trump?
At what point does their opposition to Orange Satan become too much for you to countenance? Does such a point even exist?
If you cannot articulate this, then you have passed the point of simple opposition. You have created an inverse personality cult that is nothing more than thoughtless reaction.
The difference is the right is nominating someone within the system as it operates, obeying the rules as they stand. The left, in anger over losing, is saying, "We will nuke the filibuster with a bare majority so that we can then change the fundamental rules of the system."
One team has been winning bit by bit for three-and-a-half quarters. They have a slim lead with two minutes left in the game.
Then, their opponents manage to recover an onside kick and score a touchdown, taking the lead.
This sucks for the team that was winning until the last two minutes of play. But they still lost the game as everyone understood it to operate.
Seriously, could Trump have asked for a situation more perfectly designed to show how little the Democrats care about the norms of American governance? Or how little ability Joe Biden has to control them?
Let's just game this out. Say Biden wins and the Dems take the Senate. They then nuke the filibuster, vote to expand SCOTUS by 2~4 seats, & vote to add new states to the Union (PR, maybe a fracturing of CA, who knows at this point?). In what universe does Biden veto these bills?
We all know exactly what will happen. And this is the message the Trump campaign will prosecute going forward if they're smart. They will saturate the airwaves and internet with ads contrasting Biden's "return to normalcy" message with members of his party advocating all the
It's funny: I started this account two years ago during the summer because I wanted to keep up with the Kavanaugh-nomination process. I'd stepped away from Twitter a year or so earlier and deleted my old account.
I was a solid Never-Trump conservative who was really frustrated
with the GOP in the Trump era. My disgust with him personally has never left. But when it comes to who controls Congress and SCOTUS, I will drag my body over broken glass to prevent Democrat/leftist control.
The Kavanaugh confirmation hearings were a radicalizing event for me.
One thing I think Democrats don't understand is that myopic appeals to what happened in 2016 (regardless of the actual standard McConnell set re: control of the presidency and the Senate) ignore what happened in 2018.
The right remembers Kavanaugh.
The viciousness of the left during that battle has not been forgotten, and even in these years that seem to last decades, those wounds are still fresh for many.
Threats of mass political violence just confirm what many on the right thought last time: one way or the other, the left will try to force its way on us, whether it costs one man's reputation or the damage wrought by rioters.
I understand that this doesn't break through to those who consider themselves our betters, but for many people this isn't some kind of values-balancing test when it comes to abortion. Many view it as an evil on par with slavery; the systematic extermination of the unwanted.
I 𝙬𝙞𝙡𝙡 𝙣𝙤𝙩 vote for a Democrat these days and abortion is the alpha and omega of that decision. That doesn't mean I will support or vote for Trump, because I won't. But there is literally nothing that could convince me to vote for a candidate that is pro-abortion.
Libertarian-leaning conservatives and libertarians see using the DoE to push back on the teaching of the 1619 Project and the utilization of CRT methods more broadly as federal overreach and a strict policy issue that parents should handle at the local level.
Others on the right (more socially conservative elements, those generally more moderate concerning government involvement, the non-liberal right broadly, etc.) see this as an ideological assault on 𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯.
While I understand the point @DavidAFrench is trying to make in his newsletter about CRT, it relies on a fundamental misunderstanding of how CRT operates in practice. It is not something that can be held subordinate, because it would analyze that as a frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/on-the-use-a…
hierarchical imposition, likely one rooted in "white supremacy." CRT explicitly rejects the West and all that comes along with it. Trying to squint at it the right way to find some good in the steaming pile of ideological shit is how it infects (their language, not mine) an
institution and remakes it in its image.
I see this error a lot in @DavidAFrench's thinking. There is a desire (laudable in many instances) to give the benefit of the doubt to a position that is prima facie objectionable; we could call it "lawyer thinking."
While I guess the results match me, I feel like it would be better constructed if the answers weren't all structured the same way, which forces me to gauge my level of agreement with totalizing statements.
In religious questions, my answers rested on the assumption thatm many values seen as neutral in our society have a historically religious valence to me, so I strongly disfavor their removal from the public sphere.
Great passage from 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘜𝘓𝘈𝘎 𝘈𝘳𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘨𝘰, 𝘝𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘮𝘦 𝘐𝘐 (pg. 280-281):
"Over the years I have had much occasion to ponder this word, the 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴𝘪𝘢. We are all very fond of including ourselves in it—but you see not all of us belong.
In the Soviet Union this word has acquired a completely distorted meaning. They began to classify among the intelligentsia all those who don't work (and are afraid to) with their hands. All the Party, government, military, and trade-union bureaucrats have been included.
All bookkeepers and accountants—the mechanical slaves of Debit. All office employees. And with even greater ease we include here 𝘢𝘭𝘭 teachers (even those who are no more than talking textbooks and have neither independent knowledge nor an independent view of education).
Seriously, the absolute gall it takes to say something like this. Maybe this is news to Bruenig, but there were concentration camps (концлагеря) in the Soviet Union before they appeared in Nazi Germany (see SLON and GULag).
And for those who read English: rbth.com/history/331201….
Note the dates on the first entry. The Solovetskij Island camps became operational in the early 1920s (after the Orthodox monasteries were expropriated and the monastics by and large expelled).