This New Republican party isn't supported by even D Cheney former Vice President under George Bush Jr who will vote for K Harris & T Walz . Trump has probably broken most of the Ten Commandments & is seen as the leader of Christian Nationalism >? Seems like the biggest scam eva' no ?
There are no laws that regulates how the parties selects their candidates. Therefore there are no formal error made. They may do however they wish.
How well the democracy work in USA will be determined by how the population and the politicians respect the outcome of the November 5, 2024 election. Is there a risk for anyone not to respect it? Will democracy in USA survive?
I do hope there will be a lot of international observers in this election.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_monitoring
How well the democracy work in USA will be determined by how the population and the politicians respect the outcome of the November 5, 2024 election. Is there a risk for anyone not to respect it? Will democracy in USA survive?
I do hope there will be a lot of international observers in this election.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_monitoring
Am I alone in not caring who celebrities or other prominent people will vote for?
I care about a candidate's knowable, actual past performance in his or her previous several years in office. When he or she promises to start doing something if elected, I wonder -- did he or she do that when they were already in office? If not, why not?
I care about a candidate's favored policies and their practicality and usefulness, or lack thereof.
,
I care about what candidates say when they are in a press conference or debate, answering tough questions. Not so much what they say in short or edited interviews. And not so much if they are using notes or a teleprompter.
I care about whether a candidate is willing to walk into tough press conferences with reasonable frequency and then depend not upon notes or teleprompters but instead upon his or her own knowledge and wits.
I care if a candidate seems to abruptly change long-standing positions apparently in response to polls, shortly before an election.
But should I care about who some former politician or celebrity favors? I don't really care. Maybe that's unusual. I suppose it could be.
I care about a candidate's knowable, actual past performance in his or her previous several years in office. When he or she promises to start doing something if elected, I wonder -- did he or she do that when they were already in office? If not, why not?
I care about a candidate's favored policies and their practicality and usefulness, or lack thereof.
,
I care about what candidates say when they are in a press conference or debate, answering tough questions. Not so much what they say in short or edited interviews. And not so much if they are using notes or a teleprompter.
I care about whether a candidate is willing to walk into tough press conferences with reasonable frequency and then depend not upon notes or teleprompters but instead upon his or her own knowledge and wits.
I care if a candidate seems to abruptly change long-standing positions apparently in response to polls, shortly before an election.
But should I care about who some former politician or celebrity favors? I don't really care. Maybe that's unusual. I suppose it could be.
@ThunderClap said in #52:
> Trump has probably broken most of the Ten Commandments & is seen as the leader of Christian Nationalism
What a weird thing to say
> Trump has probably broken most of the Ten Commandments & is seen as the leader of Christian Nationalism
What a weird thing to say
it doesn't make much sense to talk about Christian nationalism: before nationalism becomes a political ideology, nationalism comes etymologically from nation therefore, nationalism means a certain chauvinism and a pride in representing/defending a country culturally, sportingly...
nationalism was not a bad thing originally: it was first of all an artistic movement from the end of romanticism with artists enthusiastic about the idea of highlighting the cultural heritage of their country and the values of freedom and emancipation. Composers like Dvorak or Grieg fit perfectly into this category. but now, nationalism necessarily mixes with politics and at the end of the 19th century, certain regions of the world aspire to independence and the fight against imperialism and if sometimes this policy succeeds rather peacefully (Italy 1860-70), It most often happens that the ideas of original nationalism are a pretext for violence, ethnic cleansing, genocides...
patriotism differs from nationalism in the sense that the Patrie/homeland is rather a kind of allegory than a reality. a homeland can be a region, a department, a state or a country. it can be some villages as even a region of the world which is shared between several countries but which have a cultural unity. therefore, homeland is originally a term more allegorical than real, but because of the consequences of political nationalism, it has become preferable to use the word patriotism to designate everything I said above.
but technically, Christianity is a religion, not a homeland or a state. why talk about Christian nationalism? Rather, they are simply nationalists who simply have the common point of using certain Christian remarks as they wish. but no people wishing to create a Christian state
nationalism was not a bad thing originally: it was first of all an artistic movement from the end of romanticism with artists enthusiastic about the idea of highlighting the cultural heritage of their country and the values of freedom and emancipation. Composers like Dvorak or Grieg fit perfectly into this category. but now, nationalism necessarily mixes with politics and at the end of the 19th century, certain regions of the world aspire to independence and the fight against imperialism and if sometimes this policy succeeds rather peacefully (Italy 1860-70), It most often happens that the ideas of original nationalism are a pretext for violence, ethnic cleansing, genocides...
patriotism differs from nationalism in the sense that the Patrie/homeland is rather a kind of allegory than a reality. a homeland can be a region, a department, a state or a country. it can be some villages as even a region of the world which is shared between several countries but which have a cultural unity. therefore, homeland is originally a term more allegorical than real, but because of the consequences of political nationalism, it has become preferable to use the word patriotism to designate everything I said above.
but technically, Christianity is a religion, not a homeland or a state. why talk about Christian nationalism? Rather, they are simply nationalists who simply have the common point of using certain Christian remarks as they wish. but no people wishing to create a Christian state
@Noflaps said in #50:
> In #45 you write, @salmon_rushdie, that
>
> "It was clear he [apparently referring to Joe Biden] was going to do poorly - they [apparently meaning the Democrat party] needed to adapt".
>
> You seem like a fair person. Perhaps you could stop and reflect for a second about what the quoted statement reveals.
>
> Joe Biden was PICKED BY DEMOCRAT VOTERS. In the primary. Right?
>
> Even after the debate, Joe Biden wanted to KEEP RUNNING. Seriously -- and for some days after the debate, and even with the resulting negative publicity, Joe Biden was STILL saying he was going to continue as candidate, wasn't he? Do you remember that? Please check, to make sure I'm not mistaken.
>
> So, the candidate who the PEOPLE voted for, and who still wanted to run -- and who we were assured repeatedly, by some prominent Democrats, for months leading up to the debate -- was still up to the task ...... (Do you remember? Is that mistaken? Might you check?)
>
> ....is suddenly no longer the candidate?
>
> Why? Didn't the process end up having the effect of ignoring the Democrat voters' own choice for presidential candidate? Because it looked like who they voted for might not do well? So -- sorry voters -- it's not really your choice after all?
>
> Is that "saving democracy" ? Really?
Well the primaries aren't a democratic process anyway, even if they may seem like it on the surface - they have no basis in law, nor do parties.
No one even ran against him in the primary lol
What's important is to have a candidate who can win the election - why would they knowingly run a candidate that is going to lose? They were out of time to change that.
What better candidate to pick than one that Trump hasn't even come up with a kindergarden nickname for?
And yeah hes not going to be wishy washy about it - and be like "I'm thinking of dropping out" - it's either all or nothing for optics.
And I ask again - Democrats seem to be universally happy with the decision. Why are republicans the only ones who care?
Mind I don't believe any actually care. This is about the biggest bone they have to pick right now with the opposition - which isn't a good sign for them.
> In #45 you write, @salmon_rushdie, that
>
> "It was clear he [apparently referring to Joe Biden] was going to do poorly - they [apparently meaning the Democrat party] needed to adapt".
>
> You seem like a fair person. Perhaps you could stop and reflect for a second about what the quoted statement reveals.
>
> Joe Biden was PICKED BY DEMOCRAT VOTERS. In the primary. Right?
>
> Even after the debate, Joe Biden wanted to KEEP RUNNING. Seriously -- and for some days after the debate, and even with the resulting negative publicity, Joe Biden was STILL saying he was going to continue as candidate, wasn't he? Do you remember that? Please check, to make sure I'm not mistaken.
>
> So, the candidate who the PEOPLE voted for, and who still wanted to run -- and who we were assured repeatedly, by some prominent Democrats, for months leading up to the debate -- was still up to the task ...... (Do you remember? Is that mistaken? Might you check?)
>
> ....is suddenly no longer the candidate?
>
> Why? Didn't the process end up having the effect of ignoring the Democrat voters' own choice for presidential candidate? Because it looked like who they voted for might not do well? So -- sorry voters -- it's not really your choice after all?
>
> Is that "saving democracy" ? Really?
Well the primaries aren't a democratic process anyway, even if they may seem like it on the surface - they have no basis in law, nor do parties.
No one even ran against him in the primary lol
What's important is to have a candidate who can win the election - why would they knowingly run a candidate that is going to lose? They were out of time to change that.
What better candidate to pick than one that Trump hasn't even come up with a kindergarden nickname for?
And yeah hes not going to be wishy washy about it - and be like "I'm thinking of dropping out" - it's either all or nothing for optics.
And I ask again - Democrats seem to be universally happy with the decision. Why are republicans the only ones who care?
Mind I don't believe any actually care. This is about the biggest bone they have to pick right now with the opposition - which isn't a good sign for them.
Messiah := P01135809
@Noflaps said in #54:
> Am I alone in not caring who celebrities or other prominent people will vote for?
>
> I care about a candidate's knowable, actual past performance in his or her previous several years in office. When he or she promises to start doing something if elected, I wonder -- did he or she do that when they were already in office? If not, why not?
>
> I care about a candidate's favored policies and their practicality and usefulness, or lack thereof.
> ,
> I care about what candidates say when they are in a press conference or debate, answering tough questions. Not so much what they say in short or edited interviews. And not so much if they are using notes or a teleprompter.
>
> I care about whether a candidate is willing to walk into tough press conferences with reasonable frequency and then depend not upon notes or teleprompters but instead upon his or her own knowledge and wits.
>
> I care if a candidate seems to abruptly change long-standing positions apparently in response to polls, shortly before an election.
>
> But should I care about who some former politician or celebrity favors? I don't really care. Maybe that's unusual. I suppose it could be.
D Trump's performances ... 2020 Crona Virus performanxes ? D Trump's Charloysville "performance' His NOT lowering of yje flag '"performance" for J MCcain ? His disability "ACt' performing all sortd of stupid "performances in every action he ever took ? >>> remember the Ecperence GAP between Harris & Trump is REAL as Trump had ZERO before he was elected over Hillary Clinton . Harris is way SMAETER than Dumb Trump
> Am I alone in not caring who celebrities or other prominent people will vote for?
>
> I care about a candidate's knowable, actual past performance in his or her previous several years in office. When he or she promises to start doing something if elected, I wonder -- did he or she do that when they were already in office? If not, why not?
>
> I care about a candidate's favored policies and their practicality and usefulness, or lack thereof.
> ,
> I care about what candidates say when they are in a press conference or debate, answering tough questions. Not so much what they say in short or edited interviews. And not so much if they are using notes or a teleprompter.
>
> I care about whether a candidate is willing to walk into tough press conferences with reasonable frequency and then depend not upon notes or teleprompters but instead upon his or her own knowledge and wits.
>
> I care if a candidate seems to abruptly change long-standing positions apparently in response to polls, shortly before an election.
>
> But should I care about who some former politician or celebrity favors? I don't really care. Maybe that's unusual. I suppose it could be.
D Trump's performances ... 2020 Crona Virus performanxes ? D Trump's Charloysville "performance' His NOT lowering of yje flag '"performance" for J MCcain ? His disability "ACt' performing all sortd of stupid "performances in every action he ever took ? >>> remember the Ecperence GAP between Harris & Trump is REAL as Trump had ZERO before he was elected over Hillary Clinton . Harris is way SMAETER than Dumb Trump