Mainstream Publishing Industry Says it Will KEEP OUT Trump Supporters

I do believe you can be a conservative libertarian and not be racist, I know many.

But you can't defend Trump on racism allegations without being either racist or delusional about the kind of man he is.

 

By insisting on deliberately misrepresenting Democrats as mainstream conservatives, you completely misunderstood my point.

To restate what I said, there's absolutely no chance that Republicans will, at least willfully, bring socialism to the USA.

There is on, the other hand, a small but not altogether vanishing chance that Democrats might enact future policies that might reasonably seem socialist in nature, should they ever hold comfortable and decisive majorities in Congress. The last words there are the operative words; they don't hold such control.

Anyway, this is off the main thread topic. To avoid confusion, I would suggest using the terms such as Democrats and Republicans, if you are referring to the two mainstream American political parties.

 

Moderate Democrats are center-right, our most left leaning politicians are basically center-left and push for policies that other first world countries consider a given like single payer healthcare. Bernie Sanders would be considered moderate in most countries.

 

Which is why we need a world republic, eventually. Any nation that has to or aspires to fill a superpower role is going to be inherently statist, militarist with the corresponding conservative values needed to keep the culture from floundering. And if one nation is so gracious to let go of the role or has to for other reasons, the role will get filled. I am not talking good or bad.

The things we might like, a worldwide decent standard of living, freedom to move about and live peacefully, better handling of worldwide problems, the final end of this world’s millennia of infantile racism and prosperity on the backs of old colonial regions can’t be ended under the current means

 

Alarmism is the norm for both of our main parties, and I have learned to mostly ignore it.

The Democrats warn you that the Republicans will bring in a new era of racism, sexism, homophobia, fascism, global warming, air pollution, rich getting richer, poor getting poorer, and legislated morality.

The Republicans warn you that the Democrats will bring in a new era of cancel culture, forced wokeness, destruction of the Bill of Rights, total dissolution of gender lines, atheism as the new state religion, legalized hard drugs, economic catastrophe, gun confiscation, and the rise of a communist state.

This is how they win elections.

 

^ This.

 

Ho ho, you're playing the TRANSPHOBIA card. Now I have to give my blessing to genetic males (I did not say "men") in women's sports or I'm degenerate, evil, and intolerant.

First, the Olympic rules don't make the competition fair. They make it less unfair. Trans women have still experienced a male puberty, making them bigger and providing them with a male physique. Second, the executive order Biden just threw out allowed people to compete according to IDENTIFICATION. That means genetic males, with their testicles hanging between their legs and pumping testosterone into their system, are allowed to compete against women. Saying that is not fair competition is NOT transphobia. It is biological fact.

It is not. I have done musical theater, and worked with a number of gay men I respect and admire greatly. The thought of kissing another man myself makes me gag, but that's a matter of personal preference. I don't like eating Lima beans, either.

However, the systematic exclusion of right-leaning writers is hardly respectful of the right to free speech.

No, I'm comparing breaking windows, spray-painting buildings, setting police cars on fire, taking over whole areas of Seattle (which is 10 miles from where I live), attacking police, and occasionally getting people killed with your hijinks. Many pro-Trump protests were peaceful, too. You're focusing on the BLM protests that were peaceful, and on the one pro-Trump affair that was not. That's hypocrisy.

 

I am because that is what you're doing and you're continuing to do it.

Free speech does not entitle to a publisher. They're a business and can refuse to publish whoever they want. Especially when it may harm their business in the case of people trying to overthrow the government, unless you believe that all right-leaning people are fascists. I'm not sure why you'd want to conflate them unless you can't tell the difference.

Also why is the defense of every single racist and bigot that they have "insert minority" friends? It's so telling at this point that it's a red flag.

 

That's pretty accurate.

But the distortion of characterizing the Democratic Party as the mainstream conservative party is unwarranted. There is no practical option to the left of it whatsoever, both at this time and for the foreseeable future, and, as is implicit in your points, the Democratic Party is a coalition from both sides of the center.

Also, it's worth observing that the types of coalitions that are possible under parliamentary systems don't precisely translate to the US for quite a few reasons.

The net effect is that in the US, two parties are the rule. Periods when new parties arise or when parties split don't see three parties for long, as things settle back down into a new arrangement of two parties. Since WWII, it's basically been a seesaw back and forth between the two parties we have now, even though their composition has shifted. A noteworthy thing is the unaffiliated voter, but each cycle they generally just end up choosing candidates from one party or the other. Third parties themselves have practically no support to speak of on the national level. The only other option is not to vote at all.

Well, yeah. Stated as @Awesome Possum stated it there, it's accurate. See the above.

 

And making those procedures unreasonable, separating kids from their families and locking them up in squalor while they wait for months on end and forcibly sterilizing these wrongly imprisoned people is...?

How about because of several lawsuits against his renting practices that predate his presidency? Because he continued to call for the execution of a group of young black men who had been found innocent? Because of his calls for Obamas birth certificate? Because of the way he began his campaign by calling Mexicans murderers and rapists? Because he vilified a caravan of asylum seekers? Because he said there were good people on both sides of a rally in which a nazi killed some one? Because he tried to overturn DACA? Because of his endorsement by the KKK? Because of the muslim ban? Because he called several African countries shitholes? Because of all the racists he appoints to high positions in his inner circle?

 

Fine. You probably also think it's fair for a Rottweiler to fight a Pug because they're both dogs.

It's because their religious beliefs (protected by the First Amendment) prohibited homosexuality. They believed that baking the cake would be participation in something their faith opposed. If you were a sign painter, would you want to paint a bunch of TRUMP FOR 2024 signs? Or would you prefer the right to refuse?

 

Dog fights are illegal, so that's quite the straw man.

 

So is endorsement by these ultra conservative groups like the KKK. If I was running against Biden, and had been asked about the racist groups like them, I would have answered that they were twisted and evil, the slime of humanity, and I found their very existence offensive. And they STILL would have endorsed me, because of my conservative stance on other issues (illegal immigration, gun control, and the first amendment rights of ALL citizens).

 

It's not a card. Transphobia is a real issue that gets people killed.

 

Statement which lands smack dab in "Some of my best friends are..." territory.

We know where this always ends up. "Some of my best friends are ____, but I wouldn't want my daughter to marry one."

And, bingo, there it is.

 

No one is going through surgeries, hormone treatments, bigotry, violence, and alienation from intolerant family and friends in order to gain an advantage in sports or to assault another woman in the bathroom. If someone wanted to assault you in the bathroom they would just wait for a time when you are in there alone and do it, no elaborate preparation necessary.

Trying to tie that legitimate fear of assault to transgender people is pure nonsense based on zero factual evidence and willful ignorance of the fact that it's the trans woman who is in far greater danger upon entering the bathroom, because they face both the same threat of sexual assault plus the threat of bigoted reprisals from people who feel like they don't belong in that bathroom.

Where would you have them go? The men's room that doesn't conform to their gender and where the risk of assault for both the reasons mentioned above would be even higher? Should trans people have to risk sexual and physical assault based off an irrational baseless fear by cisgender people that has no case law to support it?

As far as sports go, there are regulations for trans athletes competing against cisgender women, such as allowable testosterone levels, etc. And there are cisgender women who have higher testosterone levels than the trans women, or are taller and heavier, and more muscular. Should they be disqualified from competing? Micheal Phelps literally dominated because he was born with an abnormally long torso and short legs, plus he's double jointed and has a divot in his sternum that make hydrodynamically perfect. He still has to train but should we disqualify him for that?

If being trans is such an automatic advantage, why are the vast majority of victorious athletes still cisgender? You don't think colleges would be scooping up as many transgender athletes as they could get their hands on if it imparted such a significant advantage?

The fact is that appeals against trans women competing in sports with cis women or using the same bathroom because of a danger of assault don't hold up to scrutiny and are just cloaking fear of change in reasonable sounding but baseless arguments.

 

Did you learn that in the last few months? Because back in September you were saying "And the people Biden is in bed with are the greatest threat to a free and just society that we've ever seen."

So it's quite telling that Trump "the least racist person anyone could meet" could have said something like that, and didn't.

 

Well if were talking about racism, and people in office that have a not so stellar record on that..

Lets see some exact quotes, from Biden:

— “Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

— “You got the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” (That’s in reference to President Obama.)

— “Unlike the African-American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly diverse attitudes about different things.”

— “In Delaware, the largest growth in population is Indian-Americans moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.”

-- "Unless we do something about this, my children are going to grow up in a jungle, the jungle being a racial jungle with tensions having built so high that it is going to explode at some point."

And some facts of Biden courted Southern segregationist Senator James O. Eastland, who helped him land spots on the committees dealing with criminal justice and prisons. As early as 1977, Biden rallied for mandatory minimum sentences that would limit judges' discretion in sentencing criminals — with support from Eastland. In the meantime, Biden also became a legislative partner — and a close friend — of another segregationist named Strom Thurmond.

Now, I'll admit that people can change, positions can switch with time, and should be given the chance to applogize, However, the first quote is from LAST YEAR..

With this post, all I'm saying is, take off the blinders to your own side, I will categorically admit that Trump is a POS, same with other Republicans, and democrats, I generally don't like any politican. All liers, hypocrites, etc. etc..