Nah man, you'll get no resentment from me. I appreciate what you're doing, and I'm trying to be pretty well-behaved, here, but my sarcasm is inescapable, in all scenarios. Like when I was pretty tipsy and mk hopped on the Jit.si for the 10-year anniversary and someone gave him a grand introduction and I said "...who?". I definitely aim to have a major difference in the way I treat folks like 1mg vs. the people who indisputably know better yet treat lying to their constituents as opportunistic sport. LOL sorry to shoehorn this in, I read the first two paragraphs of a WSJ op-ed today (I don't give them money anymore) about how the author won't be voting for Trump a third time. Paraphrasing: "Reason #2: Trump's J6 behavior gave democrats a cudgel to hammer him with". Not the actual behavior itself, just the fact that it makes Trump weaker, politically. Faschy af. I'm still racking my brains to understand what the secret appeal of fascism is to the libertarian crowd. Part of it's the strongman thing ("rugged individualism"), I think. All three of my Uber drivers in Seattle were differing versions of nonwhite pro-Trump immigrants. It's a global thing (and apparently Latinos in the Rio Grande valley). But I also think MAGA has been successfully packaged as anti-regulation, but that's simply not true. The fact that many libertarians are in no way bothered by the Roe repeal says a lot. Sorry, I think most libertarians are simply conservatives who don't want the stigma they've rightly sensed exists towards the conservative movement. Conversely, I will tell you I'm a socialist, even though I know there's a stigma. I think the stigma is almost completely misplaced, and (seems to be a theme) based on lies and misunderstandings. So if anyone, including 1mg, you, a hypothetical someone named Cruz-Shapiro, or my dad, who is currently veryyyyyy indignant that I am planning to leave America, wants to tear me a new one, that's fine. Personal attacks don't bother me almost at all anymore in the face of ongoing institutional sabotage. I dunno. Bigger fish to fry. edit: not at all saying you're attacking me, to be clear, just that I'm sorry, babybl00, I'll always love you. No /s.
Rhetorical question: are there any editorial boards that aren't shit, that haven't been shit since William Randolph Hearst was giving his mistress' clitoris pet names or before? I would argue that the WSJ editorial board at least has moral clarity: they are evil and make no bones about it. The NYT editorial board, on the other hand, is evil but pretends to be good. They are concern-trolling us into totalitarianism. You have to convince Democrats to vote Democratic. Their default is dudgeon and outrage with the party on their voter registration, with the organization that fundraises off of them, that when they vote, they vote for without fail. On the other hand, you have to convince Republicans not to vote Republican - they'll toe the party line and absolve their guy of any crime and if they have any misgivings they'll secretly not vote. This has had the effect of peeling support away from the Democrats as they've drifted to center, and the effect of peeling the Republicans away from the center as they've become more and more criminal. The reason you're confused is that in your head, "support the candidate" is subordinate to "candidate has earned support." In the Republican mind, "support the candidate" is a fundamental underpinning of the Republican identity. "I'm not voting for the candidate" in Republican-speak is equivalent to "I support fascism" in Democrat-speak. This is why the Jan 6 Committee stuff is so important: They're trying to change the definition of Republican. Nobody has ever accused anyone else of being a "democrat in name only" - Republicans fight all the time about who has the conch, who holds the scepter, who speaks for the tribe. This is why the Republicans became a fascism buffet the minute Trump had the nomination, and why Ted Cruz sat there phone-banking like a lapdog for a man who said his dad shot Kennedy and called his wife ugly. Democrats value the ability to put forth logical, empathetic policies. Republicans value winners. LOL the two most important beliefs of libertarianism are (1) "no one can tell me what to do" (2) "I don't have to care about anyone else." If you're a white male, the fundamental outcome of Republican fascism is to make things a fuckton worse for non-white non-males. nothing wierd about that in the liberal mindset, justifications are the logical underpinnings of the belief. In the conservative mindset, justifications are the backstop that allows you to stop thinking about it. "I like money, Republicans like money, therefore anything a Republican says about money is true." Prior to William F. Buckley the conservative mindset supported a welfare state because it forced the government to deal with the Poors, thereby permitting captains of industry to get their industry on. (1) "no one can tell me what to do" (I demonstrably lack a uterus) (2) "I don't have to care about anyone else" (the uterine class is not my problem) NIH estimates that 6.2% of the population could be clinically diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. The PRRI polling above indicates that 7% of the population is libertarian. Is that a false correlation? mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmayyyyyyybe? does it feel truthy thoLOL sorry to shoehorn this in, I read the first two paragraphs of a WSJ op-ed today (I don't give them money anymore)
Paraphrasing: "Reason #2: Trump's J6 behavior gave democrats a cudgel to hammer him with". Not the actual behavior itself, just the fact that it makes Trump weaker, politically. Faschy af.
I'm still racking my brains to understand what the secret appeal of fascism is to the libertarian crowd
All three of my Uber drivers in Seattle were differing versions of nonwhite pro-Trump immigrants. It's a global thing (and apparently Latinos in the Rio Grande valley).
But I also think MAGA has been successfully packaged as anti-regulation, but that's simply not true.
The fact that many libertarians are in no way bothered by the Roe repeal says a lot.
Sorry, I think most libertarians are simply conservatives who don't want the stigma they've rightly sensed exists towards the conservative movement.
The "lesser of two evil" establishment dems seem plenty narcissistic, to be fair. Not really the base, the peeps at the top. Wonder where the new guy went? Hmm