quote:

it’s the right wing machinery and leadership that enables Trump,

quote:

I’m out, I retire from this conversation because it makes me so furious I could chop down a F-ing telephone pole with a violin knife.

quote:

Ultimate goal will be to achieve Civil War.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Estevan

quote:

Ultimate goal will be to achieve Civil War.

Andrey Sidorov, deputy dean of world politics at the Moscow State University and russian state TV mouthpiece:

Mar 30, 2023
"Trump is coming. Think of him as you will, I always saw him and still see him as a destroyer of America."

September 6, 2024
“I will always root for Trump. Trump is a direct path to civil war in the United States.”

Sep 13, 2023
"I am for Trump, I always was for Trump.

"If he gets elected, everything we said about civil war will be on their agenda, in reality.... Trump can really get it to the point that our geopolitical adversary will fall apart—without any missiles."

quote:

Dunno about revenge, but I'd see value in applying a legal punishment on the person who started the fire. It serves as a disincentive for others and in the long run should contribute to reducing the number of fires started that way.

quote:

A lot of things do in fact work, even if the outcomes aren't perfect.

quote:

Sometimes sh1t just happens, without any need for a cryptic mastermind secretly pulling the strings.

quote:

Give an example, other than "that famous person is no longer allowed to do it thanks to the law", and I will show you why it is very different right now than it used to be.

quote:

"a message for the priests and prophets"???? WTF man they are the problem...they ARE the teenage girls jeeeezus. the Political phynx as you say is not being given a voice. The cameras move OFF of people like that and their clear headed logic is buried under heaps of pointless complaining about trumpety and others.

quote:

Mark2: They do understand that our immigration system is absurd. The Biden administration utterly failed in this regard. That gave Trump the advantage. Then we had inflation during his term, which IMO he was not really to blame for, but his denial of its existence gave Trump another point of attack.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Richard Jernigan

quote:

Mark2: They do understand that our immigration system is absurd. The Biden administration utterly failed in this regard. That gave Trump the advantage. Then we had inflation during his term, which IMO he was not really to blame for, but his denial of its existence gave Trump another point of attack.

I have read this thread with interest, but ultimately with dissatisfaction. I think many posters have touched upon a few causes of the present situation, but none have identified a dominant cause, nor have they proposed a workable solution.

My opinion is that there are a number of contributing causes, many of which exploit elements of human nature which can at times work against the general welfare.

Now to pick a nit: The quote above gives an erroneous impression. In fact a bill was negotiated and written by a bipartisan coalition of Senators, with administration approval. The bill would have taken significant steps to reform the mechanisms and laws of immigration. Reportedly, the bill was about to pass when Trump called and told its Republican backers to vote against it, so he could run on the issue of a broken immigration system.

This is just one example of how division has intentionally been stoked, not just by Trump or his supporters.

I think both politicians and the media are nearly always behaving irresponsibly when they foment dissent. The Republicans look back fondly upon their hero Ronald Reagan, but we don't hear much about Tip O'Neill, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, with whom Reagan crafted many successful compromises.

Nowadays congressional careers can be destroyed by a willingness to compromise. In my view compromise is the primary function of people elected to represent us in a democratic republic. Constituencies are bound to disagree fairly often. It is up to our elected representatives to find a more or less workable solution.

But somehow people often find "principled" defiance and demonization of the "opposition" more satisfying than moving on with a practical compromise, itself open to revision as time may reveal unanticipated flaws.

Allergic reaction to compromise is just one part of the problem. Irresponsibility by politicians, the media and the public are other components, but not a comprehensive list of causes.

For example, how about a level of economic inequality nearly unprecedented during the last century? Lots of well off people voted for both Trump and Harris, but lots of people on both sides of the line are barely making it from paycheck to paycheck. Some of those whom I know are roundly pissed off.

RNJ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark2

I'm a person who does believe the far left is in part responsible for Trump's win. 80% of the public believes that folks born male have an unfair advantage when competing in certain women's sports. I believe that is obviously true. What I've heard some folks claim is that this occurs in very small numbers, and since that is the case, it shouldn't matter. But it does to the girls and women who are affected.

This is one example.

Illegal immigration is another. Most all Amercians understand that the US was built by immigrants. They do not understand letting millions of people waltz right in. They do not understand busing them into cities all over the country and spending billions to support them.

They do understand that our immigration system is absurd. The Biden administration utterly failed in this regard. That gave Trump the advantage. Then we had inflation during his term, which IMO he was not really to blame for, but his denial of its existence gave Trump another point of attack.

Using terms like fascist, dictator, nazi, threat to democracy, etc as applied to Trump absolutely contributed to his victory, as most of the country simply doesn't believe it. You may believe it, and millions agree. But when we heard multiple democrat leaders, as well as most of the media, use the exact same phrases to describe Trump, it became clear this was an orchestrated effort to paint Trump as the next Hitler. That was not credible.

Trump's legal issues......I believe he committed many crimes in his life, but the way the Biden administration went after him simply rubbed many people the wrong way. For example, Trump increased his support among black Amercians significantly. I believe they saw their experience with the justice system in Trump's. People love an underdog.

Trump's term could turn out to be a complete disaster. If so, he will be trounced in the mid terms and the next president will be a democrat. Will you then claim that Trump's failures, and his far right supporters had nothing to do with a democrat victory?

As inferred in your post, the idea that people who don't agree with someone’s political views need education is offensive and will not win elections. The fact is, we have vast numbers of uneducated and undereducated folks in the US. Many voted for democrats. I didn’t hear the GOP telling them they needed to be educated or worse.

I realize my post reads as an endorsement of Trump but that is not the case. I find him personally reprehensible and unsuited to the office. But I'm also upset with the democratic party for not putting forth a candidate who could offer a clearly better alternative, which should have been easy, and yes, for embracing far left cultural ideas that are clearly out of step with the majority of Amercians.

Finally I do not agree with the idea that the country is going to fly off the rails under Trump. The pendulum will swing back. In the meantime, I'm collecting my SS and have no fear that it will end-which is yet another hysterical baseless claim that will not help the democrats when it never actually happens. If you think Trump was not aware and did not encourage this division, you have underestimated him, which puts you in the company of many.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bulerias2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark2

I'm a person who does believe the far left is in part responsible for Trump's win. 80% of the public believes that folks born male have an unfair advantage when competing in certain women's sports. I believe that is obviously true. What I've heard some folks claim is that this occurs in very small numbers, and since that is the case, it shouldn't matter. But it does to the girls and women who are affected.

This is one example.

Illegal immigration is another. Most all Amercians understand that the US was built by immigrants. They do not understand letting millions of people waltz right in. They do not understand busing them into cities all over the country and spending billions to support them.

They do understand that our immigration system is absurd. The Biden administration utterly failed in this regard. That gave Trump the advantage. Then we had inflation during his term, which IMO he was not really to blame for, but his denial of its existence gave Trump another point of attack.

Using terms like fascist, dictator, nazi, threat to democracy, etc as applied to Trump absolutely contributed to his victory, as most of the country simply doesn't believe it. You may believe it, and millions agree. But when we heard multiple democrat leaders, as well as most of the media, use the exact same phrases to describe Trump, it became clear this was an orchestrated effort to paint Trump as the next Hitler. That was not credible.

Trump's legal issues......I believe he committed many crimes in his life, but the way the Biden administration went after him simply rubbed many people the wrong way. For example, Trump increased his support among black Amercians significantly. I believe they saw their experience with the justice system in Trump's. People love an underdog.

Trump's term could turn out to be a complete disaster. If so, he will be trounced in the mid terms and the next president will be a democrat. Will you then claim that Trump's failures, and his far right supporters had nothing to do with a democrat victory?

As inferred in your post, the idea that people who don't agree with someone’s political views need education is offensive and will not win elections. The fact is, we have vast numbers of uneducated and undereducated folks in the US. Many voted for democrats. I didn’t hear the GOP telling them they needed to be educated or worse.

I realize my post reads as an endorsement of Trump but that is not the case. I find him personally reprehensible and unsuited to the office. But I'm also upset with the democratic party for not putting forth a candidate who could offer a clearly better alternative, which should have been easy, and yes, for embracing far left cultural ideas that are clearly out of step with the majority of Amercians.

Finally I do not agree with the idea that the country is going to fly off the rails under Trump. The pendulum will swing back. In the meantime, I'm collecting my SS and have no fear that it will end-which is yet another hysterical baseless claim that will not help the democrats when it never actually happens. If you think Trump was not aware and did not encourage this division, you have underestimated him, which puts you in the company of many.

I'm gonna go line by line here, but I'll start by addressing your point about lack of education. I did not call for more education in reference to political beliefs. I am talking about a general lack of education that crosses party lines -- there are people on the right and left who are spouting totally baseless rhetoric that is used to create convenient narratives, though I think it is known that reality does have a left-leaning bias -- not talking about far-left political rhetoric or anything, but generally speaking, issues pertaining to social justice are typically going to veer more left if we're interested in equitable solutions, and while certain economic ideas, like the weaponization of tariffs, can be found on both the right and left, I think broadly speaking one would find more sympathy among the general populace that capitalist structures the way they have them in the US are not facilitating the top 1% to pay their fair share, nor are they equitable and just. This doesn't imply that a totally socialist or otherwise left system is the answer, but I'm just saying that an argument against the status quo is probably going to engender broad support, as folks generally aren't enthused about the direction of the country at the moment.

With respect to the question of transgender folks in sports, your belief that folks born male have an unfair advantage, in the specific case of those who are transgender, is not "obviously true". Please read the following:

https://www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-about-transgender-non-binary-athletes

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10641525/

You are correct in stating that this is an issue affecting very, very few -- but the girls and women you are citing here belong squarely in the J.K. Rowling-adjacent TERF category. There is no scientific evidence pointing in the direction of the opinion you stated. So, this in particular is a bad example. You might want to do further reading which supports the idea that it is in the interest of the current ruling powers to erase identities like those of transgender people. They are, simply put, "undesirables" in their minds and incompatible with the ideals championed by the religious right.

Next point, illegal immigration. I think this is largely a problem of optics. This issue is far too complex for the average person to fully understand, hence sound bites, personal narratives, and "gotcha!"-type articles are going to rule the day. The reality is of course nuanced and complex, e.g., https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/trump-vs-biden-immigration-side-side-policy-comparison

But when it comes to optics, I'll concede that Trump was much more successfully able to tap into the collective zeitgeist regarding immigration, not because people are so specifically concerned with the idea that many are side-stepping the legal mechanisms in place, but perhaps because there is a certain appeal to "othering" and the maintenance of (an) out-group(s) during a time of more emboldened nationalism and isolationism.

The point about using terms like "threat to democracy" as somehow contributing to Trump's victory is absurd. The "political outsider" argument doesn't work anymore. He is a former president with a clear track record of flagrant disregard for democracy and one doesn't need to dig terribly deep to see that. Trump is not an "underdog". And by the way, reducing the reason that Black Americans voted more for him this time to the fact that they could identify with his experience in the justice system, yeah, I don't know about that one. Kind of seems like you are reducing that entire voting bloc to a monolith that is voting based on perceived injustice of someone who is white who committed white collar crimes AND got off scot-free pretty much every time and that's supposed to somehow mirror their experience in the legal system when they get inequitably screwed over with often significant punishments for minor offenses? Doesn't track, sorry.

To circle back again to your point about education, the GOP doesn't talk about education because they rely entirely upon those who are less educated to be the primary voting bloc. I'm not talking about the people who swing between the parties, I'm talking about the consistent blocs like the Evangelicals who subscribe to a fundamentalist religious ideology that doesn't intersect very often with scientific fact or reality generally. There is a lot of benefit to keeping this large swath of people if not uneducated then simply one-issue voters who will avert their gaze from anything as long as it is pro-life. You can't have a serious conversation with a person like this whose entire political persuasion is reduced to identifying a mass of cells as fully human and possessing a soul. It's just a Sisyphean task at that point. You may highlight that I seem to be reducing THIS group to a monolith, but I think you'll much more readily find that this bloc often self-identifies as voting on single issues, like abortion, while I am not aware of similarly sized movements among minorities, African-American or otherwise.

Lastly: "Finally I do not agree with the idea that the country is going to fly off the rails under Trump. The pendulum will swing back. In the meantime, I'm collecting my SS and have no fear that it will end-which is yet another hysterical baseless claim that will not help the democrats when it never actually happens. If you think Trump was not aware and did not encourage this division, you have underestimated him, which puts you in the company of many."

To that paragraph, I simply say, let's see what happens.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark2

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I'll offer my opinion.

First, the 1%-Depending on the state you live in, an income of between 350k and 990k puts you in the 1%

A person earning 650k will pay about 140k in Federal income tax, assuming reasonable deductions, and if they happen to live in CA, another 30k in State taxes.
If they own a home they will also likely pay another 10-20k in property taxes. More in some states that have lower state income taxes.

If you think that isn't enough, you are entitled to that opinion. My opinion is that they pay plenty. In fact, the numbers as to exactly how much of the total tax that the top earners pay are readily available, as well as the fact that the bottom 45% of earners pay no federal income tax. I disagree with that. Everyone should pay something. When you start talking about billionaires, they write a check to the government every year that exceeds what most everyone will pay in a lifetime.

Regarding the trans issue, no amount of explanation will negate the fact that some men who have transitioned have shattered records that were held by women. This, IMO, is unfair to women. Trying to paint women who have been affected by this as radical activists is not fair. As a father of women, one of whom played sports, I'd have been livid if my daughter was denied a place on a team, a scholarship, or even playing time in place of a boy. The fact that the democratic party supported their participation put them at odds with about 80% of the populace.

Along with illegal immigration, these issues often provoke an emotional response in voters, and the democrats lost on both of them.

I'll also hold to my opinion that the dems using inflammatory terms only energized the GOP vote. When Trump was shot, his numbers went up. When you start comparing someone to Hitler, you've lost credibility.

The black vote still went to the dems by a large margin, so I'm hardly "reducing them to a monolith"
I'm pointing out that Trump made historic gains among blacks. And I do believe they relate to him in a way that other republicans have never been able to. His legal issues, justified or not, made him more sympathetic among some voters, be they minorities or not.

When you consider that Trump is an outsider in the political world, he is an underdog. He was certainly an underdog when facing the government's attempts to prosecute him.

You seemingly assert that certain groups of folks are less educated or intelligent because of religious beliefs that you think fly in the face of science. I think you prove my point. You are discounting the concept of faith, which has been a part of human history for thousands of years. As long as democrats hold to the belief that they are smarter, better educated, and have the "correct" view regarding issues like abortion, they will continue to alienate vast blocks of voters. I happen to believe that the republicans are at a disadvantage regarding their position on abortion, but your view that someone who holds to the idea that life begins at conception automatically disqualifies them from intelligent debate paints you with the same brush you are wielding.

There are brilliant people who hold various religious beliefs. Some of those beliefs might defy logic, but faith can do that. To me, you have to separate that from intellectual prowess.

Finally I'd agree that Trump is a wild card. He may run the train off the rails. I don't think it's going to happen. If I did, I'd sell my T-bills.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bulerias2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark2

I'm a person who does believe the far left is in part responsible for Trump's win. 80% of the public believes that folks born male have an unfair advantage when competing in certain women's sports. I believe that is obviously true. What I've heard some folks claim is that this occurs in very small numbers, and since that is the case, it shouldn't matter. But it does to the girls and women who are affected.

This is one example.

Illegal immigration is another. Most all Amercians understand that the US was built by immigrants. They do not understand letting millions of people waltz right in. They do not understand busing them into cities all over the country and spending billions to support them.

They do understand that our immigration system is absurd. The Biden administration utterly failed in this regard. That gave Trump the advantage. Then we had inflation during his term, which IMO he was not really to blame for, but his denial of its existence gave Trump another point of attack.

Using terms like fascist, dictator, nazi, threat to democracy, etc as applied to Trump absolutely contributed to his victory, as most of the country simply doesn't believe it. You may believe it, and millions agree. But when we heard multiple democrat leaders, as well as most of the media, use the exact same phrases to describe Trump, it became clear this was an orchestrated effort to paint Trump as the next Hitler. That was not credible.

Trump's legal issues......I believe he committed many crimes in his life, but the way the Biden administration went after him simply rubbed many people the wrong way. For example, Trump increased his support among black Amercians significantly. I believe they saw their experience with the justice system in Trump's. People love an underdog.

Trump's term could turn out to be a complete disaster. If so, he will be trounced in the mid terms and the next president will be a democrat. Will you then claim that Trump's failures, and his far right supporters had nothing to do with a democrat victory?

As inferred in your post, the idea that people who don't agree with someone’s political views need education is offensive and will not win elections. The fact is, we have vast numbers of uneducated and undereducated folks in the US. Many voted for democrats. I didn’t hear the GOP telling them they needed to be educated or worse.

I realize my post reads as an endorsement of Trump but that is not the case. I find him personally reprehensible and unsuited to the office. But I'm also upset with the democratic party for not putting forth a candidate who could offer a clearly better alternative, which should have been easy, and yes, for embracing far left cultural ideas that are clearly out of step with the majority of Amercians.

Finally I do not agree with the idea that the country is going to fly off the rails under Trump. The pendulum will swing back. In the meantime, I'm collecting my SS and have no fear that it will end-which is yet another hysterical baseless claim that will not help the democrats when it never actually happens. If you think Trump was not aware and did not encourage this division, you have underestimated him, which puts you in the company of many.

I'm gonna go line by line here, but I'll start by addressing your point about lack of education. I did not call for more education in reference to political beliefs. I am talking about a general lack of education that crosses party lines -- there are people on the right and left who are spouting totally baseless rhetoric that is used to create convenient narratives, though I think it is known that reality does have a left-leaning bias -- not talking about far-left political rhetoric or anything, but generally speaking, issues pertaining to social justice are typically going to veer more left if we're interested in equitable solutions, and while certain economic ideas, like the weaponization of tariffs, can be found on both the right and left, I think broadly speaking one would find more sympathy among the general populace that capitalist structures the way they have them in the US are not facilitating the top 1% to pay their fair share, nor are they equitable and just. This doesn't imply that a totally socialist or otherwise left system is the answer, but I'm just saying that an argument against the status quo is probably going to engender broad support, as folks generally aren't enthused about the direction of the country at the moment.

With respect to the question of transgender folks in sports, your belief that folks born male have an unfair advantage, in the specific case of those who are transgender, is not "obviously true". Please read the following:

https://www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-about-transgender-non-binary-athletes

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10641525/

You are correct in stating that this is an issue affecting very, very few -- but the girls and women you are citing here belong squarely in the J.K. Rowling-adjacent TERF category. There is no scientific evidence pointing in the direction of the opinion you stated. So, this in particular is a bad example. You might want to do further reading which supports the idea that it is in the interest of the current ruling powers to erase identities like those of transgender people. They are, simply put, "undesirables" in their minds and incompatible with the ideals championed by the religious right.

Next point, illegal immigration. I think this is largely a problem of optics. This issue is far too complex for the average person to fully understand, hence sound bites, personal narratives, and "gotcha!"-type articles are going to rule the day. The reality is of course nuanced and complex, e.g., https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/trump-vs-biden-immigration-side-side-policy-comparison

But when it comes to optics, I'll concede that Trump was much more successfully able to tap into the collective zeitgeist regarding immigration, not because people are so specifically concerned with the idea that many are side-stepping the legal mechanisms in place, but perhaps because there is a certain appeal to "othering" and the maintenance of (an) out-group(s) during a time of more emboldened nationalism and isolationism.

The point about using terms like "threat to democracy" as somehow contributing to Trump's victory is absurd. The "political outsider" argument doesn't work anymore. He is a former president with a clear track record of flagrant disregard for democracy and one doesn't need to dig terribly deep to see that. Trump is not an "underdog". And by the way, reducing the reason that Black Americans voted more for him this time to the fact that they could identify with his experience in the justice system, yeah, I don't know about that one. Kind of seems like you are reducing that entire voting bloc to a monolith that is voting based on perceived injustice of someone who is white who committed white collar crimes AND got off scot-free pretty much every time and that's supposed to somehow mirror their experience in the legal system when they get inequitably screwed over with often significant punishments for minor offenses? Doesn't track, sorry.

To circle back again to your point about education, the GOP doesn't talk about education because they rely entirely upon those who are less educated to be the primary voting bloc. I'm not talking about the people who swing between the parties, I'm talking about the consistent blocs like the Evangelicals who subscribe to a fundamentalist religious ideology that doesn't intersect very often with scientific fact or reality generally. There is a lot of benefit to keeping this large swath of people if not uneducated then simply one-issue voters who will avert their gaze from anything as long as it is pro-life. You can't have a serious conversation with a person like this whose entire political persuasion is reduced to identifying a mass of cells as fully human and possessing a soul. It's just a Sisyphean task at that point. You may highlight that I seem to be reducing THIS group to a monolith, but I think you'll much more readily find that this bloc often self-identifies as voting on single issues, like abortion, while I am not aware of similarly sized movements among minorities, African-American or otherwise.

Lastly: "Finally I do not agree with the idea that the country is going to fly off the rails under Trump. The pendulum will swing back. In the meantime, I'm collecting my SS and have no fear that it will end-which is yet another hysterical baseless claim that will not help the democrats when it never actually happens. If you think Trump was not aware and did not encourage this division, you have underestimated him, which puts you in the company of many."

To that paragraph, I simply say, let's see what happens.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bulerias2005

Appreciate the great discussion!

By 1%, I am perhaps more specifically talking about the 1% of the 1% -- just because billionaires pay more than others may in a lifetime, is not really a convincing argument because a linear comparison doesn't really work here. There is simply a disproportionate concentration of wealth while those at the bottom echelons are scraping by -- I see how difficult it is to navigate the system at said financial echelons every day, by virtue of the work I do as a psychiatrist working with people who are undeserved, underinsured, etc. To say that there is not a disparity here is not acknowledging what's really going on.

The narrative about "shattering records" is just not true. Read the section here about Lia Thomas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_sports

I will concede that an emotional response is far more powerful than a logical one. Which is likely why this issue tanked with the public at large, but again, it does not track with reality.

Regarding inflammatory terms, are we just going to negate the fact that anybody slightly left of center is labeled a "radical leftist" or "communist"? Is that considered inflammatory? How is that different than addressing someone as fascist, in terms of incendiary quality? The US has historically had a significant problem with demonizing the left -- see McCarthyism. We are a historically right of center populace that has been tempered by less radical forces in positions of power, such as, for example, the efforts of the Founding Fathers to dilute some of the religious content that was going to make its way into the Constitution or that would harshly limit engagement of non-desired religious identities in government.

I'm not convinced that it's specifically Trump's legal issues that make him relatable. I would be curious fro some evidence here.

Trump cannot be considered an underdog or outsider anymore. He's a former president. How long does someone get to carry around the banner of underdog or outsider?

Regarding religious beliefs, it's not what I think. Someone who thinks the Earth was created 6,000 years ago and believes that an omnipotent God magically created all entities as they are now IS ignorant and DOES believe in things that fly in the face of reality and science. I'm not discounting the concept of faith, but I do have a particular animosity toward the business of Evangelical Christianity in the United States, which really has extremely little to do with Christianity anyway.

To clarify regarding my point about abortion, I have historically been unable to have a logical conversation with someone who holds the position that life begins at conception because they have ZERO inclination to accept facts or science and hold to their belief. Why is it that Democrats run the risk of alienating voters by arguing for a correct view on abortion and Republicans do not when they in fact ALSO argue that there is a correct view? This double standard just kills me. And how about the fact that it's not only about a correct position, but about allowing women to make decisions about THEIR BODY and not have OLD WHITE MEN in positions of power decide for them? This is not a controversy in many places in the world. We are way behind in the US and a large reason is the commodification and big business of organized Christianity, specifically Evangelical strains.

You over-interpreted my comment regarding religious beliefs. I have nothing against anyone holding specific religious beliefs, that is their business and is very personal. It's different when it becomes a business and a project of control over an entire country, where the goal inarguably is Christian theocracy -- see Project 2025 which is being systematically implemented as we speak.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark2

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I'll offer my opinion.

First, the 1%-Depending on the state you live in, an income of between 350k and 990k puts you in the 1%

A person earning 650k will pay about 140k in Federal income tax, assuming reasonable deductions, and if they happen to live in CA, another 30k in State taxes.
If they own a home they will also likely pay another 10-20k in property taxes. More in some states that have lower state income taxes.

If you think that isn't enough, you are entitled to that opinion. My opinion is that they pay plenty. In fact, the numbers as to exactly how much of the total tax that the top earners pay are readily available, as well as the fact that the bottom 45% of earners pay no federal income tax. I disagree with that. Everyone should pay something. When you start talking about billionaires, they write a check to the government every year that exceeds what most everyone will pay in a lifetime.

Regarding the trans issue, no amount of explanation will negate the fact that some men who have transitioned have shattered records that were held by women. This, IMO, is unfair to women. Trying to paint women who have been affected by this as radical activists is not fair. As a father of women, one of whom played sports, I'd have been livid if my daughter was denied a place on a team, a scholarship, or even playing time in place of a boy. The fact that the democratic party supported their participation put them at odds with about 80% of the populace.

Along with illegal immigration, these issues often provoke an emotional response in voters, and the democrats lost on both of them.

I'll also hold to my opinion that the dems using inflammatory terms only energized the GOP vote. When Trump was shot, his numbers went up. When you start comparing someone to Hitler, you've lost credibility.

The black vote still went to the dems by a large margin, so I'm hardly "reducing them to a monolith"
I'm pointing out that Trump made historic gains among blacks. And I do believe they relate to him in a way that other republicans have never been able to. His legal issues, justified or not, made him more sympathetic among some voters, be they minorities or not.

When you consider that Trump is an outsider in the political world, he is an underdog. He was certainly an underdog when facing the government's attempts to prosecute him.

You seemingly assert that certain groups of folks are less educated or intelligent because of religious beliefs that you think fly in the face of science. I think you prove my point. You are discounting the concept of faith, which has been a part of human history for thousands of years. As long as democrats hold to the belief that they are smarter, better educated, and have the "correct" view regarding issues like abortion, they will continue to alienate vast blocks of voters. I happen to believe that the republicans are at a disadvantage regarding their position on abortion, but your view that someone who holds to the idea that life begins at conception automatically disqualifies them from intelligent debate paints you with the same brush you are wielding.

There are brilliant people who hold various religious beliefs. Some of those beliefs might defy logic, but faith can do that. To me, you have to separate that from intellectual prowess.

Finally I'd agree that Trump is a wild card. He may run the train off the rails. I don't think it's going to happen. If I did, I'd sell my T-bills.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bulerias2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark2

I'm a person who does believe the far left is in part responsible for Trump's win. 80% of the public believes that folks born male have an unfair advantage when competing in certain women's sports. I believe that is obviously true. What I've heard some folks claim is that this occurs in very small numbers, and since that is the case, it shouldn't matter. But it does to the girls and women who are affected.

This is one example.

Illegal immigration is another. Most all Amercians understand that the US was built by immigrants. They do not understand letting millions of people waltz right in. They do not understand busing them into cities all over the country and spending billions to support them.

They do understand that our immigration system is absurd. The Biden administration utterly failed in this regard. That gave Trump the advantage. Then we had inflation during his term, which IMO he was not really to blame for, but his denial of its existence gave Trump another point of attack.

Using terms like fascist, dictator, nazi, threat to democracy, etc as applied to Trump absolutely contributed to his victory, as most of the country simply doesn't believe it. You may believe it, and millions agree. But when we heard multiple democrat leaders, as well as most of the media, use the exact same phrases to describe Trump, it became clear this was an orchestrated effort to paint Trump as the next Hitler. That was not credible.

Trump's legal issues......I believe he committed many crimes in his life, but the way the Biden administration went after him simply rubbed many people the wrong way. For example, Trump increased his support among black Amercians significantly. I believe they saw their experience with the justice system in Trump's. People love an underdog.

Trump's term could turn out to be a complete disaster. If so, he will be trounced in the mid terms and the next president will be a democrat. Will you then claim that Trump's failures, and his far right supporters had nothing to do with a democrat victory?

As inferred in your post, the idea that people who don't agree with someone’s political views need education is offensive and will not win elections. The fact is, we have vast numbers of uneducated and undereducated folks in the US. Many voted for democrats. I didn’t hear the GOP telling them they needed to be educated or worse.

I realize my post reads as an endorsement of Trump but that is not the case. I find him personally reprehensible and unsuited to the office. But I'm also upset with the democratic party for not putting forth a candidate who could offer a clearly better alternative, which should have been easy, and yes, for embracing far left cultural ideas that are clearly out of step with the majority of Amercians.

Finally I do not agree with the idea that the country is going to fly off the rails under Trump. The pendulum will swing back. In the meantime, I'm collecting my SS and have no fear that it will end-which is yet another hysterical baseless claim that will not help the democrats when it never actually happens. If you think Trump was not aware and did not encourage this division, you have underestimated him, which puts you in the company of many.

I'm gonna go line by line here, but I'll start by addressing your point about lack of education. I did not call for more education in reference to political beliefs. I am talking about a general lack of education that crosses party lines -- there are people on the right and left who are spouting totally baseless rhetoric that is used to create convenient narratives, though I think it is known that reality does have a left-leaning bias -- not talking about far-left political rhetoric or anything, but generally speaking, issues pertaining to social justice are typically going to veer more left if we're interested in equitable solutions, and while certain economic ideas, like the weaponization of tariffs, can be found on both the right and left, I think broadly speaking one would find more sympathy among the general populace that capitalist structures the way they have them in the US are not facilitating the top 1% to pay their fair share, nor are they equitable and just. This doesn't imply that a totally socialist or otherwise left system is the answer, but I'm just saying that an argument against the status quo is probably going to engender broad support, as folks generally aren't enthused about the direction of the country at the moment.

With respect to the question of transgender folks in sports, your belief that folks born male have an unfair advantage, in the specific case of those who are transgender, is not "obviously true". Please read the following:

https://www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-about-transgender-non-binary-athletes

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10641525/

You are correct in stating that this is an issue affecting very, very few -- but the girls and women you are citing here belong squarely in the J.K. Rowling-adjacent TERF category. There is no scientific evidence pointing in the direction of the opinion you stated. So, this in particular is a bad example. You might want to do further reading which supports the idea that it is in the interest of the current ruling powers to erase identities like those of transgender people. They are, simply put, "undesirables" in their minds and incompatible with the ideals championed by the religious right.

Next point, illegal immigration. I think this is largely a problem of optics. This issue is far too complex for the average person to fully understand, hence sound bites, personal narratives, and "gotcha!"-type articles are going to rule the day. The reality is of course nuanced and complex, e.g., https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/trump-vs-biden-immigration-side-side-policy-comparison

But when it comes to optics, I'll concede that Trump was much more successfully able to tap into the collective zeitgeist regarding immigration, not because people are so specifically concerned with the idea that many are side-stepping the legal mechanisms in place, but perhaps because there is a certain appeal to "othering" and the maintenance of (an) out-group(s) during a time of more emboldened nationalism and isolationism.

The point about using terms like "threat to democracy" as somehow contributing to Trump's victory is absurd. The "political outsider" argument doesn't work anymore. He is a former president with a clear track record of flagrant disregard for democracy and one doesn't need to dig terribly deep to see that. Trump is not an "underdog". And by the way, reducing the reason that Black Americans voted more for him this time to the fact that they could identify with his experience in the justice system, yeah, I don't know about that one. Kind of seems like you are reducing that entire voting bloc to a monolith that is voting based on perceived injustice of someone who is white who committed white collar crimes AND got off scot-free pretty much every time and that's supposed to somehow mirror their experience in the legal system when they get inequitably screwed over with often significant punishments for minor offenses? Doesn't track, sorry.

To circle back again to your point about education, the GOP doesn't talk about education because they rely entirely upon those who are less educated to be the primary voting bloc. I'm not talking about the people who swing between the parties, I'm talking about the consistent blocs like the Evangelicals who subscribe to a fundamentalist religious ideology that doesn't intersect very often with scientific fact or reality generally. There is a lot of benefit to keeping this large swath of people if not uneducated then simply one-issue voters who will avert their gaze from anything as long as it is pro-life. You can't have a serious conversation with a person like this whose entire political persuasion is reduced to identifying a mass of cells as fully human and possessing a soul. It's just a Sisyphean task at that point. You may highlight that I seem to be reducing THIS group to a monolith, but I think you'll much more readily find that this bloc often self-identifies as voting on single issues, like abortion, while I am not aware of similarly sized movements among minorities, African-American or otherwise.

Lastly: "Finally I do not agree with the idea that the country is going to fly off the rails under Trump. The pendulum will swing back. In the meantime, I'm collecting my SS and have no fear that it will end-which is yet another hysterical baseless claim that will not help the democrats when it never actually happens. If you think Trump was not aware and did not encourage this division, you have underestimated him, which puts you in the company of many."

To that paragraph, I simply say, let's see what happens.

quote:



We are way behind in the US and a large reason is the commodification and big business of organized Christianity, specifically Evangelical strains.

quote:

Comedians often illuminate an issue in interesting ways and I've heard two of them offer these jokes:

"If you take a cake out of the oven and throw it on the floor, are you going to tell me you didn't ruin my cake? That it's not a cake yet? Because it's going to be a cake if you leave it alone!"
Bill Burr

"I think a woman should be able to abort a child up until birth. But it is killing a baby. And they should be able to kill them after birth. Maybe up to five years old. At least until the first report card!"
Dave Chapell

quote:


In Europe we cannot understand how people with even a marginal level of intelligence could elect a narcissistic loco. The impression here is that all Americans are stupid.