US Presidential Election 2024

[Elvis]

What I'm getting is, a better world is impossible because of Hunter Biden.

[Elvis]

Thanks to bad government policy, 100,000,000 Americans (41% of adults) are in debt for medical bills.

So we do nothing to change this? We just allow medical debt to increase? We should just allow the finance industry to leech more and more working class wealth?


I see some lip service here to "the working class" but I see zero fucks given about taking measures to actually make their lives better.

I see only fear and defeatism.

[Elvis]

With regard to who gives a fuck, cutting US Social Security benefits will lower the living standards of millions of US citizens. That's millions of people giving a fuck.

"Who gives a fuck" is the rightwing mantra of atomization, the alienating essense of "trickle-down" ideology.

[Belligerent Savant]

I see only fear and defeatism.

This is laughable. There has been plenty of FEAR exhibited by many these last few years. But those that lost their jobs or livelihoods because they chose to counter GOVT POLICIES/affronts to human rights (like me and millions of others) were far from 'fearful'. The opposite, in fact.
Based on comments these last few years it appears most of you sucumbed to fears, and that fear caused far too many to put aside claimed core principles.

(Government policies, i should add, that were pushed/enforced hard by both establishment political parties in the U.S., though the so-called Democrat Party was markedly worse in most respects. And yes: this INCLUDES Bernie, AOC, et al.)

And no, it's not "defeatism". It's the fucking reality of the system. What we are advocating for is WAKING THE fuck up. There is no 'representative' within the current system that will challenge the status quo, demonstrably. 'Representatives' that claim to do so, if at one point earnestly, are captured/compromised. Some more so than others. A small percentage may be less captured, at least until they reach higher office.

That said, there remain plenty of opportunity for the potential of good livelihoods, but these scenarios occur mostly outside the current system (for the non-wealthy, that is). Part of the problem is that, starting overtly in the last ~3 yrs, they are taking active steps to incrementally LIMIT ability to operate outside their SYSTEM (or minimally -- importantly -- the ability for any of us to CHOOSE how we prefer to operate within the System, while abiding by sensible, agreeable laws, WITHOUT penalty or punishment). They are tightening the screws to limit options for those that want to (partially or wholly) UNSUBSCRIBE.

Unfortunately too many remain misdirected, wittingly or not. Too many are compliant and complicit.


*In the event some may misinterpret my rhetoric/sentiment above: I recognize the collective value in programs such as social security, pensions, unions, etc., in their idealized forms (and/or during the early years of their adoption). But as touched on above -- and in many comments over the years in this forum -- we have observed gross and egregious capture and compromise of these programs (or otherwise blatant ransacking). A cynic may even argue they were set up initially as yet another means for later capture/ensnaring of citizen income, and methodically increasing citizen reliance on the System, rendering them less self-sufficient over time. It is a System that -- progressively, incrementally -- makes it increasingly difficult to have a decent living with working class (or even upper-middle) wages. A honeypot, in many respects.

Regardless of origins and stated objectives, within the current System these programs are largely broken. As demonstrated, historically to date attempts to repair this within the system has FAILED. Indeed, things have only gotten more worse, to paraphrase one of my Italian cousin's working English expressions.

[Belligerent Savant]

.
One more point: I see this here and elsewhere (a few of my 'friends', as they were, used this phrase quite a bit since the madness of 2020-onward). A variation of:

"That's a right-wing talking point"

Of course, it's no coincidence that many 'prominent' News establishment govt mouthpieces like the NY Times and Washington Post regularly spray this phrase across a number of their articles on a given week. It's a form of programming (contagion), and clearly a number of you are infected with it.

For those reading between the lines soberly, it's quite clear that the above quoted phrase is intended not only as a means to further create wedges and dividing lines, but it -- again, by no coincidence -- is also used as a catch-all against practically ANY considerations or talking points that counter status quo, that counter the current prevailing DOGMA of our times.

This is not to say that there isn't a Venn Diagram of certain thoughts that may fall within the 'Right' spectrum, of course, but here's a fucking news flash:

Saying something is a 'right wing' or 'Far right' talking point does NOT, by itself, automatically make it fucking wrong.
It does, however, often facilitate and enable blatant censorship/othering attempts, as we've seen the last few years.

Certain types of WRONGTHINK, which these last few years tend to be those labeled as 'Right Wing' or 'Far Right', have been deplatformed/censored, etc.

By way of just a few examples:

- Choosing NOT to be injected with a mandated medical product is a 'right wing' thought. Sometimes even 'Far Right';
- Questioning current Net Zero, ESG, and/or 'carbon offset' initiatives (and along similar lines 'green energy' and any related policies) is 'right wing' or 'Far Right'.
- believing that mandates were blatantly unethical and counter to fundamental rights was -- for a period of time -- considered to be a Right Wing/Far Right talking point. Some secretly still believe it to be so.

The above Labeling is applied by default, REGARDLESS of the underlying drivers or thought processes that may lead one to express these positions.

In the past ~3 yrs, I've come to know a number of 'leftists' (or at least those that formerly considered themselves leftists or progressives prior to 2020) that align with a number of my views, as well as those that have self-described as 'conservative'/Right leaning. This may speak more to my own circle rather than a general trend.

Point being: some of the most critical issues these last few years should not have become political/tribal dividing lines. Yet they clearly became just that. Why?

I also lost a number of friends due to my positions these last few years. The 'compasionate' Left, eh?

All of the above is made more absurd when one reflects that some of the MOST critical issues we faced these last few years --- civil/human rights issues -- were historically 'Left'/progressive ideals.

And yet: there remain many that continue to operate as if definitions haven't flipped; as if the ground beneath their feet haven't shifted or turned at all.

Surreal, tragic. But no longer surprising. Nor is it surprising, anymore, that many have no inclination to re-calibrate or even re-consider underlying drivers.

[Grizzly]

^^^

Yup.

So anyone want in on this bet?

Alien/UFO talk in news...someone will have a "contact" with beings and say the typical "We humans are destroying the world and Aliens say we need to fix it or else" - And itll tie into global warming/climate change

Thats the moment you'll know all this UFO/alien stuff is pure psyoppery.

yeah, yeah...back on topic *rolls eyes*

[Marionumber1]

All of the above is made more absurd when one reflects that some of the MOST critical issues we faced these last few years --- civil/human rights issues -- were historically 'Left'/progressive ideals.

And yet: there remain many that continue to operate as if definitions haven't flipped; as if the ground beneath their feet haven't shifted or turned at all.

I don't believe the definitions have flipped. Left-wing means the same thing it always did, and frauds calling themselves that doesn't make it so. The frauds are also active on both the "left" and "right": I think the COVID op lowered many people's defenses to right-wingers who did the right thing on COVID but have shit takes on numerous other issues (e.g. DeSantis).

The nature of our system is to prevent any consensus from ever forming around a positive future. Especially since 2016, the main way to achieve that is having good or at least semi-valid takes get embraced by odious people. Trump says something antiwar, DeSantis opposes lockdowns, Fox News reports on e-vote rigging... And what happens? The mainstream libs (+ PNAC conservatives who have fallen in with the Dems lately) bleat about these dangerous "right-wing conspiracy theories". The libertarian/anti-establishment conservatives back someone who's correct on one issue (and occasionally follows through, though usually it's for show), but continues systematically fucking over the US population in every other respect. Anyone in the realm of left-wing has to pick which of these two aforementioned shit sandwiches they'd prefer. (In reality they don't have to pick either, but it's hard to avoid that for very long, even just subconsciously.)

You can sometimes advance certain issues (e.g. opposition to lockdowns), at the expense of taking a step back with social services and other basic civil liberties (from abortion rights to police and prosecutorial abuses, which the Republicans have virtually always been worse on). Then the pendulum swings back to people who will take the inverse set of positions.

[Harvey]

With respect, who gives a fuck what any government should do?

This is an utterly bizarre statement. Can it be sincere? I can't even fathom where this thinking comes from.

The gulf between any of the infinity of things we could or should be doing and what governments actually do, not quite wide enough for you yet? Keep on giving a fuck what government should do. I hope the strategy works for you.

[Belligerent Savant]

All of the above is made more absurd when one reflects that some of the MOST critical issues we faced these last few years --- civil/human rights issues -- were historically 'Left'/progressive ideals.

And yet: there remain many that continue to operate as if definitions haven't flipped; as if the ground beneath their feet haven't shifted or turned at all.

I don't believe the definitions have flipped. Left-wing means the same thing it always did, and frauds calling themselves that doesn't make it so. The frauds are also active on both the "left" and "right": I think the COVID op lowered many people's defenses to right-wingers who did the right thing on COVID but have shit takes on numerous other issues (e.g. DeSantis).

The nature of our system is to prevent any consensus from ever forming around a positive future. Especially since 2016, the main way to achieve that is having good or at least semi-valid takes get embraced by odious people. Trump says something antiwar, DeSantis opposes lockdowns, Fox News reports on e-vote rigging... And what happens? The mainstream libs (+ PNAC conservatives who have fallen in with the Dems lately) bleat about these dangerous "right-wing conspiracy theories". The libertarian/anti-establishment conservatives back someone who's correct on one issue (and occasionally follows through, though usually it's for show), but continues systematically fucking over the US population in every other respect. Anyone in the realm of left-wing has to pick which of these two aforementioned shit sandwiches they'd prefer. (In reality they don't have to pick either, but it's hard to avoid that for very long, even just subconsciously.)

You can sometimes advance certain issues (e.g. opposition to lockdowns), at the expense of taking a step back with social services and other basic civil liberties (from abortion rights to police and prosecutorial abuses, which the Republicans have virtually always been worse on). Then the pendulum swings back to people who will take the inverse set of positions.

I will grant that "flipped" was not the best term here; it's not a '180 degree' turn (though in some cases, it has been). But I don't necessarily agree that "left wing means the same as it always did". Let's test it right now. For those that consider themselves earnestly "left wing":

- did they vocally/openly oppose lockdowns, mandates, and "vaccine passports" from the onset and call them out as affronts?
- did they vocally /openly oppose censorship whenever applied by govts/social media from 2020 - 2023?
- did they vocally/openly oppose seizure/closure of bank accounts and other affronts imposed on those that protested against lockdowns/mandates?
- etc.

Some did. Many didn't.

Indeed, the frauds that claimed to be leftists were outed as blatant hypocrites, cowards, or simply captured entities (even historical "leftists" -- Chomsky is one glaring example, which leads to a question: do you consider Chomsky to be a fraud 'leftist'? I'd imagine so, but in either case his words essentially called for the segregation, minimally, of the "unvaccinated")


You also typed:

The nature of our system is to prevent any consensus from ever forming around a positive future.

Fully agree, and have been indicating as such here for years. My position has never been in 'support' of much of the mainstream narratives in play, particularly in the U.S.

Despite insinuations, I do not label myself a 'libertarian', however that term may currently be defined, though of course some of my current thinking at least appreciates aspects of it (as I appreciate aspects of several political talking points, which is why I remain 'independent' from all of them)

Some of what you're typing above almost sounds like excuse-making for being in support of lockdowns or mandates, though perhaps I'm misreading. OF course there are a variety of ways that those who historically subscribe to many/most of political ideology/Party Line rhetoric (as presented to the general populace) have been led down certain paths -- misdirected, mis/disinformed, played for rubes, led down certain talking points or thinking patterns for the reasons you outline.

But I'm not referring to those groups of people, for the most part, when I issue certain critiques about reactions to some of the events since late 2019.

I'm focusing on those that claimed to be above the fray (in words or actions); those that claimed to be aware, at least in part, of the myriad machinations in place such as those you call out above. It's THESE people that I focus on, because -- as demonstrated in this very forum, for example -- these types of people have supported (at least to some degree, and perhaps only for a period of time, particularly when hysteria was at its height*) lockdowns, mandates, affronts to essential human rights.

(*and yet, it's during such times -- when hysteria is at its highest points -- when its most critical to not be consumed by it and call out the affronts)

To an extent, this was understandable given the unprecedented campaigns in play. But how many have since full acknowledged their errors in thinking? How many have taken ownership or acknowledged this? How many are actively involved in countering these affronts? I've seen lots of silence or 'hiding behind the bushes'. Little action in this regard.

Irrespective of anything else (political factors, manipulation efforts, etc), this much is clear: Mandates, Lockdowns, blatant acts of censorship, etc. -- ALL were unwarranted, harmful, and NEVER justified. And this should be a foundational understanding for anyone that claims to be aware of the manipulations in play out there.

Once we all agree on this, we can move forward For A Positive Future, as it should be clear that "they" WILL aim to push same or similar measures (be it due to "climate alarm", "monetary collapse", "social credit scores", future pathogens, etc). HOW MANY (among the "earnest Left", or of any persuasion) will Refuse/Resist? How many will not comply when these affronts are rolled out again?

(they're already priming the populace for climate-related lockdowns and restrictions)

We'll find out.

[Grizzly]

^^^

Well said BS

I was one more 'nudge'*, at work away from filing a hostile work environment suit. Several of my co workers had mild to severe reactions and the company caused their own crisis employment by pushing the jabs. and losing workers due to reactions. And believe me Missoula is a 'liberal' city. But many of my friends saw this for what it was a money grab crime against humanity, via organized and sanctioned crime. 'simply captured entities', is the best description I've heard so far. Something has shifted. Maybe it's me. But, I'm not the only one, and further, I've lost some life long friends over these past few years, who can't or wont see the (small) businesses closed never to return, the divorces- family break ups, child /teen suicide sky rocketing,

nudging* a form of needling, and harassment.

[Belligerent Savant]

...
For those that consider themselves earnestly "left wing":

- did they vocally/openly oppose lockdowns, mandates, and "vaccine passports" from the onset and call them out as affronts?
- did they vocally /openly oppose censorship whenever applied by govts/social media from 2020 - 2023?
- did they vocally/openly oppose seizure/closure of bank accounts and other affronts imposed on those that protested against lockdowns/mandates?
- etc.

Some did. Many didn't.

Edit to add another bullet to the above list (among others that can be added:

- Did they blanketly endorse U.S. actions in the Ukraine, without reservations and/or caveats, and essentially adopt much if not all of the front-facing narratives Re: war in the Ukraine/surrounding regions? (and/or did they place a Ukraine flag on one or more of their social media account profiles, or worse, perch a Ukrainian flag in front of their home/apt?).

Note, to be clear: I'm not inferring the above towards anyone here, necessarily, but to those out there that claim to be leftists and yet their stated positions (or silence, or compliance) in alignment with any of the above are counter to 'Leftist' sentiment.

For the record, I am flatly AGAINST war, ESPECIALLY any 'war' as presented in the modern era. There is no justification for any human life -- other than those that are organizing/pushing for such campaigns, and they will never step foot in any field of war -- to be taken for these aggressive actions. They are never justified, especially and foremost because the actual reasons for such actions are never aligned with the presentations by media/govt.

Why would an earnest "Leftist" support any war in the modern era, if not due to programming/conditioning/priming/tribalist rhetoric?

Case in point:

Glenn Greenwald Retweeted
System Update
@SystemUpdate_

Almost every Dem—along w/ the ever-radical @BernieSanders — just voted against the most basic oversight on this aid, going so far as to invoke the "racist" filibuster to block it

Other than deliberately deceiving the public, what could possibly be the motive for less transparency & accountability?

https://rumble.com/v32z8nu-system

There is essentially no oversight on the billions in weapons & funding the US is funneling into Ukraine.

And like in every other US war, it is likely just a matter of time before we go to war against groups armed with our own "misplaced" weapons from this conflict.

https://twitter.com/SystemUpdate_/statu ... 50369?s=20

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald

Bernie Sanders joined every Senate Dem except 2 (Ossoff and Tester) in voting NO on an amendment to appoint an Inspector General to provide oversight and supervision on the billions of dollars the US is sending to Ukraine, the most corrupt country in Europe.

Failed 51-48.

Michael Tracey
@mtracey

Once again the Senate rejected a proposal to establish a lead Inspector General to oversee Ukraine spending and enhance legislative oversight. This wasn't some "isolationist" measure: it was introduced by hardcore GOP hawks Wicker and Kennedy. But the Dems still all voted it down

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1 ... 88775?s=20

[Belligerent Savant]

.
To drive it home even further, given the recent comments here Re: social security and other domestic social programs, observe the hypocrisy/irony:

Lee Fang
@lhfang

Lol within about 15 hours from this tweet Bernie Sanders voted against a special inspector general audit of $117 billion in Ukraine war money/contractors.

Bernie Sanders
@SenSanders

Somehow, we never have enough money for health care, education, or housing, but always have more than enough money for a bloated and wasteful Defense Department that cannot even pass an independent audit. It’s time to change our national priorities NOW.

3:08 PM · Jul 27, 2023

https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/16850 ... 80128?s=20

[Joe Hillshoist]

All of the above is made more absurd when one reflects that some of the MOST critical issues we faced these last few years --- civil/human rights issues -- were historically 'Left'/progressive ideals.

And yet: there remain many that continue to operate as if definitions haven't flipped; as if the ground beneath their feet haven't shifted or turned at all.

I don't believe the definitions have flipped. Left-wing means the same thing it always did, and frauds calling themselves that doesn't make it so. The frauds are also active on both the "left" and "right": I think the COVID op lowered many people's defenses to right-wingers who did the right thing on COVID but have shit takes on numerous other issues (e.g. DeSantis).

The nature of our system is to prevent any consensus from ever forming around a positive future. Especially since 2016, the main way to achieve that is having good or at least semi-valid takes get embraced by odious people. Trump says something antiwar, DeSantis opposes lockdowns, Fox News reports on e-vote rigging... And what happens? The mainstream libs (+ PNAC conservatives who have fallen in with the Dems lately) bleat about these dangerous "right-wing conspiracy theories". The libertarian/anti-establishment conservatives back someone who's correct on one issue (and occasionally follows through, though usually it's for show), but continues systematically fucking over the US population in every other respect. Anyone in the realm of left-wing has to pick which of these two aforementioned shit sandwiches they'd prefer. (In reality they don't have to pick either, but it's hard to avoid that for very long, even just subconsciously.)

You can sometimes advance certain issues (e.g. opposition to lockdowns), at the expense of taking a step back with social services and other basic civil liberties (from abortion rights to police and prosecutorial abuses, which the Republicans have virtually always been worse on). Then the pendulum swings back to people who will take the inverse set of positions.

I will grant that "flipped" was not the best term here; it's not a '180 degree' turn (though in some cases, it has been). But I don't necessarily agree that "left wing means the same as it always did". Let's test it right now. For those that consider themselves earnestly "left wing":

- did they vocally/openly oppose lockdowns, mandates, and "vaccine passports" from the onset and call them out as affronts?
- did they vocally /openly oppose censorship whenever applied by govts/social media from 2020 - 2023?
- did they vocally/openly oppose seizure/closure of bank accounts and other affronts imposed on those that protested against lockdowns/mandates?
- etc.

Some did. Many didn't.

Indeed, the frauds that claimed to be leftists were outed as blatant hypocrites, cowards, or simply captured entities (even historical "leftists" -- Chomsky is one glaring example, which leads to a question: do you consider Chomsky to be a fraud 'leftist'? I'd imagine so, but in either case his words essentially called for the segregation, minimally, of the "unvaccinated")


You also typed:

The nature of our system is to prevent any consensus from ever forming around a positive future.

Fully agree, and have been indicating as such here for years. My position has never been in 'support' of much of the mainstream narratives in play, particularly in the U.S.

Despite insinuations, I do not label myself a 'libertarian', however that term may currently be defined, though of course some of my current thinking at least appreciates aspects of it (as I appreciate aspects of several political talking points, which is why I remain 'independent' from all of them)

Some of what you're typing above almost sounds like excuse-making for being in support of lockdowns or mandates, though perhaps I'm misreading. OF course there are a variety of ways that those who historically subscribe to many/most of political ideology/Party Line rhetoric (as presented to the general populace) have been led down certain paths -- misdirected, mis/disinformed, played for rubes, led down certain talking points or thinking patterns for the reasons you outline.

But I'm not referring to those groups of people, for the most part, when I issue certain critiques about reactions to some of the events since late 2019.

I'm focusing on those that claimed to be above the fray (in words or actions); those that claimed to be aware, at least in part, of the myriad machinations in place such as those you call out above. It's THESE people that I focus on, because -- as demonstrated in this very forum, for example -- these types of people have supported (at least to some degree, and perhaps only for a period of time, particularly when hysteria was at its height*) lockdowns, mandates, affronts to essential human rights.

(*and yet, it's during such times -- when hysteria is at its highest points -- when its most critical to not be consumed by it and call out the affronts)

To an extent, this was understandable given the unprecedented campaigns in play. But how many have since full acknowledged their errors in thinking? How many have taken ownership or acknowledged this? How many are actively involved in countering these affronts? I've seen lots of silence or 'hiding behind the bushes'. Little action in this regard.

Irrespective of anything else (political factors, manipulation efforts, etc), this much is clear: Mandates, Lockdowns, blatant acts of censorship, etc. -- ALL were unwarranted, harmful, and NEVER justified. And this should be a foundational understanding for anyone that claims to be aware of the manipulations in play out there.

Once we all agree on this, we can move forward For A Positive Future, as it should be clear that "they" WILL aim to push same or similar measures (be it due to "climate alarm", "monetary collapse", "social credit scores", future pathogens, etc). HOW MANY (among the "earnest Left", or of any persuasion) will Refuse/Resist? How many will not comply when these affronts are rolled out again?

(they're already priming the populace for climate-related lockdowns and restrictions)

We'll find out.

By definition lockdowns are a left wing policy.

They are a collective policy that values collective/group benefits over individual ones.

[drstrangelove]

Actually Joe, lockdown's were an authoritarian policy based on totalitarian values.

The means were forceful(authoritarian) and the ends justified on a totalistic view of society as a monolithic organism(totalitarian).

Left and Right don't actually mean anything. Hitler had a collective policy that valued a group benefit over individual ones.

Lockdown's can only be opposed, in principle, using either Libertarian or Democratic values. Which is why every democratic tenet was trampled upon without justification.

It's actually all a totalitarian conspiracy. Two factions have just been bickering over whether human nature is good or evil, and whether to use words or numbers, to bring this about. Here if anywhere, is where you actually find the left/right divide.

[Grizzly]

RFK Jr BANNED From Dem Ballot?! Progressive Group Fundraises Off Push To BLOCK Kennedy From Primary