There's a certain irrelevance to your 'we beat them, and he's better than him' kind of comparisons you keep making.
we’re in a discussion thread about us candidates/ policy yet you find it irrelevant that comparisons are being made? Right after you ask me if there are republican candidates that I find electable?
Don’t ask the question if you can’t stand the answer, Hensmon.
People like Biden 'win' because of campaign tactics, rhetoric and the nature of idealogical tribalism, not because of capabilities or qualities. How much substance a candidate has unfortunately seems to be less pivotal than how much style they have, and all victories operate within that vector. Over-analysing the nuances of the trash in order to postulate ' look how bad the Reps are' is a pointless exercise to me, it tells us nothing.
I fixed that for you to point out that you’re projecting with frankly, useless rhetoric,its flilps both sides, you’re not making a point here, you’re just showing colours.
I find the memes equally eye-rolling and tribalistic if i'm honest, if even posted half-seriously.
well sorry you didn’t find my memes funny m8, I though they where, and painfully on point. but perhaps that’s because its you, not me who’s the actual political (left) tribalist you constantly accuse me of being here. I had a great laugh at Katadunkas’s Trump memes.
The bomb one is a good example of the pointless sparing between the two sides via each others garbage. Yes, the Dems and The Repubs both bomb, a deplorable action and both containing hypocrisy (although your meme only demonstrates that on the Dem side here).
the title of the meme when I downloaded it was “same shit, different party” but yes, you're right. the democrats are especially good at highlighting how much they’re on board with the future utopia and social justice whilst at the same time doing exactly the same thing the reps are doing.
Why on earth is the debate never about who is NOT going to be bombing, I wonder??? .
1 The debate is, 2 Because NO ONE is NOT going to be bombing (or starving people) Hensmon. And please don’t kill me with laugher if you are infact referring to your preferred isle of the ideological spectrum when you think of potential leaders who allegedly won’ reside. It has a couple of particularly nasty genocides attributed to it.
My point is that the focus should be entirely on the good ideas and the great leadership candidates. There is no question that at least in UK and U.S politics within the last 10+ years that they are currently all coming from the Left.
And I couldn’t disagree more on the latter part. the left, aside from doing nothing but identity politics nowadays, are openly aspousing things like:
state redistribution of wealth based on race or class,
open borders,
government distributed "universal" healthcare
more draconian government control over the demos
absurd taxes (not just for the rich)
blasphemy / hate speech laws for the individual and press.
to name a few,
there’s a very good reason why they lost the working class throughout the world, why they keep eating their on in order to get to the top of the virtue hierarchy and why they can’t seem to win ANY elections. And, please. Don’t give me the blame Populism! for that, Populism is as much left wing (BLM, Leninism 1930’s, occupy wallstreet etc.) as it is right (generation identitaire, bolsenaro, MAGA etc.) it literally means, "for the people, against the elites".
Doesn't mean i'm always on board with the right though. I'm divided but still pro-choice, think agw is real and i'm an ietists qua religion.
But where the left seems to keep regressing towards forms of neo marxism, the right is "conservativly" classical liberal/ individualist. So for now i'm in their camp, Till the left gets its act together.
Both Left and Right institutions are at bursting point with war-mongering, corrupt and outrageously stupid politicians and we can spend all day cherry picking the anecdotes of each to form our arguments, but in the rare occasion I (* fixed that for you, You don’t get to speak for me nor for the rest society) come across politicians with worthy levels of political integrity they are currently residing on the Left. Again that is the likes of Sanders, Corbyn, Gabbard, Yang...
"worthy levels of political intengrity" doesn't mean "ideas I like and people who have consistently kept them" It just means a candidate has stuck to his principles. which some reps do to the point of new earth creationism.
And the reason“politically integral “oldschool socialist candidates like “tax the milionairs oh shit I am one, I mean billionairs” Sanders, and “our friends in hamas and Hezbollah” Corbyn aren’t getting elected is because their ideas are not credible, they are terrible, they have been discredited/ tested and failed enmasse, and they don't work. Regardless of how “decent, principle and intellectual” their personas might be.
Yang is a bit of a oddball, I can’t figure out whether he’s actually left or right, his plans seems left leaning, suffering from a lot of the same flaws that national socialist policies suffer from, but his political compass reads him as firm authoritarian (lean) right which would explain why he was endorsed by the likes of Richard spencer, which he fortunately denounced. So, Dunno maybe his is maybe he isn't.
We agree on Gabbard, She out of all seems to be the candidate I would most likely support, though I would classify her far more as a centrist then a leftist on many issues. she’s against TTP/globalist neoliberalism, pro lowering income tax, anti-trimester abortion, like trump against wastefull foreign wars (who’s impeachment she didn’t support), pro sovereignty/borders but disagrees on the problem/solution. To name a few. Wouldn’t mind seeing her in 2024.
do not believe these traits are exclusive to left-wing individuals, just that the Right wing has failed to deliver a single offering with integrity since before I was born.
Like I said, Integrity is not just “policies I agree with” .I again refer you to Carson or Cruz, who’s principles are as integer as when they first entered the political domain. You just disagree with them.
This is not a debate just on ideology. I want decent, intellectual individuals, who have a moral compass, consistency in principles, actual ideas, not narcissistic, not extreme egotists, not pathological liars, and who do not rely on hitting the lowest common denomination of emotive divisiveness and fear based rhetoric.
I think I went through pretty much the entire election program of both candidas above so i don't see how i've "just" been focussing on ideology, and I find it honestly amazing that the people who continue to bemoan the US’s populist “vote for the man, not the policies/ideology” are the same who come up with wishlists like that mostly focussing on the hominem/ character traits and continue not to realize that.
further more:
- a technocratic intellectual isn’t the same thing as a leader, I'm firmly with Heinlein on this.
- Morals and a moral compass are largely determined by one's ideology, sorry thats just a fact.
- Name me 1 politician, who, when in office didn’t compromise principles for the sake of getting things done,
- Your preferred candidates “actual” ideas demonstrably don’t work/ turn out worse for society by track record.
- And as for narcicism, egotism and pathological liars/deniers, Trump certainly doesn’t have a monopoly on that doesn’t he? I would argue any postwall socialist/ communist is one and me and my loved one’s are certainly happy they get elected out rather then in power in the west. I honestly don't get why people still thing these ideas are a credible working option for a human society. how many times would like to see them fail precisely?
An insane obsession with ideology and on which side the individual falls has completely unhinged us from demanding those type of requirements as fundamental, which they unquestionable are.
yeah Don’t worry about the ideology/ direction a person is taking your country, as long as the politician speaks nice, is charismatic, an intellectual, sticks firmly to his principles and has actual ideas on how to form society it doesn’t matter if his name is Fidel Castro.
sorry not sorry but this is such a fundamentally nonsensical position to take that t I’m not even going to rebut it properly. Please. do live your fantasy.
There's a reason the politicians I mentioned above all feature on JRE, and as far as i'm aware little (or no?) Republican candidates as of yet. That's because they lack those fundamentals aforementioned. They are quite literally not worth the conversation.
Ok, well I don’t think using an entertainment podcast hosts program as your metric for decency concerning political candidates is a very good one m8, especially considering Joe roagan openly voted Trump this election, and tried to have both him and Biden on.