The Real timschochet

In this issue, other than your instinctive “gotta blame the libs” shtick, you sound like a very reasonable fellow.

This is very different. Haley may be from South Carolina, but she is far less popular there than Trump.

For once I agree with you 100%.

Most of Haley’s support comes from independents. So even if she does well in Iowa or New Hampshire, even if somehow she wins New Hampshire, it’s impossible to see how she goes anywhere from there. Most of the other states, starting with South Carolina, only allow registered Republicans to vote. And they’re heavily for Trump. The media wants a contest, because they want ratings (always their primary motivation.) But it really isn’t one. Trump will be the nominee, that’s it.

I suppose one can be both.

Umm your boy Trump doesn’t want Vivek to shock.

Thanks for the information, and for once again describing my POV. I haven’t read that Islamophobia had nothing to do with that incident but if it’s true I’m glad of it. I certainly don’t mind being wrong. I do believe Islamophobia is a real problem in this country and pretty much has been since 9/11. But I’m happy when I’m wrong about that too. With regard to Michael Brown I continue to suspect it was a wrongful shooting though I acknowledge there will never be a way to prove it.

Trump is the nominee. At this point that’s inevitable IMO. I don’t agree with @RaiderHaters Revenge’s POV but he represents a whole lot of Americans, particularly conservatives. The Neocon wing of the GOP, where Haley really belongs, is dying or dead. It’s a far more isolationist, nativist party, much more similar to the pre-World War II Republicans. I hate it but it would be stupid to deny it. Americans are sick and tired of the internationalism that has defined us since the end of World War II. We want to be left alone and the rest of the planet can go hang. There is plenty of good reason for people to feel this way, though personally I think it’s very short sided.

That’s good. Libertarian ideas do work. Capitalism works. Hopefully he sticks to this sort of thing and stays away from the other stuff that’s not so good.

His point is also wrong as usual. But whatever.

Yes. I generally agree with your point. And I certainly don’t believe that Democrats are all good guys or Republicans are all bad guys. But in this forum the opposite contention is constantly made, and I push back against that.

No that’s wrong about Hitler. You’re correct about Goebbels but he had little to do with economic control. The ones who did, first Schacht and then Funk, were pro-capitalist. It’s true that Funk in particular was corporatist, following Mussolini’s model of the state directing private business. But that’s far removed from socialism.

Many Republicans were very pro-Nazi. I’m not making it up.

Nikki Haley represents the older Republican Party, the party of Ronald Reagan. She cannot win. The modern day Republicans have a different set of priorities.

Yes he did: what does that have to do with anything I wrote?

Yes he did. Before taking power. But once in power he was very pro business. Which is why prominent right wing American capitalists of the time, like Henry Ford and Charlie Wilson loved Hitler and were very pro Nazi. As were a good chunk of the Republican Party.

This is really terrible history. Almost everything you wrote here is incorrect starting with the notion that Hitler hated capitalism: the first thing that Hitler did, upon taking power, was purge all of the socialist elements of the Nazi Party (its called the Night of Long Knives, look it up. June of 1934.) Fascism and communism are equally evil ideologies but they aren’t the same and shouldn’t be conflated. Neither has anything to do with democracy or American liberalism.

More importantly, he’s also a better quarterback than any of the guys you named.

But when you started this thread you claimed it was analogous to what happened with Saudi Arabia. Do you still believe that?

Whatever the majority of this board decides on issues regarding the relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia, I’m comfortable taking the dissenting opinion.

It’s not. But it should be.

I get accused around here of socialism and Marxism a lot. It’s kind of amusing in a way. I am certainly what most would call a liberal Democrat. I am very much woke and socially very liberal, perhaps extreme in some areas. My views on immigration, including illegal immigration, tend to be very libertarian. But economic socialism? That is, the Marxist theory of redistributing wealth and/or the state controlling the means of production? That’s a nonstarter for me. Nor do I believe in the “soft” Democratic socialism of Bernie Sanders and AOC. I’m for a social safety net. I’m for regulating certain industries to help deal with crises like climate change, and future and current public health issues. But beyond that government should stay out of private business, especially small business, as much as possible. And you guys need to stop worrying so much because socialism is NEVER going to happen here no matter how many AOCs crawl out of the woodwork. Here’s why, 2 reasons: 1. it doesn’t work. I challenge anyone to point to a socialist society that ever produced anything other than misery or economic failure. If you want some good arguments as to why it doesn’t work, read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. Rand is a flawed writer, bombastic, absolutist, and far too eager to confuse liberalism with leftism (a trait that is also all too prevalent in this forum) but at her core she makes the best arguments for capitalism and against collectivism that I have ever read, why is why her novel remains timeless and an essential read for any thinking American. 2. immigrants to this country don’t want socialism. That includes undocumented immigrants BTW. I find this so ironic because so many conservatives seem to believe that immigrants are brought here to vote Democrat. Sheer nonsense. Nearly every immigrant I meet (and in my field I meet a lot) is an economic conservative. They’ve seen what socialism has done to Venezuela, Cuba, Vietnam, Turkey, etc., and they don’t want it! They came here to escape it. Short term they may vote Democrat out of expediency and because of the perception that the current Republican Party, led by Trump, doesn’t want them here. Long term they will vote Republican. The more immigrants that come here, the more Republican this nation will be. I get that and despite the fact that I disagree with conservatives on so many social issues, I welcome these immigrants anyhow, even if it means Republican dominance for decades to come. Because they are salt of the Earth, the hardest working, best people as a whole I’ve ever encountered. So stop worrying so much about Marxism. Ain’t never gonna happen. Not here.

Good question: 1. Even before Trump arrived, Schiff was often interviewed on foreign policy issues. I found him to be extremely well informed and very insightful on a host of issues, particularly on trade and relations with China and India. 2. I dispute that Schiff ever lied about the Trump/Russia issue. I know what the claim is and I believe that Trump supporters have deliberately mischaracterized Schiff. We don’t need to go back into all of that but I generally think Schiff’s criticism was correct. 3. Adam Schiff was the main House Manager during the first Trump impeachment trial in the Senate. I thought he gave an eloquent devastating series of arguments as to why Trump deserved to be removed from office. Senate Republicans were unconvinced, but I was. Despite my high respect for Schiff I will be voting for Katie Porter, as she is local, I have met her, and I like her very much.

Well first off I’m glad being called a retard isn’t an insult. That’s a new one on me but good to know! The Soviet Union and other Communist regimes of the 20th century threw around words like democratic all the time. But the answer is no- they were not democratic in the way that Americans would traditionally regard it.

I have a lot of respect for Adam Schiff and I generally agree with him. But not on any of these points: 1. Whatever the original reasons for the electoral college it’s the system we have. Attempting to get rid of it would be quite difficult and in the end would be very divisive. Besides I’m not sure that it’s really all that important. In most Presidential elections the winner of the popular vote and the electoral college are usually the same guy. It’s pretty rare when that doesn’t happen, and it usually means a very close election anyhow. I don’t think we need to change what’s worked for two centuries in order to prevent rare outcomes. 2. Packing the court is a very bad idea. Already many Americans don’t trust the integrity of the Supreme Court. Packing it would destroy whatever trust is left. So Trump got to appoint 3 justices, so what? Again that’s an extremely rare outcome. 3. Getting rid of the filibuster would have the worst practical outcome of all 3 ideas, because it would mean that every time there is a new Senate majority (and with a divided country that could mean every 2 years) there will be a host of new legislation designed to completely overturn the last Senate. If you want a state of permanent chaos and instability you couldn’t ask for a better idea. Look there’s a lot of stuff I want to have happen too that isn’t getting done. But the way to break the logjam isn’t to bulldoze the other side, it’s to work with them and achieve compromise so that the filibuster doesn’t matter. If you can’t do this perhaps the legislation isn’t worth doing.