With November approaching, the Democratic Party and President Trump have released plans for future policies, and both sides are calling for an end to Washington’s seemingly never-ending wars in the Middle East.
On Sunday, President Trump released a 50-point agenda for his second term that says the president will “stop endless war” and bring US troops “home.” The plan also pledges that the US will “maintain” military strength and says the US will “wipe out” global terrorists that threaten Americans.
The Democratic Party released its 2020 platform this month, which uses similar language to President Trump’s agenda and calls for ending “forever wars.” The plan says the Democrats will work to end these foreign entanglements “responsibly.” The only conflicts mentioned by name in the platform are the wars in Afghanistan and Yemen.
The Democrats don’t promise a withdrawal from Afghanistan, but they do call for a political agreement that will prevent the rise of al-Qaeda and ISIS in the country, which sounds similar to the peace process that is playing out now.
The Democratic platform takes a stronger stance on the war in Yemen. “Democrats will end support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen and help bring the war to an end,” the platform reads. There was a bipartisan push to end US support for the war in Yemen in 2019, but that was ultimately defeated when President Trump used his veto powers against a War Powers resolution calling for an end to the war.
President Trump ran on ending these “forever wars” in 2016, and so far, has failed to live up to his promise. The Democrats have played a role in the president’s failure, with most Democrats in Congress opposing Trump’s plans at every turn, like when the president tried to pull out of Syria in 2019.
the men amerikans most admire tell them the most extravagant lies; the men amerikans most despise try to tell them the truth”. HL Menkhen
“amerikan children lie to their parents; amerikan parents lie to their children–it’s expected”. Geoffrey Gorer
“amerikans have been liars and braggarts for 3 centuries”. Daniel Boorstin
“Obama’s job is to lie to a nation of liars”. Prof Kiese Laymon
Haven’t the Dems tried to stop Trump’s funding and arming of the Saudis’ war in Yemen all this time? It’s a bit rich to say it’s all been Trump trying to end wars and the Dems thwarting him. He also came close to starting a war with Iran twice.
It has been the RNCs media strategy to make as many failed GOP policies stick to the dems wherever possible. Dem hawks make this possible, the overall congressional voting against war is ignored. Even here on antiwar.com. Biden is not the “democrats”. It is a fractured polity.
The Democrats are a coalition of social liberals, not a real party.
The Republicans are likewise a coalition, but of socio-economic conservatives.
In a coalition, the strongest factions determine overall policy,
The Democrats have never paid anything but lip service to ending the 9/11 wars. No-one ever had peaceful expectations of the Republicans.
However, Vietnam did end under the Nixon Republicans, for all that he schemed to prolong the war while out and then in power.
The Forever Wars are far more likely to end under Trump.
“Vietnam did end under the Nixon Republicans”..hardly..
The 1973 Case Church amendment vote….
House
War. Dems 14. GOP 113
No war dems211 gop 72
Senate
War dems 12. Gop 4
No war dems 39 gop 32
The last hurrah for antiwar GOP senate.
The veto proof vote left Nixon no choice….tho he would find a way.
More like, Vietnam ended despite Nixon Republicans
That was in response to the expansion of the war into Cambodia, not actual pressure to end the Vietnam war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper%E2%80%93Church_Amendment
Support was to be continued for Republic of Vietnam forces only WITHIN Vietnam.
The Democrats were trying to save the war by limiting its scope.
They did not understand, the expansion of the war into Cambodia was at a strategic level, a necessary flanking maneuver, or rather, a response to North Vietnam’s flanking maneuver.
With no way to prevent insurgent resupply, the war would only become more brutal for U.S. troops. Had Nixon somehow chosen to continue fighting, expansion into Cambodia was inevitable.
“paid anything but lip service” No, the dems have voted majority antiwar over several congressional Bill’s. Because the gop doesn’t, doesn’t make it lip service from the dems, it means there’s too many Republicans in congress. If you want to see real lip service…see trump.
If they can do the math, they know their chances of winning. Antiwar theatre, is all the Democrats do.
Or, they vote antiwar and lose, because there are too many republican jackboots all over congress.
Love the “theater” excuse. You a mind reader ?
If I were capable of reading minds, then I’d know for sure if Trump were lying.
However, his record suggests he wants to end the 9/11 wars, and does not want things to get any worse.
Those who ignore Trump’s actual record, seem keen for a Democratic victory at any cost, not ending wars.
His record, is escalating everywhere, his deployments everywhere are greater than when he came in. Trashed arms control round the world too. And no progress in Korea (attributable to him) swollen pentagon budgets.
“His record, is escalating everywhere, his deployments everywhere are greater than when he came in. Trashed arms control round the world too. And no progress in Korea (attributable to him) swollen pentagon budgets.”
But you are ignoring the reality that he really, really, wants to end wars, but can’t because he’s only the President of the United States and does not hold a much higher office.
Name one new Trump hot war.
The Yemen war began in 2014, under Obama’s watch and with his administration’s support.
The Democrats support or deny war as suits their political interests. Apparently Mohammed bin Salman thought intervening on the losing side of the Yemeni civil war was in his interest, and Yemen was to U.S. War Party geopolitiks, potentially useful real estate.
A war with Iran would be ruinous, and out of power, the Democrats would lack the extensive Presidential and Continuity of Government protection systems they built for themselves. So naturally, a U.S. war with Iran had to be avoided.
Trump knows all this and never built up the regional assets for a real Iran war, just made provocations that if the Iranians ever responded to, would screw the Dem billionaires good.
https://asiatimes.com/2020/01/financial-n-option-will-settle-trumps-oil-war/
There was an oil derivatives market before the COVID-19 crash, that depended on shipping about the Arabian peninsula to be clear of missile fire. Trump got careless and never thought the derivatives bubble would be popped. COVID-19 scamdemic was and is an insane power play; a lot of people were caught off guard.
Trump needed Saudi support, as they are the foundation nation of the petrodollar, so like the Democrats, he supported Saudi Manifest Destiny pretensions in Yemen. When MBS went full Trumpian, the Dems turned om MBS and his BS war.
The Democrats and their Euro globalist sponsors are far to deceptive to be allowed back into power. Americans own America, not Soros and his ilk.
Four more years of Trump, is preferable.
At least under Trump, we can’t be fooled into believing everything is awesome. Trump delivered no new wars and no meaningful escalations of the pre-existing stalemates. Even Yemen has been dialed back, though still ongoing.
Trump resists COVID-19 medical police statism, and is encouraging rejection of lockdown culture.
The congressional dems put the screws to Obama’s Yemen boner, no GOP support, but enough party pressure to keep it minimal, as it is now, no change. Tho, the change are the annual Yemen votes which the dems pass, and trump and the gop prevent.
trumps escalation in Syria is a new war by scale, as I have outlined too many times, yet you deny still.
The fact that Venezuela or Iran have not responded to trumps attempts to war there, is not a reflection on “antiwar trump”
The Yemen war still went on. And on. And on.
Obama was the great hope for peace in 2008. Many have not forgotten the letdown when he let Hiliarity run riot in Libya. And the 9/11 wars expanded into Syria.
Sure, Obama exited Iraq – after carefully ensuring the Islamic State would allow the U.S. to return,
Biden was front row, right of President Obama for all that.
Democrats are too good at deception – self-deception, and deception of others, to be allowed back into power.
Trump has started no new wars, yet, but not exactly for lack of trying. They did indeed increase military buildup in the form of carriers, and they certainly “provoked” the shit out of a peace envoy and military Iranian hero while in Iraq, the country you invaded but were now a guest of, and are now occupying *again* having outstayed your welcome by killing a couple of dozen officials who happened to be standing near the victim of your international assassination by drone. They asked you to leave for that. You didn’t.
Walking away from the JCPOA and imposing sanctions on
Iran didn’t start a war, but it sure as hell did not prevent one,
absolutely made things worse for the Iranian people and left them even more vulnerable for the virus that you called a “bust” a while back (more on that later).
The latest coup attempt against Venezuela, while officially denied by the US government, is absolutely part and parcel of a regime change policy Trump and Democrats have supported equally for the last 20 years (around about which there was another attempted coup supported by the US).
When Trump said he wanted to leave Syria, that was fine. But moving the troop so they can occupy the oil is not ‘leaving’. It’s an act of war by a bully who knows that the victim is too weak or overextended to do anything about it. Please take off you MAGA hat as it is blinding you to the the truth which you misinterpret as glare. And, the way he left the Kurds to their fate without at least signalling to Turkey that their own invasion and decimation was not welcome, something he vaguely waved away afterwards? There are errors of commission and there are errors of omission. He could have given the Kurds some warning. Told them to get their people out some time ahead.
I know this site is all about antiwar. But you have to look at the domestic side of things too. Racial minorities in the US have had enough of being lynched, shot, and kneed to death. This isn’t new. Trump didn’t start it. But he has enabled and made it worse by constantly dogwhistling to the so-called alt-right, to supremacists. Trump reflexively supports anyone–anyone at all–who supports him without a second thought, regardless of where that support comes from, hence all the embarrasing retweets of such groups and for that matter conspiracy theories. Let us not forget he was the face of the Birther movement. He does not “reject” what you call lockdown culture, he rejects whatever does not fit his own narrative of his image as it suits him, and if that includes medical science or any other science, so be it. Hence his support of a bunch of wackos in white lab coats headed by a pediatrician who thinks sickness can be caused by sex with demons and witches in your sleep. This is a man who doesn’t think, doesn’t reflect, doesn’t care, and is extremely easily led. He watches FOX news and repeats and retweets what they say in minutes or the next day. All of this should at the very least be mildly disturbing to you and give you pause. There is no platform. What do they intend to do over the next four years? Whatever he says. Only he doesn’t know from one week to the next what that will be.
Finally, Trump’s approach to trade is fundamentally bellicose and explicitly warlike. He said trade wars were great. He acts like he got massive concessions by changing the name of NAFTA and scared the crap out of everyone for about a year just for the sake of it. It’s his modus operandi: cause chaos and then swoop in and “solve” it, or not. His attempts at arrving at a better trade relationship with China, hard fought, has now been completely undermined by using them as a political distraction for his abysmal failure in fighting the virus, which as we speak is killing 1000 Americans a day. (By the way, we’ve reached the numbers I predicted months ago, here we are end of August. At this rate it’ll be 200,000 deaths in three weeks, and given the confusion as flu season sets in… I hesitate to try but I’ll say close to 325,000 by 3 November).
Now, four years of Biden versus four years of Trump. Tell you what, none of us has a crystal ball. I know Biden has some bad guys around him. On the other hand, the world ain’t what it was in 2004. The US armed forces sure aren’t. They don’t talk about it much but the last I heard the rate of infection among them was double the national rate (probably about the same now). The US can still project power in all sorts of way but I think there is little if any prospect of a ground war anywhere for the next four years regardless of who is in charge. That being the case if I were in your shoes I’d go with someone that actually cares about domestic issues beyond sending in federal armed forces to “solve” social problems.
Ah, you don’t get it, or do, but can live with it. Trump knows when he can get away with being a bully. Assassinating Solemani and al Muhandis under flags of truce were acts of war Iran could not reasonably answer with war.
Just like Obama did when he sent U.S. marines into Syria – a brazen act of war – knowing Syria and Russia dared not take him up on that offer and fire upon the invading forces.
Yet Trump is the only duopoly candidate who openly talks of ending the 9/11 wars. In a democracy, you don’t always get what you want, but it really helps to support advocates of what you want.
The third party candidates are wholly ineffectual votes, and come off more as balm for a decadent conscience that no matter what, will ‘benefit’ from Western imperialism. Not real advocacy for peace.
Funny both sides only want to end these wars when elections are coming up, once over its back to business as usual.
Americans are cheap. We can be bought for empty promises.
Bingo!
As shown in this article, Congress recently voted in favour making the “Endless War” even longer:
https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2020/07/prolonging-endless-war.html
The fact that Democrats would vote with the Republicans to defeat Amendment 5 of the National Defense Authorization Act suggests that the Democrats will do anything to see that Donald Trump’s agenda for Afghanistan is soundly defeated.
Here’s the numbers on Omar’s amendment on ending the Afghan war…
End it. Dems 126. Gop 2
More war. Dems 103. Gop 181
Mr “end the wars” trump, never mentioned this bill, although he has spent hours bragging how he can drink water with one hand.
Certainly dem hawks are a problem.
…but not THE problem.
The War Party is the Democrats and RINOs, and Trump is neither.
Lost antiwar measures are a foregone conclusion with the Democrats.
If this was true, if either one was going to do this, they’d already have done it.
Obama had 8 years. Trump has had 4 years.
Another 4 years for Trump or for Obama’s foreign policy people won’t change anything. To believe that is to be credulous beyond anyone who actually follows the news.
Trump might get his conquests in Venezuela and Iran.
Let Trump have another four years then.
Break the duopoly, Democrat side first.
Pointless discussion. Politicians obviously no longer have control over war. The US military has become enforcers for global organized banker mafia.
Close, but the U.S. military isn’t necessarily wholly on board with forever war either.
I see no evidence of that. The U.S. military is illegally occupying oil fields in Syria and contracting with oil companies to steal oil. They are still in Afghanistan where a $trillion drug business has flourished for nearly 20 years. Hundreds of US bases all over the world are not draining the swamp, they are draining the economy.
General Wesley Clark exposed the ‘seven in five’ invasion plans back in 2006. Major Danny Sjursen (ret.) is a regular Antiwar contributer.
The U.S. military HAS to follow the commands of the civilian leadership. Although there may have been a soft brass-level mutiny on Trump’s last Syria pullout attempt, that would have been backed by the majority of the rest of the civilian political leadership, had it come down to impeaching Trump to do so.
However, to suggest many don’t have qualms about materially and morally stupid orders sells them short. Even if I were pro Long War, the total lack of a break in the pace and realistic re-armament and up-armament would be very alarming.
Shows both major parties have a sense of humor.
It will take FOREVER to end FOREVER wars. But at least it is now clear. These are THEIR wars — both Democrat and Republican elites are defying American people. No on-going wars or stationing troops abroad is justified, as no genuine defense interests exist.
So now Trump just provided Democrats the successful formula — promise, withdraw a little, hint at dark forces preventing you from ending wars, and problem solved.
Trump can fire Pompeo — but he will not. Until it is time to throw him under the bus, and hire another nut. Democrats will do the same.
Pompeo hasn’t failed as spectacularly as Bolton yet…
Major parties promise to end forever wars thus guaranteeing forever wars will continue forever. Got it.
Which is why I do not watch the speeches at their conventions. A bunch of blah, blah. At least the DNC has a platform. According to the latest news, the RNC has no platform. Donald Trump is the alpha and the omega and he alone will solve everything. That’s it.
Which is pretty much how a fascist party acts, investing all of themselves into the wisdom or whim of the Almighty and Infallible Leader, who apparently can do no wrong. A platform that is basically “we’ll wing it”. I think the problem is if they bring up all the stuff they really want to do, or are doing, it will turn off the base by advertising that they still haven’t achieved any of the more hubristic promises that were made in 2016: the border wall, repealing/replacing ACA, or bring unwanted attention to the implications of their most recent policies (effectlively defunding Medicare and Social Security) or indeed the failure of Trump and his cabinet even now to address Covid19 seriously or acknowledge major problems of police brutality, racism, and right wing terrorism, all the while decrying phantom left wing terrorism (to my knowledge there has not been one Antifa-related incident reported in any reliable news source; if there is, it pales by comparison to confirmed white supremacist / milita and unlawful killings by poilce, which is what started the mess in the first place).
We’re not in a war in Yemen.
We are not in a war with Yemen but we fund Saudi Arabia’s military which is at war with Yemen.
I know – which makes us not in a war with Yemen.
Career bullshitters bullshitting with more bullshit.
Vote Jo Jorgensen.
In normal times, I might. In the 44 (edit: actually 45, it’s been 44 years since I first voted) years since I reached the age of majority I have never subscribed to the wasted vote theory and I am not enough of a hypocrite to espouse it now. But for what I find to be good and sufficient reasons, I am voting Democrat for the first time ever.
If we don’t rid our country of this orange sh-tstain, we don’t deserve a country.
I keep thinking that and then I think about voting for Biden and I get ill. Third party once again.
I understand. The only wasted vote is one voting for what you don’t believe. I meant that as open and honest dialogue and in no way a put down.
👍
I only agree with “we don’t deserve a country.” That’s my aim. Empire down, all the kings horses and all the kings men kind of sh*t. Plus, Biden is worse.
“I only agree with ‘we don’t deserve a country.'”
“Country” can mean a geographical area united by voluntarily accepted common bonds. It doesn’t have to mean an area under the rule of a state, or an empire. But, your point is well taken. In a sense, I am a traitor just as you are, as I oppose the existing regime.
“Biden is worse.”
We really don’t know yet, although he has indicated some pretty scary stuff so far. In particular, his statement that “I would shut it down; I would listen to the scientists.” That is every bit as much a fascist sentiment as anything Trump has dished out so far. He doesn’t even acknowledge the word play: “science” and “scientists” as being defined by state violence. I have nothing against scientists or physicians, I just don’t think they should be doing their work while pointing a gun at my throat.
I prefer to think of Biden and Trump as equally repulsive, and equally dangerous. To give either my vote would be a betrayal of common decency.
I maybe get that and I’m all in. Ending the imperial presidency would be a good start but I have no idea how to get there. But on one point I disagree. Nothing is worse than Trump.
Of course there’s a dichotomy at play. On the one hand, our president makes me ashamed to be American. On the other hand, it’s great that our world influence is lessened.
I just wish it had been more rational and less petulant. There’s a great America First article by Justin that I can’t find just now.
This isn’t it but it is close…
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-last-word-on-america-first/
Anyway, I have reconciled that my rightish libertarian peacenik self is at the fringe. We can’t win. But we can go down swinging. In my little league career, I never took strike three.
“In normal times, I might”
It seems to me, that the reason we aren’t in “normal times” now, is because people have consistently voted for whom they perceived to be the lesser of two evils among the majors in the past. It also seems to me, that we will never again experience “normal times” at the ballot box if we continue to do this. Trump/Clinton and Trump/Biden are not aberrations, they are the logical result of reducing discourse to the lowest common denominator year after year. If Biden becomes president, this will not change. There will be new, and even worse, Trumps, Clintons and Bidens, until ultimately our major party choice will be effectively Hitler vs Stalin.
I carry some of that burden. I haven’t voted since 2000. I was sick of it all. On or about 2007, I took a sabbatical from the news.
I don’t think it will come down to a Hitler Stalin choice
“I haven’t voted since 2000.”
That actually makes a very powerful statement. If the winner got no more than 10% – 15% of the vote of eligible voters, they would have much more difficulty claiming a “mandate from the people.” Even now, where they get not much more than 20%, it embarrasses the winner, and causes them to think about it (except perhaps Trump, as thinking is not his game).
“On or about 2007, I took a sabbatical from the news.”
Yeah, I haven’t watched a mainstream media news broadcast in years myself. I get virtually all of my news from the Internet.
I was less than clear, I can see. My news sabbatical was all internet. I quit watching TV thirty years ago or so. I just quit watching any news. I worked my job. I plied my hobbies. I just didn’t give a sh-t what the political world did.
And then… then, summer of 16 trainwreck of an election sucked me back in. Here I am, registered to vote (a result of my year long quest to get my driver’s license renewed and prove that I exist).
I’m unsure of what you meant by powerful statement but I might fill the bill. I haven’t voted in twenty years and I have never voted for a Democrat in my life. But not this time.
This time, Trump can put all the jackbooted thugs between me and the voting booth. They can kill me. And that’s it. They can’t make me kneel.
“You can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.”
Robert A Heinlein
I love the sentiment you’re expressing, although I disagree with your intended method of acting on it (I don’t expect a Biden presidency to be better than a second Trump term in any material respect).
I know what you mean about the quest for “official ID.” I did without it for about a decade due to a catch 22:
I lost my wallet with my driver’s license and Social Security card in it, and I had long since misplaced my birth certificate.
I couldn’t get my driver’s license without my Social Security card and birth certificate.
I couldn’t get my Social Security card replaced without a driver’s license or state ID card and birth certificate.
I couldn’t get my birth certificate without my Social Security card and driver’s license or state ID card.
Since I had already stopped driving due to a tremor in my hand (which has since gone away), I just went without rather than try to unsnarl that mess.
Fortunately, around the time that I started desperately needing ID so that I could get on a plane (I had moved a thousand miles away from Missouri to Florida and wanted to be able to visit my elderly parents), Tennessee changed its birth certificate requirements such that I was able to get mine with a copy of my DD-214 and a copy of my lease. And in Florida, I was able to get a state ID card with that DD-214, lease, and birth certificate.
Unfortunately, I no longer need to be able to travel to visit my parents. My dad died in 2017, and COVID-19 took my mom on August 17th. But I may find other reasons to travel.
My catch 22 started July 18. I was broke and homeless with ten bucks in my pocket. I got a full boat ride on food stamps but had a bad address for the Obama phone.
Later, I needed a birth certificate to go real id . So, there are services for the homeless in Houston. I went to Compass and Operation ID and there and back again.
I needed a birth certificate to renew my license. I needed an ID to get my birth certificate. I got by with a HOT ID. Homeless Outreach Team. Poor choice of acronym.
..
My condolences for your loss Thomas.
Just curious R P, but which state do you live in? If you’re like me (I live in Montana), and your state is either solid blue, or solid red, your vote for the major party contest is irrelevant.
Take my state, Montana, for example. As Montana is a heavily red state, the only way it could even possibly have a chance of going to Biden would be if the vote nationwide were so heavily for Biden that he wins in a landslide.
Same thing in a blue state like California. The only way California could ever have a chance of going for Trump would be if Trump were sweeping practically everything else.
In both cases, a vote for either Trump or Biden would be totally irrelevant, it would be a truly wasted vote.
Now, if you are sure you are in a swing state, you’ve got a point. But is Biden really preferable to Trump? I would never, ever vote for Trump even for dogcatcher. But I feel the same way about Biden. I feel that giving either of these men support by voting for them will be interpreted by them as meaning “I have a mandate from the people for my agenda,” not “The people found me the least repulsive of the two.” Is that really what you want to do? Biden, with what little consciousness he has left, is potentially every bit as egotistical as Trump. And probably every bit as incompetent as Trump, as no human being is competent to be president as the powers of the presidency are currently constituted. Their personas are very different, and, I would probably dislike Trump more than Biden if I knew both of them personally. But, you can’t hit what you don’t aim at, and, if what you want is liberty and peace, you are never, ever going to get them with Trump or Biden.
“Just curious R P, but which state do you live in?”
I live in a ball of confusion.
https://youtu.be/-9poCAuYT-s
Your point is well taken. I will be voting in Texas. Voting for the first time in two decades. For the first time for a Democrat. Will it count? I don’t give a f-ck. Biden ain’t my hero. But I will crawl across broken glass and kill any mother f-cker what gets in my way of ridding our country of this orange sh-tstain.
I ain’t looking for perfection. Just normalcy.
“I live in a ball of confusion.”
Don’t we all?
“If we don’t rid our country of this orange sh-tstain, we don’t deserve a country.”
I up voted you for that.
Shucks.
Unfortunately Jorgensen’s running mate is Spike ‘Brony’ Cohen, an acolyte of Vermin Supreme. Vermin’s a guy who’s antics have probably done more damage to the Libertarian party’s image as a serious choice than any other single personality claiming to be with the movement.
Millions of Americans do not need the second fiddle to the guy with the boot on his head rebuilding the economy. The Green PArty’s Angela Walker is far more electable.
Sure, many libertarians do not like or support the state – but with lives and livelihoods at stake, they should have taken the Presidential nominations far more seriously.
The Greens under Howie Hawkens pretty much regurgitate the extreme left manifesto of the Democrats.
Jorgensen was not my first choice of presidential nominee, but she’s a reasonably good candidate.
For VP, Cohen was almost certainly the best choice from among those running. John Monds would have been OK too, but Cohen busts his ass to get the message out in a way that nobody else does.
Anyone who thinks it’s the job of the president and vice-president to “rebuild the economy” doesn’t get it and isn’t going to vote Libertarian anyway. The only productive thing the US executive branch can do vis a vis the economy is get the hell out of the way.
“but she’s a reasonably good candidate.”
Yes, for the first time in 16 years, the LP actually nominated something close to a libertarian. I think Bob Barr was the low point, as there was almost no attempt to even hide that he was actually a conservative Republican.
Lockdown culture isn’t going away; the Dems own it, and Trump rejects lockdown culture insofar as he can. Hands-off is easily smeared as negligence.
The job of the Executive is to provide leadership. This includes advocating for the economy and rejecting unsound policies.
Too many people write off the powers of the President; but the Democrats clearly want back in the Oval Office to forward their anti-market economic agenda.
“to forward their anti-market economic agenda.”
And what about Trump’s anti-market economic agenda?
Trump wants to keep the economy open during the scamdemic; all else is reset nonsense from the globalists. There’s not much else to say; this is beyond any President, however skilled and knowledgible, to truly resolve. Trump’s bluster seems almost tongue in cheek at times.
Anti-market agendas don’t work; the free market cannot be truly denied. The globalist reset is an attempt to deny the free market’s own ‘reset’, a large part of which was the ongoing closing of the overall power gap between the power elites and the rest of us.
However much the elites own, those who care to be have never been better informed and so able to defend our human rights. However, we kind of needed an economy…
Vermin isn’t a deal killer for me. He’s a Yippie provocateur. His methods may be madness but his goals are weapons grade justice. Jo has gone out of her way to bring the left into the LP, which I’ve been waiting for for a long time. I got no complaints.
Wearing a boot on his head isn’t going to sell whatever his message is, let alone the Libertarian party as a serious choice for most voters.
Cohen may be a good VP candidate and perhaps might never have gotten the VP nomination without Vermin, but… yeah, very disappointed that the Libertarians don’t take this stuff seriously.
Yeah…no. Ain’t happening.
“President Trump ran on ending these ‘forever wars’ in 2016, and so far, has failed to live up to his promise.”
Because it wasn’t a promise, it was a lie.
You’re ignoring the Democrat-led Russiagate impeachment scandals that kept Trump in need of Republican Hawk support, and the bipartisan opposition to exiting Afghanistan and Syria.
Biden and the Dems are horse whispers at the glue factory. They won’t end the wars willingly, and, aren’t averse to starting new wars.
“that kept Trump in need of Republican Hawk support”
I am sick and tired of hearing about how wimpy and powerless Trump is, and that that is the reason he doesn’t follow through on his “promises” to end wars. He’s the f*cking President of the United States of America. He could have initiated bringing ALL American troops home on day one in office. So what would that have cost him? That he would be a one term president? Well, I’ve got news for you, he is going to be a one term president anyway! WTF, he could have gone down in history as the all time most decisively antiwar president in history, but now, he will go down in history as no more truthful than Richard Nixon. It is so obvious to anyone with any objectivity that he is no different than any of the other criminals who have held that office. He is a liar, and, I’ll agree with you, he’s a coward too.
No, he’d be dead like Kennedy, push come to shove. Kennedy, was a wildly popular politician. Trump. far less so.
I’m tired of veteran antiwars ignoring reality and demanding an oxymoronic antiwar dictatorship.
Again, any withdrawal has to be done in such a way as to stick and survive even the removal of a President. There has to be sufficient elite and popular support for permanent withdrawal from the Forever Wars.
Popular support for peace is there; and economic crisis is winnowing the indifferent. Elite support… well its likely growing, albeit forced by economic reality.
Economic crisis is a two-edged sword; an economically broken middle and elite class cannot oppose anything an authoritarian government does. Trump has sent out a few federal police to put down riots; we’re not seeing mass arrests of political opponents.
The Democrats are another matter. Mass gun confiscations, for example, might well HAVE TO include arrests of pro-gun political opponents.
The U.S. is still somewhat democratic; Trump cannot unilaterally end wars the elites overwhelmingly support and the public, at best is indifferent to.
Pro-war Hilary did win the popular vote. The failure lies as much with American insousciance as Trump. There will never be the perfect candidate, only a more perfect liar. Trump, it turns out is a terrible liar.
“demanding an oxymoronic antiwar dictatorship.”
You said it yourself, “oxymoronic.” Unilateral executive action to end wars is constitutional, and is not dictatorial, as it is action to reduce government aggression, not increase it.
Unilateral executive action absent clear majority political support, is an abuse of executive power and dictatorship. Polls have inconsistently supported ending the wars, according to the news cycle.
The Forever Wars must end, but if there is no substantive political support, just Presidential whim, the President ends up removed, by vote, impeachment, or extra-constitutionally, by assassination.
Suppose the scenario were reversed an the anti-you were arguing for the need for war. The same check-and-balance powers would remain, and the same definition of abuse of power would remain.
Trump could easily take advantage of popular indifference and end the wars unilaterally.
Then he’d have to square that peace with the power elites, who know even people like yourself who adamantly oppose war, for some reason hate Trump more than wars.
Easy social math to see the outcome of wannabe heroes, learned very young on any schoolyard jungle with well-connected bullies.
“for some reason hate Trump more than wars.”
I do not “hate” Trump, nor do I “like” him. I cannot do either because I do not even personally know him. I hate the policies of all statists, including Trump and Biden, and give no favor to any of the people who put forth such policies. I am not singling out Trump in any way. The reason he is the focus of my criticisms right now, is that he is currently the POTUS, and no one else is. In 2021, when Biden takes office, the focus will shift to Biden, and Trump will be an afterthought in the same way that Bush, the Clintons, Obama, and others without political power are now afterthoughts.
Any President will be by default a statist tool.
Libertarian rejection of a Libertarian party is clearly wise. Even without a party crutch, there are people willing to be ideological over rational.
Precluding any objective assessment of Presidential actions based on partisan ideology, leaves no capacity to guage their impact on core values and lifestyle.
Trump may not be great for anarchism, but a Biden administration cannot be remotely tolerant of anti-statists. Presidential embrace of a mask mandate, for example, would enable not just crushing fines but jail terms for ‘scofflaws’.
What kind of reality are you trying to affirm?
As stated, the specifics of the mix will be different.
While I abhor the idea of medical fascism, I also abhor the idea of the state brutally crushing the lives, hopes, and dreams of immigrants, an issue on which Trump has been the absolute worst in my adult lifetime. You might respond, “but that’s just immigrants, their lives are less important than those of native born American citizens.” I don’t believe that any person’s life or rights are inherently, in any universal sense, more important than any other person’s life or rights. That is the whole problem with statism, as far as I’m concerned, the idea that any individual or group of individuals has interests which are superior to those of any other individual or group of individuals in a political sense.
I am not willing to give support to any politician who is guaranteed to massively increase the crushing of individual rights, and that includes Trump and Biden. I am willing to compromise a little around the edges, but primarily on amount, not direction. Jo Jorgensen is the first presidential candidate on the general election ballot in many, many years that I can vote for without much in the way of abhorrence. She will almost certainly not win this time. But, if someone like her does not win soon, there will be no stopping the country’s descent into total despotism.
Little Brother can do far more damage than Big Brother, and often the two are connected.
East Germany was just such a state; eventually half the country was spying on the other half.
Realistically, you only have the choice of who can do less harm, which objectively speaking, is Trump, not Biden.
I don;t care who you vote for, as long as you vote knowing the real consequences.
Jorgensen is very highly unlikely to win.
Biden is an experienced and polished war criminal with the full support of the Deep State and willn ot opose them even by accident..
Little Brother can do far more damage than Big Brother, and often the two are connected. East Germany was just such a state; eventually half the country was spying on the other half.
Realistically, you only have the choice of who can do less harm, which objectively speaking, is Trump, not Biden. The immigration problem would be solved by not persecuting the homelands of many of the immigrants fleeing war and poverty.
I don’t care who you vote for, as long as you vote knowing the real consequences. There are no perfect candidates who can realistically win.
Jorgensen is very highly unlikely to win.
Biden is an experienced and polished war criminal with the full support of
the Deep State and will not oppose tyranny even by accident..
“which objectively speaking, is Trump, not Biden.”
I can name at least two people on this site who think that, objectively speaking, Biden would do less damage than Trump (Dave Sullivan and R P McMurphy). They essentially give the same argument that you do, but in reverse: “A second Trump administration would be an absolute catastrophe and the country would never recover.” vs “A Biden administration would be an absolute catastrophe and the country would never recover.”
Forgive me if I disagree with both sides. The fact is, that either Biden or Trump would be a disaster, and there is no way to know, “objectively,” which would be worse. Am I really that much of an idiot to say I refuse to give my support to either side?
Sullivan I’m more familiar with, and he’s a political partisan. I’m a non-partisan centrist become Trumpian by convenience. Even if Trump were outright lying, he’s still the only duopoly guy talking about ending the 9/11 wars. The notion didn’t just magically disappear one he gained office, however in the breach. Plus, there have been no new wars.
In any case, you are obligated to live under the absolute catastrophe that wins the election. Not voting, is not an absolution. Voting third party, is only the illusion of an absolution. By living in the system, you’re basically living a rigged question of consent.
The vote allows you some say in the finer nuances of the disaster. Biden is an accomplished war criminal who wants to end wars responsibly (meaning, win them). Trump an amateur war criminal who talks of ending wars (meaning, some token troop reductions in an ugly Long War stalemate).
Either candidate could start a new war, but Biden was in on an Administration that started new unprovoked wars and his entire political career saw little shyness in cheerleading war. Trump, has indulged in calculated bullying acts of war that his victims knew better than make into actual wars.
Bush and Obama had the choice not to invade. They invaded. Biden likely will do the same, being the team player that he is. Trump, left it up to Syria/Russia and Iran to decide just how much war they wanted, even giving them Iran one free shot. Iran chose not to level U.S. bases across the Middle East.
There is a problem in not having better realistic choices than Biden or Trump, but most people don’t have the time for party politics, leaving it to the partisans to make the candidate choices for them.
That really doesn’t absolve you from the reality that, the Presidential contest is only between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
Hating both, is not meaningless. Its a denial of responsibility.
Pretending you won’t be affected by or responsible for their actions doesn’t work in democracies. Citizens of a democracy are by default morally responsible for the actions of their governments.
Perhaps this is why so many close their eyes to Western (not just American) authoritarianism; they don’t want the responsibility of choice and duty to dissent.
“That really doesn’t absolve you from my fantasy that, the Presidential contest is only between Donald Trump and Joe Biden because I WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNTTTTTT it to be.”
Fixed, no charge.
Both leading third parties consider 5% of the popular vote to be a ‘win’.
Jorgensen and Hawkens aren’t contenders by any poll save of the imagination.
Please feel free to point out where the Libertarian Party has ever said any such nonsensical thing as 5% being a “win.”
You can’t, because it’s never said any such thing.
Video: McArdle: “…and working to get five percent of the popular vote you’ll guarantee ballot access for several states for the libertarian party…”
I could probably dig up more, but that’s where I picked up the number to begin with.
You can certainly argue, McArdle did not officially speak for the Libertarian party. However, five percent is clearly a strategically important number, granting ballot access in many states. If Libertarians strategists don’t have an eye on that, there’s something wrong.
Its just that, at the Presidential level, there’s still no point. Trump, with nominal Republican support, still faced a realistic bipartisan impeachment threat. A Libertarian President, apart from not getting in, if somehow voted in anyway by the electoral college, still would have zero Congressional or Senate support. Such a President would not be able to do much except veto until impeached. Whatever little good done, would be easily reversed by a duopoly successor.
Libertarians are far better off working for one of the coalitions, and as Francis Melton pointed out, only the Republicans are even remotely Libertarian. Though the Democrats will appeal to social Libertarians far more, the critical economic freedom that underpins Libertarianism is best matched by the Republicans.
Libertarians need to be a real electoral force. Gain municipal, then state legitimacy nationwide, then once embedded as a real threat in the electoral landscape, try for the Presidency as a party.
Otherwise, there’s no way to win. Had this been a leadership contest for a supposed United States Party, faction Sorensen would concede and offer support to one of the leading contenders, faction Trump or faction Biden.
I agree with libertarians like Ron Paul, who say education is more vital than partisanship – this includes voting for a libertarian party that cannot win.
Voting for the coalition that best advantages libertarianism is crucial for the day-to-day survival of libertarian living. Harris-Biden’s pending medical police state, packed Supreme Court, and likely new wars, is not an even remotely libertarian outcome.
“he’d be dead like Kennedy” impressive..mind reading, and soothsaying skill. Save it for Qanon.
Care to stick to reality and not fantasy?
Or is it not possible for those advocating, directly or indirectly, for a Biden victory to face the reality of what a Democratic presidency would mean for America and the rest of the ‘free’ world?
The Dems own cancel culture and lockdown culture and COVID-19 mask cultism.
Good thinking to bail from foreign policy. I am not going to debate yet another “expert” on the pandemic, especially on a foreign policy page. I don’t know what “cancel culture” or “PC” mean, as they obfuscate actual policy that can be legislated. Just right wing buzz punditry to avoid actual issues.
… For some reason seem to think admitting you’re clueless somehow leaves you blameless.
How could you not know what cancel culture is or its place in the very obvious American social media civil war?
“How could you not know what cancel culture is or its place in the very obvious American social media civil war?”
I plead guilty too. While I have heard the expression “cancel culture” I don’t know specifically what it means.
Its basically shunning for political incorrectness on steroids.
Alt-right and alt-left sites, for example, don’t hesitate to ban off-message posters from their forums.
Politically captured host services, ban entire groups.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Cancel%20Culture
Originally, cancel culture was simply the holding to account of people who did objectively bad things.
https://www.dictionary.com/e/pop-culture/cancel-culture/
However, cancel culture has, especially for the alt-left, become the go-to weapon for silencing reasoned dissent to foster and promote political agendas.
Its always been around, just become more commonplace hence marked by the name, cancel ‘culture’.
Its probably been inflamed by the cleverness with which trolls have learned to troll. Neither can one rule out Deep Statist programs to break up social media into enclaves of echo chambers.
And exactly how will keeping Trump in office fix that? Was it not Trump who threatened to sue a social media company for being “unfair” to him?
While I don’t like companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google limiting speech on their sites, it is a thousand times worse to give the state the power to set content editorial rules, even in the name of “free speech” or “fairness.” And that is exactly what Trump wishes to do, to give the state the power to set the rules. How is that in any way superior to what Biden would do?
(2nd post attempt…) Little Brother is far more dangerous than Big Brother. They have the numbers and infect the very grassroots Big Brother is often removed from, and so disadvantaged.
Trump acted only after social media banned alt right and genuine progressives. So his actions are defensive in favor or free speech.
Trump also merely threatened to remove the legal protections social platforms enjoyed against any responsibility for content.
Lawsuits are a perfectly legal recourse to defamation. Hulk Hogan famously took down Gawker for releasing the sex tapes they had on hiom.
Biden represents the alt-left, who stated the whole cancel culture machine in the first place. Having cancel culturists empowered by both powerful private sector media platforms and the government, is a totalitarian disaster.
“Having cancel culturists empowered by both powerful private sector media platforms and the government, is a totalitarian disaster.”
And how is giving the state the power over private media going to solve this problem? Let’s say that Trump wins reelection, and sets the precedent of regulating private content, then this power continues beyond his presidency, and say Biden is elected in 2024. Now Biden has this power at his disposal. You see? It is no remedy.
Trump likely buys you four more years to figure out a solution. A President Biden is unlikely to finish his first term; President Harris will inherit his cancel statism.
Jorgensen, won’t even come close to winning. Work to promote Libertarianism, but vote strategically, if you can.
Libertarian theory recognizes freedom and authoritarianism happens in cycles.
We may be headed for a more authoritarian future, but the dip does not have to be very long or very Deep.
The price of liberty is vigilance, and constant action. There are no magic solutions that are set and forget.
“Trump likely buys you four more years to figure out a solution.”
No, Trump, as does Biden, hastens the descent into despotism. And my solution is: withhold my consent for tyranny.
We have different views of cause and effect, and different religious views. I believe in the law of Karma, that you reap what you sow, at least in the long run. If I give my assent to, and consent for, tyranny, even watered down tyranny, tyranny is what I will get. I really believe that, perhaps you don’t. It’s OK, I don’t expect everyone to believe as I do. But do you see that, given those beliefs, I can’t take seriously the things you say about supporting Trump?
You can’t see that supporting the perceived lesser of two evils election after election is exactly why the major party choices become worse and worse each time? Honestly, I thought Hillary was the worst the Democratic Party could possibly come up with, but then there’s Biden (and Harris, probably). And Trump appears to be even less desirable, if that is even possible, than in 2016. This is the direct Karmic result of giving support and votes to these turkeys. Nothing will ever change until we change our behavior. A second Trump election will not buy time, it will kick the can down the road to 2024, where the choice will likely be even worse than 2020. Ultimately, the Karmic result will be effectively a choice between Hitler and Stalin.
I am sorry but that is not the world I desire to live in.
You can neither give nor deny consent to tyranny. Such power would surly imply an absence of tyranny.
You can try an alter the trajectory of the… level of tyranny you’re in towards more freedom using your ability to speak, associate, and vote.
If you truly do not believe in the polity you live in, you can only leave, though escaping the worldwide influence of the United States of America is nigh impossible.
If you pay taxes (few can escape sales taxes), however under duress, you’ve consented to allow the government to spend that money however it wants, except where you can lawfully alter that outcome.
Kicking the can is buying time. That’s why everyone kicks the can when they have no clue or worse about an intractable problem.
“If you pay taxes (few can escape sales taxes), however under duress, you’ve consented to allow the government to spend that money however it wants, except where you can lawfully alter that outcome.”
Sure, if it turns out that every dictionary in the world is wrong and “consent” doesn’t mean what they all say it means.
Well, consent is not always freely given, realistically. A deal is made. Consent is a complex idea.
Someone wants all the toys in a store. Most will ‘freely’ accept the store will sell what the buyer can afford to buy, because to do otherwise is theft (even if the story started it with outrageous pricing). This presupposes consent to recognize theft is a bad thing; not everyone does. Horse and cattle raiding were once manly activities, for example.
Taxes is theft and spent on nonsense. I would rather not got to jail backing that up and ‘freely’ consent to pay, understanding that apart from indirect influence through voting and advocacy, government will spend that money as they please and I have ‘consented’ to that as well, born into the system and not leaving.
Wannabe starlets ‘consented’ to be abused by Harvey Weinstein. That was part of the Hollywood system back from the beginning in the early 2000’s. Fortunately some were able to revoke that consent, although the damage to their lives and psyche was done.
A dictionary definition is useful, but there are nuances that are clearly implied.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/consent
consent
[ kuhn-sent ]SEE SYNONYMS FOR consent ON THESAURUS.COM
verb (used without object)
to permit, approve, or agree; comply or yield (often followed by to or an infinitive): He consented to the proposal. We asked her permission, and she consented.
(2nd attempt at reply…)
Last I checked, Trump’s actions remove liability protections. That’s all. He’s not cancelling anyone. (Except ByteDance… but Tik Tok will survive.)
Trump gives you four more years to figure out a better solution. Biden, delivers the Cancel State right way. Although President Harris will probably take over soon enough.
The price of liberty is constant vigilance and action. There are no easy set and forget solutions.
Libertarianism recognizes cycles of freedom and tyranny. We may be headed for tyranny, but maybe with Trump that can be delayed and the oppressive period shortened.
“Libertarianism recognizes cycles of freedom and tyranny.”
There might be one or more schools of libertarianism that encompass such an assertion. It’s certainly not a defining aspect of libertarianism as such.
Perhaps the perspective is not universally accepted; many prefer a linear outloook for simplicity if nothing else. However, a cyclical pattern to freedom and tyranny in society and politics can be described and can sometimes explain phenomenon better.
“Libertarianism recognizes cycles of freedom and tyranny.”
Well, I am a libertarian, and it would appear to me that is is not a cycle, but, rather, one monotonic, continuous, descent into greater levels of tyranny.
Technological illusion. You’re far better off than any commoner in the history of human civilization.
However, nature operates in cycles.
Tyranny, is always going to be a threat as long as people can organize themselves into tyrannies, like the threat of hunger as long as people need to eat in some form or another, and death as long as people need to be alive.
Review the basics; (note: I depart from this analysis only in that democracy is not a form pf government but a process inherent to all forms of government. Its just that in an oligarchy the franchise is limited to a very few.)
Well, first of all the social media companies Trump threatens, were already widely condemned by the alt-right and genuine progressives for banning their voices. So, Trump’s actions are in defense of free speech, not against free speech.
Secondly, Trump merely proposed to remove the legal protections that insulate social media companies from responsibility for their content.
Thirdly, suing is a legal recourse to defamation. Hulk Hogan famously took out the old tabloid site Gawker and went after Cox, the parent company, for releasing the sex tapes they had on him.
Biden represents those who started the whole process in the first place. Alt-lefts have become so sure of their righteousness, they no longer see the need to face opponents in honest debate.
Often, many can’t debate beyond a memorized script adopted for fashionable reasons, leading to the cutting alt-right charge of ‘NPC’. (Non player character, a fixture of video games)
No one really took alt-rights seriously, until the hypocrisy of the faux progressives became so apparent anyone could cakewalk a fair debate against them.
In narrative warfare, Little Brother is far more dangerous than Big Brother. Little Brothers have the numbers and infect the very grassroots.
“Well, first of all the social media companies Trump threatens, were already widely condemned by the alt-right and genuine progressives for banning their voices. So, Trump’s actions are in defense of free speech, not against free speech.”
In English: “If some people whine that a bunch of mean ol’ poopyheads won’t provide them with free microphones, without conditions, siding with the whiners turns censorship into ‘defense of free speech.'”
“Secondly, Trump merely proposed to remove the legal protections that insulate social media companies from responsibility for content created by others.”
Fixed, no charge.
“Thirdly, suing is a legal recourse to defamation. Hulk Hogan famously took out the old tabloid site Gawker and went after Cox, the parent company, for releasing the sex tapes they had on him.”
The second sentence seems to have nothing to do with the first sentence. Truth isn’t defamatory. Hogan went after Gawker for publishing true and accurate information about him that he didn’t want published.
Hogan won, and Gawker is dead. It used to be, to protect our rights, that if the cops obtain evidence improperly, that evidence is thrown out of court however factual and condeming.
If the alt-left wants to play public censorship and narrative control from the private sector, the state will do its job to keep freedom alive (about as well as a state can) and cease treating such private entities as unbiased public guardians of free speech and hold them responsible for their content.
Tell me how cancel culture is important ? Oh, and what in the world is the “very obvious social media civil war” ?
Well, it disrupts open social dialogue, denies freedom of speech, and breaks society into enclaves of partisan echo chambers, unable to consider other points of view.
Shouldn’t you kind of understand that on your own?
… Um, its important because cancel culture breaks up social dialogue into isolated echo chambers unable and unwilling to hear out or tolerate other points of view.
Its also in the news, both the banning of conservative and genuine progressive voices on platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Youtube.
The toxic levels of social aggression between left and right in the U.S., and into Canada has been described as a civil war and even potentially leading to a hot civil war.
Gotta say, your lack of awareness seems unusually contrived. Find your own links.
My reply appears to have disappeared.
Anyway, cancel culture breaks up the social milieu into enclaves of echo chambers unable to deal with different ideas and points of view or unite in common cause.
The toxic nature of alt-left versus alt-right discussion has been described as civil war and even leadup to hot civil war.
Ok, I did look up the definition.
So you’re saying, online arguements which lead to disunity, is “owned by the democrats” ? I see, as soon as everyone bows down to the RNC, everyone will be united. And that’s a “thing”? Ok then.
The RNC isn’t really a thing under Trump. Conservatism is, and conservatism is more than a political party, let alone a committee.
Conservatives stand for the status quo as it was before the reset cult took hold, and the alt left and RINOS own the cult of reset and worst possible outcomes from the mistakes of the past.
We have the choice between carrying on the best of the status quo as it was before COVID-19 and even 9/11, or an alt-left brave new world illusion of utopia pretexted by those staged events.
The 9/11 ‘new normal’ isn’t sticking well, and COVID-19 plaster isn’t hiding the ugly cracks. The status quo of before was never a static thing either, but had far more potential for human betterment than reset utopianism.
You’re completely consumed with a party winning power, not the values of a movement, but hardly alone in that.
“My reply appears to have disappeared.”
Much of what you and I wrote back and forth last night seems to have disappeared. I don’t know what is happening but, apparently, vast parts of this thread are no longer visible. Thomas, do you know what is going on?
Nope. There are no comments pending/held for review, nor are there any comments marked as spam, and the only comments deleted in the last 48 hours were deleted by the users who posted them, not by moderators.
Odd, because the very top comment in my browser, which appears to be top level and which Brockland A.T. wrote last night, was a response to my comment, which, along with many others seems to have disappeared. Oh well. We were at it virtually all day until after midnight my time. Maybe it was the disqus gods telling us to knock it off.
Really weird, it all seems to have come back, and can now see it all. Something like this happened to me before a few months back, and, like this time, it all straightened out a day later.
While I am eagerly rooting for a Trump defeat, I am also eagerly rooting for a Biden defeat. There would be little difference between the actual results of a Biden presidency and a Trump presidency, in terms of the misery levels on the people of America and the people of the world. The specifics of the mix might vary a bit, but the following will be true in either case:
1. Warfare by the state will increase.
2. Spending by the state will increase.
3. Civil liberties violations by the state will increase.
4. Economic liberties violations by the state will increase.
Fantasyland. The Libertarians and Greens both consider making just 5% to be a ‘victory’.
Kayne West barely has the support of his own wife.
Trump out, can only mean Biden in. That is the fact.
Speaking of fantasy, the Presidential Curse kicks in in 2020. Any President of an ‘aught year does not finish the term alive.
That strongly suggests, a Biden win, or, the Deep State not taking a liking to four more years of Trump.
“Speaking of fantasy, the Presidential Curse kicks in in 2020. Any President of an ‘aught year does not finish the term alive.”
Ronald Reagan, elected 1980.
President Shrub (2000) got away entirely, but he wasn’t elected but appointed by a judge.
Point being, there’s a good statistical chance whomever gets elected in 2020 does not finish out the term.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/the-curse-of-tecumseh/
Odds are, Trump will not be re-elected and Biden will be too old to finish his term and may step aside to allow Harris to take over.
All that has ever mattered is what ISRAEL says on the subject.
I’ve heard all this for decades … Lies and more lies.
How can you end wars when we are not even legally at war?
Withdraw the aggressing assets from theatre, naturally.
Those troops in Syria are much better off in Poland. Stateside, they might just be laid off.
The Democrats failed to define what ‘responsible’ means with regard to NOT MAKING WARS OF AGGRESSION, and do not appear to share the normal definition of the word with everyone else.
Trump, at least says the U.S. should just pull out. Meanwhile the Libertarians and Greens appear to regard 5% of the popular vote ‘victory’.
Reason Magazine reported on the Soho debate on who libertarians should vote for in 2020; Biden (Ilya Somin), Jorgensen (Angela McArdle), or Trump (Francis Menton).
Audience bias naturally picked Jorgensen at 60%.
However, Menton finished second and had the best understanding of the scenario. He argued that the duopoly parties are grand coalitions, and libertarians do best advancing their ideas as part of coalitions that can win.
https://reason.com/podcast/who-should-libertarians-vote-for-in-2020-a-soho-forum-debate/
Another critical takeaway is the libertarian divide illustrated. Most Americans are libertarians but just don’t know it because there’s a libertarian divide.
Social libertarians tend to be Democrats and economic libertarians tend to be Republican. Those with a balance of both, get squeezed out in reality.
The left social libertarians seem to go too far with the idea that government at best should exist only to preserve liberty, such that the free market should be compelled to support their social freedoms regardless of marketability.
Many libertarians question the very legitimacy of having a Libertarian party and being partisan to one.
“having a Libertarian party and being partisan to one.”
While Comrade Nicky, Thomas Knapp, and myself, are, or have been, members of the Libertarian Party, and have supported some of their candidates, none of us, I believe, could be called LP partisans. I, for instance, will not support or vote for any candidate, regardless of political affiliation, that I perceive to be xenophobic or imperialistic. Thomas and Nicky have their criteria as well.
That’s because you’re you; party politics by default must exploit the psychology of partisanship.
Not everyone can be independently objective or strategic.
I am absolutely, positively an LP partisan. That doesn’t mean I won’t vote against the LP’s candidate if I believe the LP has made a terrible mistake (I voted for Cynthia McKinney instead of Bob Barr in 2008 — and was the VP candidate of an alternative party that wasn’t on the ballot in my state that year), but the LP always gets first shot at my vote and a lot more latitude for fucking up than either wing of the legacy party rates.
“Trump, at least says the U.S. should just pull out.”
His statements would appear to be calculated lies. While no one can be certain what goes on in someone else’s head, his lack of follow up on such statements would seem to indicate that they are, to put it mildly, a bit insincere.
At least trump is making the statements publicly, and went through the motions before facing and caving to intense bi-partisan political opposition.
Remember, any pullout order has to stick long-term and survive even the abrupt removal of a President.