4 ms·

Absolutely, we were warned. No one heeded and then came the destruction of the Republican party by the likes of Rush, Newt and Rove who convinced the voting pub

Absolutely, we were warned. No one heeded and then came the destruction of the Republican party by the likes of Rush, Newt and Rove who convinced the voting public everyone is evil who doesn't agree with them. Centrist and left leaning voters hoped it would just run it's course and go away, then evangelicals signed up with the Republicans and here we are.

tolerance 1y ago
Right, I’ve heard this story before. But what are we attributing to whom we’d otherwise label incompetent or malicious from among the center and left, from among the electorate and the elected? Or, what absolves them from not being held accountable for not taking heed to these warnings, being passive?
- Terr_ 1y ago
  They aren't absolved, but it's pretty normal to put more blame and attention on willful criminals as opposed to neglectful bystanders.
- anecdatas 1y ago
  The left was a Cassandra the whole time -- it's been nothing but warnings from the left. The Democrats (note: the Dems are not a left party) refused to listen, assuring everyone it was fine, that we just needed to return to norms and decorum. If we just elected the most proper guy, if we just went a little more rightwards in our policies, all this would be fine. Meanwhile, the left out there pointing at Obama's extrajudicial killings, Bush's whole post 9/11 fiasco, Clinton's "Superpredators" nonsense, etc. etc. and making tons of noise about how this was all going to end. Turns out, the left was right, the Dems were wrong. But the Dems are still fighting to try and shut down the left. Look at how hard the Dem establishment hates Mamdani.
  - tolerance 1y ago
    My line of questioning could be interpreted as a conflation of the left ("the electorate") with Democrats ("the elected"). Thanks for pointing out that distinction. I think it offers some directive as far as accountability can be considered. I’m curious to see where the Mamdani Experiment takes you all. His constituents are one group who are for certain no stranger to the armed presence reported elsewhere today. Under pretenses all too familiar.
    - ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
      >I’m curious to see where the Mamdani Experiment takes you all. His constituents are one group who are for certain no stranger to the armed presence reported elsewhere today. Under pretenses all too familiar. What are you going on about? Mamdani may or may not be a good mayor for NYC. Ask me in two years. But he's not some sort of jihadi, Commie pinko. He's a New Yorker who is actually talking about issues that New Yorkers care about. It certainly helps that his competition are a disgraced serial sexual harasser (Cuomo), a corrupt sitting mayor whose administration (as well as himself) is riddled with corruption and a lack of accountability (Adams) and a clownish jerk whose claim to fame is that he used to ride the subways at night with his gang and beat up whoever they felt like (Sliwa). Given the competition. is it any wonder that Mamdani is a cinch to win the mayoralty? And all that has absolutely zero to do with the mud being slung at him. He will be the next mayor of NYC and I look forward to his tenure -- especially since it means the other folks will go away, at least for a few years. Mamdani may suck at being mayor. I don't know. But it would be difficult for him to be worse than his field of opponents. And none of that stuff has anything to do with national politics or the DNC. I say all this as an old white guy of Jewish extraction. I don't know where you're from or where you live, but you're talking out of your ass and it smells that way too. Yuck! Edit: I may have, as anecdata (thanks for calling me out, anecdata!) suggested (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45193191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45193191 ), misunderstood your post. Upon reflection, I probably should have been more charitable in my reading of it. That said, you're flat wrong about Mamdani's "constituents." He, for the reasons I mentioned above, is supported not just by the minorities being targeted by the Trump administration, but by huge numbers of regular New Yorkers (of all ethnicities and melanin content levels), because he's the best candidate. I'd add that Mamdani didn't just fly in from an Iranian terrorist training camp to run for mayor. He grew up in NYC, went to NYC public schools and has been an elected member of the New York State Assembly for the past four years. If I misunderstood your comment as to Mamdani, his constituents (the residents of State Assembly District 36 in Queens), and/or his validity/viability as a mayoral candidate, my apologies.
  - McAlpine5892 1y ago
    > Meanwhile, the left out there pointing at Obama's extrajudicial killings, Bush's whole post 9/11 fiasco, Clinton's "Superpredators" nonsense, etc. etc. and making tons of noise about how this was all going to end. I had a whole comment written up but, meh. The noisy people are made out to be conspiracy theorists, even when someone like Chomsky brings all the receipts. People want to believe the person they voted for is the "good guy" in a superhero sort of way. Trump is partly able to do what he does because of these extreme expansion of powers from previous presidents. This is why "but my guy good!!" is among the worst forms of reasoning for justify $bad_thing.
    - anecdatas 1y ago
      > The noisy people are made out to be conspiracy theorists, even when someone like Chomsky brings all the receipts. Yes. This is what I was saying: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra
      - McAlpine5892 1y ago
        My bad! Learned a new expression today.
EasyMark 1y ago
they've lost all sense of nuance. Everyone is evil if they don't have an R beside their name. It's all about shutting off the brain and trusting the process (of indoctrination)

tolerance 1y ago

Right, I’ve heard this story before. But what are we attributing to whom we’d otherwise label incompetent or malicious from among the center and left, from among the electorate and the elected? Or, what absolves them from not being held accountable for not taking heed to these warnings, being passive?

Terr_ 1y ago
They aren't absolved, but it's pretty normal to put more blame and attention on willful criminals as opposed to neglectful bystanders.
anecdatas 1y ago
The left was a Cassandra the whole time -- it's been nothing but warnings from the left. The Democrats (note: the Dems are not a left party) refused to listen, assuring everyone it was fine, that we just needed to return to norms and decorum. If we just elected the most proper guy, if we just went a little more rightwards in our policies, all this would be fine. Meanwhile, the left out there pointing at Obama's extrajudicial killings, Bush's whole post 9/11 fiasco, Clinton's "Superpredators" nonsense, etc. etc. and making tons of noise about how this was all going to end. Turns out, the left was right, the Dems were wrong. But the Dems are still fighting to try and shut down the left. Look at how hard the Dem establishment hates Mamdani.
- tolerance 1y ago
  My line of questioning could be interpreted as a conflation of the left ("the electorate") with Democrats ("the elected"). Thanks for pointing out that distinction. I think it offers some directive as far as accountability can be considered. I’m curious to see where the Mamdani Experiment takes you all. His constituents are one group who are for certain no stranger to the armed presence reported elsewhere today. Under pretenses all too familiar.
  - ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
    >I’m curious to see where the Mamdani Experiment takes you all. His constituents are one group who are for certain no stranger to the armed presence reported elsewhere today. Under pretenses all too familiar. What are you going on about? Mamdani may or may not be a good mayor for NYC. Ask me in two years. But he's not some sort of jihadi, Commie pinko. He's a New Yorker who is actually talking about issues that New Yorkers care about. It certainly helps that his competition are a disgraced serial sexual harasser (Cuomo), a corrupt sitting mayor whose administration (as well as himself) is riddled with corruption and a lack of accountability (Adams) and a clownish jerk whose claim to fame is that he used to ride the subways at night with his gang and beat up whoever they felt like (Sliwa). Given the competition. is it any wonder that Mamdani is a cinch to win the mayoralty? And all that has absolutely zero to do with the mud being slung at him. He will be the next mayor of NYC and I look forward to his tenure -- especially since it means the other folks will go away, at least for a few years. Mamdani may suck at being mayor. I don't know. But it would be difficult for him to be worse than his field of opponents. And none of that stuff has anything to do with national politics or the DNC. I say all this as an old white guy of Jewish extraction. I don't know where you're from or where you live, but you're talking out of your ass and it smells that way too. Yuck! Edit: I may have, as anecdata (thanks for calling me out, anecdata!) suggested (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45193191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45193191 ), misunderstood your post. Upon reflection, I probably should have been more charitable in my reading of it. That said, you're flat wrong about Mamdani's "constituents." He, for the reasons I mentioned above, is supported not just by the minorities being targeted by the Trump administration, but by huge numbers of regular New Yorkers (of all ethnicities and melanin content levels), because he's the best candidate. I'd add that Mamdani didn't just fly in from an Iranian terrorist training camp to run for mayor. He grew up in NYC, went to NYC public schools and has been an elected member of the New York State Assembly for the past four years. If I misunderstood your comment as to Mamdani, his constituents (the residents of State Assembly District 36 in Queens), and/or his validity/viability as a mayoral candidate, my apologies.
- McAlpine5892 1y ago
  > Meanwhile, the left out there pointing at Obama's extrajudicial killings, Bush's whole post 9/11 fiasco, Clinton's "Superpredators" nonsense, etc. etc. and making tons of noise about how this was all going to end. I had a whole comment written up but, meh. The noisy people are made out to be conspiracy theorists, even when someone like Chomsky brings all the receipts. People want to believe the person they voted for is the "good guy" in a superhero sort of way. Trump is partly able to do what he does because of these extreme expansion of powers from previous presidents. This is why "but my guy good!!" is among the worst forms of reasoning for justify $bad_thing.
  - anecdatas 1y ago
    > The noisy people are made out to be conspiracy theorists, even when someone like Chomsky brings all the receipts. Yes. This is what I was saying: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra
    - McAlpine5892 1y ago
      My bad! Learned a new expression today.

EasyMark 1y ago

they've lost all sense of nuance. Everyone is evil if they don't have an R beside their name. It's all about shutting off the brain and trusting the process (of indoctrination)