Republican National Convention (1 Viewer)

superchuck500 said:

Fair enough - I think we all need to try to engage on substance rather than dismissive or flip comments, particularly with newer posters here trying to get a feel for the vibe here. This is supposed to be a forum for meaningful discussion, even where we think the idea being discussed is junk or should be dismissed. I think that we sometimes get into the mindset that because we dislike or reject an idea, that gives us license to be dismissive or even combative with a person here that mentions it, but that's just not how it should be done. Yes, sometimes that posture is earned through exchanges but we can't just jump to it. I think we all need to be better about that

I share your opinion about Vivek, largely because I think most of his big ideas to bring change to American government are nonsense - and that he doesn't know what he's talking about. He freely throws around plans that would require constitutional amendment and when asked about that, he seems confused. He freely insists that cutting the federal government by 70 percent and wholesale elimination of agencies, some of which have exclusive jurisdiction over important areas, is not only the best idea, but that the president can do it. I substantially question his understanding of how American government works.

Click to expand...

Vivek, Musk, Vance et al are symptomatic of what Tim Schwab describes in his book The Bill Gates Problem: Reckoning with the Myth of the Good Billionaire. While Schwab’s book focuses on the issues of unchecked power wielded simply because someone has money and can use that money to advance their own ideas with little thought as to the impact the same applies to wealth running for office. Wealth can be good or bad in office but the question lies in how wealth deals in the private sector to start with. Business is my nature hierarchal. Governing no matter the level requires the ability to give and take. A businessperson may listen to varying viewpoints but the end goal, profit, is not compatible with government.

SaintForLife said:

Click to expand...

Hmmm. Sounds similar to Vance exploiting those in Appalachia who he called deficient in his book and who he now claims are “his people”.

Peddle your hypocrisy over at Freeperville.

SaintForLife said:

Click to expand...

Gaetz, yeesh. What a scumbag. And a Republican too. But I repeat myself.

SaintForLife said:

Click to expand...

so all that and it made is forehead appear BIGGER.

SaintForLife said:

Click to expand...

So one take here is that Trump recognizes that the social-conservative line of the GOP advocates positions about gay marriage and abortion are not what he believes (to the extent that Trump can believe anything about policy) and that their hard lines will cost him votes. So he demands to use his own language that is softer.

The problem is that we simply don't know what position Trump will take in office. There's zero question in anyone's mind that Trump will say anything that he calculates will help him win the election - and that he will not be constrained by that, whatsoever, when in office.

But I think we all deserve to know what Trump's true position is. I don't actually think he cares - he will do whatever is most expedient at any given moment. At the current moment, he recognizes that it is best to be vague so that he can have plausible deniability in any sort of debate or policy comparison. After that, it will be a new moment.

superchuck500 said:

So one take here is that Trump recognizes that the social-conservative line of the GOP advocates positions about gay marriage and abortion are not what he believes (to the extent that Trump can believe anything about policy) and that their hard lines will cost him votes. So he demands to use his own language that is softer.

The problem is that we simply don't know what position Trump will take in office. There's zero question in anyone's mind that Trump will say anything that he calculates will help him win the election - and that he will not be constrained by that, whatsoever, when in office.

But I think we all deserve to know what Trump's true position is. I don't actually think he cares - he will do whatever is most expedient at any given moment. At the current moment, he recognizes that it is best to be vague so that he can have plausible deniability in any sort of debate or policy comparison. After that, it will be a new moment.

Click to expand...

Trumps position on everything is simply whatever he perceives to be in his immediate best interest at that moment.

Donald Trump resurfaced at the Republican National Convention, ushered in by a video montage of his jiggle-dancing to the gay anthem "Y.M.C.A."

Kamala Harris was repeatedly trashed — mockingly referred to as the failed "border czar" — a signal she's seen as a possible sub for the beleaguered President Biden.

Trump's erstwhile rival, Nikki Haley, delivered her unqualified endorsement in the "name of unity" — backpedaling from her earlier animus faster than Never-Trumper-turned-running-mate J.D. Vance.

Columnists Mark Z. Barabak and Anita Chabria were in Milwaukee and break down the big events on Day 2 of the RNC.

Chabria: The theme for the convention Tuesday night was "make America safe again," with lots of talk about how the "woke, Marxist left" loves crime and criminals (that's from Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana).

The calls for unity were sprinkled like confetti over every speech, but the substance changed little from what we've been hearing from MAGA for years: America is in a Democrat-induced spiral. Johnson framed it as a choice between, "the party of self-destruction," and the party of "peace and prosperity."

At one point, one speaker suggested that Washington, D.C., was too dangerous to visit. I'm not sure when this particular delusion gained ground (though it certainly started during Black Lives Matter protests), but it's a popular one.

The big chants of the night were "back the blue," in support of giving police more power, and "build the wall."

They really, really want a wall — in no small part to stop the heartbreaking devastation that addiction is inflicting on families in every state. That's where a lot of the Harris-bashing came in, since Biden charged her with handling the border.

Who's going to tell them that most fentanyl isn't walked across the border?

What struck you from Tuesday night, Mark?

Barabak: The collective amnesia that suffused the red, white and blue convention hall.

Trump’s felony conviction in the New York City hush money/election interference case was mentioned once, fleetingly, by reality TV’s Savannah Chrisley.

“Donald J. Trump has only one conviction that matters and that is his conviction to make American great again,” Chrisley said.

Others alluded to Trump’s alleged persecution, to the supposed politicization of the Justice Department and to the ex-president’s “illegal impeachment,” as New York GOP Rep. Elise Stefanik put it, making absolutely no sense. (Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. presided over Trump’s Senate trial and presumably would have said something if the House vote to impeach wasn’t legally kosher.)..................

..............Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich literally demonized the Democratic party - framing the stakes of the 2024 election as a "battle between good and evil." She described the MAGA faithful as standing up to "the Enemy" - i.e. Satan - who "wants to come in between us and our children." Echoing Trump's battle cry, she insisted: "Moms for Liberty is here to ‘fight, fight, fight' and win, win, win, win. And winning we are!"

Tiffany Justice, another cofounder of the extreme, anti-LGBT group, whose members have crusaded to ban books and take over school boards, openly mocked those who have called on Republicans to tone down violent rhetoric in the wake of the assassination attempt on Trump because it's too "too volatile." Justice insisted such language was justified: "Radical Marxists are trying to steal our children's future," she said, "so we are going to fight like hell."

Ramaswamy warned the right-wing audience that "the other side will feed our kids" an agenda centered on "race, gender, sexuality and climate - and we gotta stand up against that!" He insisted that the winning vision was instead focused on "the individual, family, nation, and God."

Hageman - who underscored she's already trying to put the Project 2025 plan to abolish the Department of Education into action, legislatively - spoke in familiar tones of right-wing grievance. "If you believe in freedom and liberty, they call us ‘fascists,'" she said. "They have demonized us for so many years because they can't beat us on policy."

Huckabee Sanders encouraged a similar victim complex, claiming that Democratic depictions of a GOP-led "war on women" were pure projection. "The only war in this country on women is on conservative women from the far left." (Arkansas has a near total abortion ban at any time during pregnancy, with no exceptions for rape or incest.)

Johnson, when he wasn't blaming schools for molding the Trump shooter, cast the left-side of the political spectrum as "destructive" and mad for power, seeking to "control people's lives."...........

He can't be this stupid to believe what he's saying. I think he's stupid, but I think he knows what he's saying is complete BS.

zztop said:

Has anyone posted about this yet? And would this behavior qualify as being cultish?

https://www.axios.com/2024/07/18/trump-bandage-rnc-fashion-trend-photos

Click to expand...

I was coming to post something similar

SaintForLife said:

Click to expand...

If you think that the Republican Party will embrace gay marriage or trans children thus endangering support including money from the religious right then you are delusional.

Much like the constitution of the old USSR the mild language of the platform will be meaningless in application. The Republican playbook is based on Lenin-Stalin methodology.

el caliente said:

I was coming to post something similar

Click to expand...

Cultish or a sign of solidarity for their Presidential candidate that was almost assassinated?

SaintForLife said:

He can't be this stupid to believe what he's saying. I think he's stupid, but I think he knows what he's saying is complete BS.

Click to expand...

you are missing the overall picture. It doesnt matter if he believes it or not.

What matters is playing the religious angle.

If you want to see how we got here, i suggest taking 96 min to watch "God & Country" on Amazon prime- documentary about Christian Nationalism.

Then re-watch that clip- it will start to make sense.

Campaign leaders rewrote some people's speeches to get rid of their rhetoric that went against the "unity" messaging they were trying to pitch.