rigorousintuition.ca

they are voting against the Fascist Donald Trump

they had a fascist take over the party and they didn't like it

The next time someone asks you to prove Donald Trump is a fascist, show them this 91-item list
http://fusion.net/story/329662/donald-t ... t-fascist/

Well, SLaD, you can dream, as you keep on proving.

Good luck with that wholly imaginary anti-Fascist alliance of yours, along with Negroponte, Paulson, Rice, Powell, Chertoff, "Jeb", George HW Bush et al (aka The Dream Team):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_R ... aign,_2016

The State, the corporations, the banks, the military and the media - all gleichgeschaltet. It's a truly mighty display of National Unity. How can the world fail to bow down to it? Especially when it comes in the name of anti-Fascism.

I'm not asking anyone to bow down to anything

I just not voting for the Fascist

I know you are cheering for the destruction of the United States but I live here

I can't help that the republicans don't want a Fascist in the White House either

Mercer/Bannon/Breitbart/Giuliani/rogue FBI/Military/Kallstrom/Schweitzer....

USING Trump ....these people are not republicans...these people are real honest to goodness Fascists

Stop insulting me, SLaD. If I were really "cheering for the destruction of the United States" then I would be cheering for One Party and more-of.the-same-forever, like the panicked Beltway creeps and vile neocons and warmongers and Republicans who are now rushing to support "Hillary".

MacCruiskeen » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:20 pm wrote:Stop insulting me, SLaD. If I were really "cheering for the destruction of the United States" then I would be cheering for One Party and more-of.the-same-forever, like the panicked Beltway creeps and vile neocons and warmongers and Republicans who are now rushing to support "Hillary".

so what is your suggestion ...what are we Americans to do Mac?

Tell me what is best for me Mac

brekin » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:26 pm wrote:
One unfortunate thing is that Obama didn't do a very good job his two terms of dealing with the sense of America falling behind, white resentment, and racial unrest growing. I know a fixed income white educated elderly progressive lady who voted for Obama twice but is now voting for Trump. Why? All I can guess is, is that things didn't get better for her these last 8 years, they got worst, and she doesn't feel like she's responsible at all (she's a victim remember) so Trump promises change and someone for white people to blame, whereas democrats promise whites more terms to blame themselves (but especially white republicans). Some people think America can never be great again, because it never was, slavery, genocide, oppression, etc. Whereas others want to believe it can be great again, which means prosperous and guilt free. People who aren't making it, living paycheck to paycheck, are two missed payments from being homeless, don't want to hear how privileged they are.

Most Republicans I know have always suspected that the Democrats will make America worse, either culturally or economically (or a combination of both). After 8 years of a Democrat White House, their suspicions have been confirmed. I actually know two types of Republicans, the business class that are actually doing quite well financially (their concern is usually cultural slip), and then the working poor or barely-middle class (as brekin mentioned above). I would say that their primary concern is economic, but they blame the cultural slip on what is causing bad economics; i.e. when God doesn't like what a nation is turning into, He withdraws His divine grace (aka money).

I am a cultural liberal, so it looks like to me that America has advanced very well, culturally, over the last 8 years. Gay people can marry, trans people can use their preferable bathroom, women can (mostly) get birth control at no additional cost tens of millions more people are going to live in states with either recreational or medical marijuana. This is all good, but when I write it out like that . . . it seems like a short list.

I will give SLAD a nod, here, and say that she is right: change takes time and we should fight for small victories that add up to major ones!

Economically, though, I can't disagree with all my Republican friends. It's shit around here. Our local housing market is amongst the worst in the nation, and realtors are predicting it might be 20 years before home prices climb back up to 2007 levels. Twenty more years. And I don't live in the sticks. This town is actually NICE compared to any community in a 40 mile radius. There are lots of businesses open and lots of jobs . . . it's just that they are all part time gigs paying less than $10 an hour. The median wage here is $12/hour . . . which means that HALF of all working people make less than that.

This is why Donald Trump is so popular in rural America. brekin is right, again, people need someone to blame. Trumps slogan might as well have been "Make America BLAME again!" because I think that is what people are latching on to.

Most Republicans I know have always suspected that the Democrats will make America worse, either culturally or economically (or a combination of both). After 8 years of a Democrat White House, their suspicions have been confirmed

.

that's bullshit


there's been a Democrat in the White House with REPUBLICANS IN BOTH HOUSES STOPPING EVERY SINGLE THING HE WANTED TO DO

and all the while pushing the lies that Obama wasn't even an American citizen


Can't wait for those Republicans to lower the taxes on the one percent?


Who is holding back an increase in the minimum wage?

Who's gonna take away Gay rights and a woman's right to choose?

SLAD, yes there has been obstructionism in congress for much of Obama's term. 100% agree. I am talking about their perception of economics. They could also say that Obama sat in the White House and threatened to veto every economic plan that the Republicans had that might have "saved" us. Obstructionism goes both way

Just to add something relating to Mac's excellent list of Republicans voting for Hillary Clinton.

For all the rural Republicans I know, the people they mostly into power in 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012 are mostly siding with Hillary . . and yet they will be voting for Trump. I think a lot of them realized that BOTH parties have been screwing them since forever. For the Democrats, that list of Republican supporters is seen as a sign of GOP defeat, that they have finally come to their sense and are supporting Democrat causes.

No, this is a sign that they are mostly on the same side of things. Henry Paulson is supporting Hillary? That should send shivers down the spine of every Democrat that I know. I think it does, in the week hours of the night, when they lay in bed and really think about it. The BUSH family is supporting Hillary? That must cause them to wake up shivering in a cold sweat! But it is a concern for after the election.

so what is your suggestion ...what are we Americans to do Mac?

Think for yourselves and act accordingly, of course.

I don't know where to start, SLaD. I don't think what masquerades as "Democracy" in the US is savable, or worth saving. I would suggest boycotting the "election", but it's far too late for anyone to organise a mass boycott now. I would suggest spoiling your ballot paper, but there is now no such thing as a ballot paper to spoil. So if you twisted my arm, I'd suggest voting Green across the board. And when this grotesque theatre is all over, take a good look at the integrity of the entire "election" process.

Fwiw.

Other than that: Do what you're already doing: care for your family and friends, and don't let the bastards grind you down -- or panic you into submission. All of these vampires feed on our fear.

http://www.womensliberation.org/index.p ... s-election

Future of Freedom Movements: A Lot is at Stake in this Election

While voting in our system is not the powerful tool the Woman's Suffrage Movement hoped it would be, it's still an important tool of defense-especially this year for stopping Donald Trump. Trump threatens a century of gains for women's liberation, civil rights, and the labor movement.

We have to face that in the current unfair election system we have only two candidates who will be able to get into power. As Alicia Garza of Black Lives Matter says, "I am not voting for candidates, I am voting for terrain."

Trump is inciting sexist and racist behavior that is already making life harder for women. He's encouraging rally crowds to beat up protesters and suggesting his armed supporters assassinate Hillary Clinton. He's making anti-woman rhetoric mainstream, encouraging supporters to call Hillary a "bitch", calling a Latina beauty contest winner "Miss Piggy" and "Miss Housekeeping" and sneeringly referring to Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren as "Pocahontas." Under Trump, women will face perilous new conditions requiring us to spend all our movement energy to keep from being pushed back, rather than moving forward and making concrete wins for women.

Under Clinton the terrain will be difficult for us, as well as the targets of her hawkish foreign policy. To get the things women need, we need a lot more than a woman president, we need a strong movement making bold demands, much bolder than anything in Hillary's platform. But making bold demands under a Hillary Clinton administration will be a lot more likely to build into a powerful, effective force than it will if Donald Trump is elected. No-one expects him to do feminist things like fight for an effective equal pay law or a public child care system. But most women do expect things of Hillary-she's said she would repeal the Hyde Amendment that has blocked women with Medicaid from accessing abortion for 40 years; she's promised to support paid family leave.

Just as Occupy Wall Street arose partly from the disappointment of business as usual under the Obama administration, the feminist movement will have the chance to mobilize under a Hillary Clinton administration, based on widespread expectations. If we unite in large enough numbers, we could win urgently needed feminist gains. With a President Trump, we will be fighting for the very space to organize.

Slad:

so what is your suggestion ...what are we Americans to do Mac?

Why would anyone be a member of a bully's gang? It's the fringe benefits that keeps the members in line. It's a trickle down economy, a bully's gang. The big bully gets the main spoils, the rest get what's left. 'Whats left' is enough to keep the rest of the gang in line, aided by an intrinsic threat of violence against gang members by the big bully.

We get TVs and condos, they get islands and armies.

We get restless, maybe we don't want to be in the gang anymore - they get nasty.

Say hello to where we're at.

I am voting for terrain.

With a President Trump, we will be fighting for the very space to organize.

that's it!

I think we damn well know what is best for us and our families ...that's all that matters

Heaven Swan » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:49 pm wrote:http://www.womensliberation.org/index.p ... s-election

Future of Freedom Movements: A Lot is at Stake in this Election

While voting in our system is not the powerful tool the Woman's Suffrage Movement hoped it would be, it's still an important tool of defense-especially this year for stopping Donald Trump. Trump threatens a century of gains for women's liberation, civil rights, and the labor movement.

We have to face that in the current unfair election system we have only two candidates who will be able to get into power. As Alicia Garza of Black Lives Matter says, "I am not voting for candidates, I am voting for terrain."

Trump is inciting sexist and racist behavior that is already making life harder for women. He's encouraging rally crowds to beat up protesters and suggesting his armed supporters assassinate Hillary Clinton. He's making anti-woman rhetoric mainstream, encouraging supporters to call Hillary a "bitch", calling a Latina beauty contest winner "Miss Piggy" and "Miss Housekeeping" and sneeringly referring to Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren as "Pocahontas." Under Trump, women will face perilous new conditions requiring us to spend all our movement energy to keep from being pushed back, rather than moving forward and making concrete wins for women.

Under Clinton the terrain will be difficult for us, as well as the targets of her hawkish foreign policy. To get the things women need, we need a lot more than a woman president, we need a strong movement making bold demands, much bolder than anything in Hillary's platform. But making bold demands under a Hillary Clinton administration will be a lot more likely to build into a powerful, effective force than it will if Donald Trump is elected. No-one expects him to do feminist things like fight for an effective equal pay law or a public child care system. But most women do expect things of Hillary-she's said she would repeal the Hyde Amendment that has blocked women with Medicaid from accessing abortion for 40 years; she's promised to support paid family leave.

Just as Occupy Wall Street arose partly from the disappointment of business as usual under the Obama administration, the feminist movement will have the chance to mobilize under a Hillary Clinton administration, based on widespread expectations. If we unite in large enough numbers, we could win urgently needed feminist gains. With a President Trump, we will be fighting for the very space to organize.

MacCruiskeen » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:01 pm wrote:Good luck with that wholly imaginary anti-Fascist alliance of yours, along with Negroponte, Paulson, Rice, Powell, Chertoff, "Jeb", George HW Bush et al (aka The Dream Team):

Yeah well, von Papen and Bruning also thought Hitler was not the best idea. Not that Trump is Hitler, of course. As I say, he's the Kayfabe version.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Republicans_opposing_Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign,_2016

The State, the corporations, the banks, the military and the media - all gleichgeschaltet. It's a truly mighty display of National Unity. How can the world fail to bow down to it? Especially when it comes in the name of anti-Fascism.

I'm sure you will agree on second thought that all this is a pretty good argument against Clinton, but not a defense of Trump against the fascism charge. And hey, it's not fascism. It's the post-reality version, I'm sure we can also agree. No difference to the incinerated, true, under either option.

.

seemslikeadream » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:55 pm wrote:I am voting for terrain.

With a President Trump, we will be fighting for the very space to organize.

that's it!

I think we damn well know what is best for us and our families ...that's all that matters

And I respect your choice, although mine (given the conveniences of living in New York) is not the same. And there is no excuse for voting for or apologizing for Trump. There is no universe in which he is the "lesser evil," or for that matter the tactically better choice because we get more space to fight him than we get in fighting a Clinton administration.

Unknowable factors notwithstanding, like whether we get a "Cyber 9/11" right after the election. Something like that may be in the works regardless of who wins the Ugliness Pageant. The Deep State has the resources for attempts to instantly turn consensus narratives. We unfortunately do not.

.

yes and we are Americans...