The General 'Murican Politics Thread

[Apollo Chungus]

For some positive news, Obama has moved to indefinitely block all offshore drilling by invoking a law from 1953. There's currently no provision at the moment for any successor to repeal this law, so Trump will have an uphill battle taking this down. As someone worried about the environment given Trump's cabinet apparently having 'climate change denial' as a job requirement and oil companies donating fuck all to help the Paris Agreement, this is the best news I've heard all week.

Thanks, Obama.

[KHCast]

Apparently people never learned from civil rights if shit like this is still being argued for and defended. Jesus Christ, and trump is for this, so his whole shit on "supporting the LGBT community" is even more clearly just PR bull if this is enforced, and more places discriminate.

[8ther]

4 hours ago, KHCast said:

Apparently people never learned from civil rights if shit like this is still being argued for and defended. Jesus Christ, and trump is for this, so his whole shit on "supporting the LGBT community" is even more clearly just PR bull if this is enforced, and more places discriminate.

Is there any way we can fight this?

[PSI Wind]

B-but he held an LGBT Flag! See, guys!? Tooooootally LGBT friendly

[Patticus]

Trump holds a rally, tells his supporters that the "drain the swamp" line was somebody else's idea, and that he didn't want to use it - but it played so well that he went with it anyway. The supporters standing behind him smile and look so proud, while Trump tells them that he repeatedly lied to their faces. I wonder if any of them understand what a lie really is?

[Mad Convoy]

2 hours ago, CD Sanic said:

Is there any way we can fight this?

We can fight this the same way we fought bans on gay marriage-- kick up a massive fuss. The bigger the better. Unite. Noelglivie is right in his assessment that Trump is like a selfish child-- and that means that Trump doesn't want to have to fight too hard or face too much criticism during his presidency. Also, make sure the Supreme Court sees this ASAP-- as of now, its still in a good position to fight social injustice and shoot stuff like this down and prevent it from coming up again, but it might not be in the future if somebody dies as Trump will likely replace that individual with a regressive like Sessions. Don't let Trump get away with this if it does manage to pass either-- never let anybody forget how Trump and the Republican congress once used the First Amendment as a cover to restrict the rights of LGBTQ+, and push for repeal until the cows come home.

Barring that, the US's federalist system will be very helpful. Maybe Trump will cripple the federal government in the fight against anti-LGBTQ injustice, but the law is apt not to affect the states' ability to pass laws-- and depending on how its worded, may even prevent the federal government from being able to do anything about it. So keep kicking up that fuss and push your state government to take counteraction. Everything that law brings up can be countered-- for example, while the law doesn't allow the federal government to pull funding for discriminatory organizations, the state still can and on top of that can pour funding into organizations that aren't discriminatory. The state can also make it as difficult as possible to get a lawsuit relating to these discriminatory businesses to qualify as valid in court-- requiring an incredibly specific set of standards that's unlikely to be fulfilled, or simply adding a clever stipulation like "Plaintiff must prove that the removal of the customer was not on the basis of race, sexuality, or disagreement with the lifestyle of the customer" (which of course, won't be possible to prove as this is discrimination, but would be worded in a way that's pretty difficult to justify fighting). I'm not a lawyer, so I'm well aware that lawmakers would probably have to go about it differently, but you get the general idea. That, and judges can still rule against the discriminatory businesses for much of the same reasoning-- while by law, you can't directly influence the judge's decisions unless you're a lawyer, witness, or something like that, you can be vigilant of attempts to prevent discrimination cases from reaching the courts, and no matter what the result, you can use the cases to fortify your arguments and galvanize support.

And of course, you can continue to be supportive of LGBTQ+, spirit days, etc. Homophobes like to pressure non-homophobes into not speaking out-- know the pressure tactics and, obviously with respect to personal safety, don't fall for them. These include making large shows of kicking out or calling out people who are LGBTQ+ and/or have pro-LGBTQ+ sentiments (eg the Christian bakery discrimination awfulness, or using bathroom laws to publicly humiliate non-conformist females), making veiled or not so veiled threats (eg close family claiming that they'll disown anybody who is gay and/or supports gays, or that God will judge those who speak out in favor of LGBTQ+), performing terrorist attacks against LGBTQ+ and its supporters (eg the Orlando shooting), or more recently implying (or outright accusing) people who are not homophobic of putting all their focus on LGBTQ and not caring about anything else (eg claiming that somebody who participates in a pride parade meant to spread awareness of bullying to LGBTQ+ individuals is actually erasing people who are bullied on the basis on mental illness, race, or *insert group here*). Again, personal safety is key and unless you're willing to risk death, if you have any reason at all to believe that a person making the threat really intends on carrying it out or if the person is physically hurting you, don't immediately come out, claim support, or identify yourself if you haven't already. Get out of the dangerous situation, get a support group or other safe place, then make your stand. Strength in numbers is a powerful thing. Homophobes know this and will try to isolate you, make you believe that you're alone in your point of view, and target you when you're alone, with the aforementioned pressure tactics. Don't let them-- you have allies online and offline, even if they don't always make themselves obvious. Haven't found one yet? If I haven't made it obvious yet, I volunteer myself as an ally.

2 hours ago, Patticus said:

Trump holds a rally, tells his supporters that the "drain the swamp" line was somebody else's idea, and that he didn't want to use it - but it played so well that he went with it anyway. The supporters standing behind him smile and look so proud, while Trump tells them that he repeatedly lied to their faces. I wonder if any of them understand what a lie really is?

Gee, a known self-absorbed, winning obsessed liar... lies to people!? How shocking!

My guess is that the supporters in attendance don't really care or didn't really want the swamp drained in the first place (gah, I still hate that metaphor. Can't we call it flush the toilet or something that doesn't insult interesting, diverse, and necessary ecosystems?). The kind of person who shows up to a tour that's blatantly happening just to gloat is probably themselves too smug to admit they made a bad choice or likes the idea of a regressive kleptocracy. I imagine the Trumpgretters are just hiding and dreading IRL right now. Which, now that I think of it, would probably explain why so few people have been attending these speeches.

[8ther]

http://billmoyers.com/story/list-anti-trump-liberals-progressives/

What do you guys think of this?

[KHCast]

On December 21, 2016 at 3:58 PM, PSI Wind said:

B-but he held an LGBT Flag! See, guys!? Tooooootally LGBT friendly

But those darn identify politics! We can't talk about these issues or else we'll anger cis white straight men and make them feel bad and that's bad and they'll distance themselves from these problems. We just gotta let this shit pass and hope for the best, and not take issue and complain about it(unless you belong to that minority group being effected, but even then).

[8ther]

On the subjects of nukes, the environment, and Russia, is it possible for us to fight against Trump the same way we can fight against him on the issues of discrimination?

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Not if he's gonna be stubborn.

Your best bet would be through Congress, but given how it is right now you'll have to wait until 2018 to do anything effective...

[TailsTellsTales]

I have not posted in this thread in a long time. I will just say two things. First: Bernie Sanders would have easily beat Trump but democrats (Not independents.) are the only people who vote for who they "think" will win instead of who they want to win. And second I was not surprised that Trump won given that this was an antiestablishment year. Anyway Bernie Sanders 2020 I suppose.

[Mad Convoy]

On 12/25/2016 at 0:09 AM, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

Not if he's gonna be stubborn.

Your best bet would be through Congress, but given how it is right now you'll have to wait until 2018 to do anything effective...

If I recall correctly, given how Trump has faced criticism from all sides for his statements on nukes, Trump's team has been rapidly backpedaling/reinterpreting, and Trump himself is trying to claim he didn't REALLY mean that he wanted to start an arms race, it seems that even the GOP draws the line at nukes. Which is weak hope.

On the other hand...

If this is to the interpretation and reflective of how the GOP intends on treating Trump, its scary. If Congress views Trump as a king akin to Jesus and not a president, they'll be very inclined to toe the line against their best judgement. And considering how Trump has already coerced the Republic of Azerbaijan, Kuwait, and Bahrain into moving a conference to his hotel in DC, which he is certainly still making money from, we're going to see a mess of conflicts of interests actually rear their ugly, rank head unless something is done ASAP.

At this point, I'm ready to push for impeachment if the CIA and/or the public can't nail Trump for something before inauguration. I'm thoroughly convinced that while Pence is no angel, he sure looks like one in comparison to Trump. He doesn't have such a cavalier attitude towards nukes and while he'd certainly like a lot of power, he doesn't seem to fancy himself as a bombastic dictator-king. Plus if him backing off on banning gay marriage in Indiana is any indication, he's at least willing to back off on policies if they prove so unpopular that they threaten his chances at reelection or being taken seriously-- even if all of his policies are utter crap. Failing that and if Trump does make serious progress in implementing what Putin wants, he'd offer no choice for the American population but to guarantee a life of misery or to risk death in revolution to possibly overthrow the tyranny and make the country better. And given the strong precedent for democracy in the US, there's enough people who'd pick the latter to cause a war. A second American Revolution, if you will.

I really, really don't want a nuclear war, or for there to be no option left for continuing progress but full-scale revolution. If he really can't be rid of before inauguration or impeached, I hope Trump's policies are nipped in the bud before they're allowed to become bigger than any one government and person, or maybe the Earth itself, can handle. At the very least, I hope people are willing to defy him in their own ways, whether big or small. Not feeling too confident in the spineless idiots in the GOP-- though the power of somebody who pretends to support party policy to avoid repercussions but votes against it when they're given the benefit of silence, as all votes on laws as of now grant, is incredible (before you scoff, remember that a fair amount of the Republican party voted in favor of protecting gay marriage once it became clear that the general public supported it in spite of the party policy literally calling for it to be banned, and even more came out as pro-LGBT+ once protections were enacted). But the Democrats, the population, and foreign countries will hopefully fight hard enough to make up for it. Please do.

But as for right now, I think the governments of CA, MA, and any other state that wishes not to have to subject its citizens to the worst effects of the Trump administration should be in talks with China right now about protection and trade. China is emerging as a major force against Trump and Russia. Its government has expressed willingness to fire back at Trump's trade restrictions by canceling food imports and changing its shipper for those 247 Boeing airplanes it recently ordered from South Carolina to a more cooperative country (likely one in Europe). The restrictions it imposes as of now would primarily affect Republican states because, whether farmers realize it or not, their local economy depends on China ordering large food imports or else the farmers will produce too much for the US, which would both devalue their produce and skyrocket food waste to Depression-era levels. And of course, South Carolina is deep red in its own right and foreign countries like China are amongst the largest buyers for planes-- frankly, if that trend continues, I can already see the layoffs. But if Trump proves to be continually uncooperative or Putin pressures Trump into not backing off, China can and will get more aggressive with its trade restrictions unless its given reason not to-- and that will come to affect the coastal progressive oases whose economies are partially dependent on receiving exports by ship, as well as companies there that rely on China for their goods. Blue states, you need to make trade deals, work something out, to give China reason to leave you out of those trade restrictions, or at the very least lessen the blow of them. China has plenty of nukes of its own too-- give China reason to use them to protect you if it gets to that point. Or barring that, at least motivate China to care about you enough to fight for you should war start. China is far from a bastion of democracy and its government is corrupt in its own ways, but if there's one thing we're learned from all this, its that its dangerous not to be willing to compromise and set aside differences for the common good-- in this case, stopping the rise of fascism and preventing or winning war with Russia, which China would be willing to compromise and set aside differences to do if it could be proven that doing so would cause long-lasting personal and economic gain.

(You might point out that China has cooperated with Russia before, and you'd be right. However, Stalin and Mao, despite all the appearance they put on, never particularly liked each other, and were constantly undermining each other and arguing in private while trying to impose their own government and ideology on the other country. Had America, Britain, et. al. failed to stop the rise of Communism, they would have gladly turned on each other and tried to conquer or subjugate each other. Indeed they were on the brink of war on multiple occasions-- and then whatever shambles of a positive relationship was left by the time Stalin died turned to dust when Khrushchev took power. While Mao at least respected Stalin for Stalin's strength and unwillingness to compromise ideology, he saw Khrushchev as weak and pathetic for trying to compromise to repair relations with other countries, including the US, and made plenty of private demonstrations to show that. While they've steadily mellowed out towards each other since then, Russia and China's relationship never recovered from the blow it took from their leaders fighting while pretending to like each other for so long. Russia and China did a great job of keeping up a facade of being a united force of communism, but Nixon demonstrated his foreign relations brilliance by not only picking up on the fact that things really weren't as peachy between the two as they pretended, but capitalizing on this conflict by partnering with China (whose new leadership was more willing to cooperate with the US on economics, especially after important moments like Nixon traveling to China) to undermine Russia by reducing China's need to support it, in the process establishing landmark trade deals that still hold influence today and offered both countries much more than Russia ever did. He also rapidly repaired relations between China and US, which had been badly damaged with the overthrow of Chiang Kai-Shek and Mao's policies of loudly and self-righteously cutting off ties with the US.

Point is-- yes China once cooperated with Russia, but the partnership was highly volatile at worst and tense at best, only kept together for as long as it was by a common foe that no longer exists as an enemy to both and the cause of spreading Communism which isn't mainstream anymore. Generally, its not something China will be motivated to do again until Russia makes some serious measures uncharacteristic of Putin. China and the US have gotten along much better, historically speaking, and with the right moves, blue states can save themselves from a fallout with China even if the rest of the country flounders. Or any state, technically, but I have a feeling the blue states would be the only ones with governments willing to try.)

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

That whole "new King" just sounds like typical crazy talk--Trump has two terms at maximum, and not even Congress will allow him to run anymore that, if he even gets a second term.

I know things aren't exactly ideal, but do you honestly believe it's that bad that a second America Revolution would be on our hands? Because for the worlds only current superpower, that sounds a bit extreme and even more far-fetched than our expectations over Trump running for president (and that's saying something).

[Mad Convoy]

22 minutes ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

That whole "new King" just sounds like typical crazy talk--Trump has two terms at maximum, and not even Congress will allow him to run anymore that, if he even gets a second term.

I know things aren't exactly ideal, but do you honestly believe it's that bad that a second America Revolution would be on our hands? Because for the worlds only current superpower, that sounds a bit extreme and even more far-fetched than our expectations over Trump running for president (and that's saying something).

I was referring there to how the GOP is (hopefully not) viewing him, not how I view him. Its true that Trump is president and will only get two terms-- but if the GOP is viewing him as some kind of savior or king figure, that will affect how its politicians deal with him and his policies, and with them having the majority of Congress, that is extremely scary. More specifically, they won't resist when they have every power to do so and may even obstruct attempts to restrain the worst aspects of a Trump presidency because of some nonsense.

I said if Trump succeeds in going too far then that will be the only option. Not that its that bad now. We still have options besides that. We can still use less extreme ways of fighting and defying him-- I do want him to be impeached but if it doesn't come to that we can still do stuff about it. Obviously, I don't want revolution to be the next step, as there are other, more civil ways of resisting. Though I think that the possibility of Trump screwing up so badly that revolution is the only option, while still extremely unlikely, is no longer not on the table considering how cavalier he is about nukes, how persistant he is, how much he and his cabinet don't care about those besides themselves, and how its becoming increasingly obvious how close he and Putin (a known authoritarian dictator looking to expand his influence and gain new territories) are.

I wrote all that stuff at, like, midnight, so I do apologize if I wasn't clear about those things.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/12/27/1614830/-GOP-House-Rule-Would-Ban-Video-Of-Protests-As-They-Gut-Medicare-and-Social-Security-On-House-Floor

Comrade Trump and his Merry Men prepare for their ascendance as the American Fascist Party.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Man, how far are they going to go now?

[Mad Convoy]

Whatever they plan on doing, they do not want the American public finding out until its too late to do anything about it. Scary, scary...

The good news is that C-SPAN (the government streaming program) is still alive and well... for now. The only consequence for private filming is a fine, and Democrats are rich enough to pay them-- that is assuming that they even get caught considering how easily the internet enables anonymity and how high quality small cameras designed to be hidden in stuff like pens and shirts can be acquired with ease. The question is-- would the Dems be willing to do it?

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

They should if they want to take back Congress. Recording something like this is an excellent way to hurt the shady parts of the GOP.

[Mad Convoy]

1 hour ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

They should if they want to take back Congress. Recording something like this is an excellent way to hurt the shady parts of the GOP.

Indeed, and that's exactly what they've been using it for. As you might expect, the shady parts of the GOP don't like that very much and are trying to stop them. And while recording would be ideal, as we've learned here people often don't do the obviously logical and right thing because their fears and/or lust for power cloud their judgement. The DNC could well submit to the GOP.

Also, I found this twitter post that contained a very indicative quote from Drumpf.

Yep, Trump doesn't like to self-analyze because he fears it would make him hate himself or make him feel like he isn't perfect and has to make some changes. If that isn't indicative of the suppressed self-loathing and deep-seated insecurity that's very common in narcissists, I don't know what is.

[Lucid Dream]

24 minutes ago, Mad Convoy said:

Yep, Trump doesn't like to self-analyze because he fears it would make him hate himself or make him feel like he isn't perfect and has to make some changes. If that isn't indicative of the suppressed self-loathing and deep-seated insecurity that's very common in narcissists, I don't know what is.

I loathe Donald Trump very much, but this makes me pity him a bit. Honestly, I may not be a professional, but I think Trump needs help. He's far too narcissistic. I mean, listen to him " you can’t respect people because most people aren’t worthy of respect". This cannot be healthy at all.  

Following that source, I found this piece of info too.  “I don’t like talking about the past,” he said, later adding, “It’s all about the present and the future”. "All types of fights. Any kind of fight, I loved it, including physical. ..." 

They say history repeats itself. With Trump, it's not hard to figure out what part of history is likely to repeat itself. Please let him drop out after 4 years, otherwise there's going to be guarenteed war. Especcially with Trump not being the only violent unempathetic maniac on his team. Especcially when Muslims are considered the bane of all things evil. And if you think I'm overblowing this, check this out https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-voters-bomb-agrabah-disney-aladdin-donald-trump. There is no way anyone is going to kick up a massive enough fuss over this. 

This is looking really, really bleak. 

 

[SenEDDtor Missile]

I'll probably get carted off by some GOP controlled secret police in the future (or the NSA; whichever's worse) for saying this, but a dark part of me wants Trump and the American Fascist Party to succeed in every evil thing they've probably planned, just simply so America (and hopefully the rest of the world) will finally realize things can't keep on going like this and will throw their crap back in their face and disgrace America so thoroughly that it will have no choice but to realize how awful it's become. The problem is that I don't have much faith in the other nations to do so since some of them are worse in many aspects of social and political progress, and might just take America's downfall as an excuse to turn into dictatorships themselves.

[Mad Convoy]

1 hour ago, Lucid Dream said:

I loathe Donald Trump very much, but this makes me pity him a bit. Honestly, I may not be a professional, but I think Trump needs help. He's far too narcissistic. I mean, listen to him " you can’t respect people because most people aren’t worthy of respect". This cannot be healthy at all.  

He definitely does. Problem is, the only known cure for narcissism is to shatter the wall of delusions of grandeur that narcissists have surrounded their self-image with, a process that takes weeks of confrontation, questioning, etc. Plus, that solution is considered unethical if it carries too high of a risk of the patient becoming so distraught at the revelation that he or she commits suicide, develops deep depression, or otherwise turns into or continues to be a danger to himself/herself or others. Which may well happen-- it may seem obvious that the narcissist isn't nearly as good as he or she would like to believe, but the narcissist has suppressed any thoughts and fears of being anything less than perfection. I compare it to that scene from Star Wars: Return of the Jedi where Anakin Skywalker realizes the horror of what he's become as Darth Vader and freaks out-- except at least Anakin knew as much beforehand that he was Darth Vader and had given himself to evil. If he were a narcissist he wouldn't have even considered those two things.

If shattering the delusions of grandeur isn't a viable option, the advice is to first get as many people as possible away from the narcissist and make sure people know not to associate with him or her. Narcissists are quite talented at con artistry and they won't hesitate to take as much as possible from people, even and perhaps especially those they're emotionally dependent on. Also, if possible, get them out of positions of power-- narcissists tend to make bad businessmen and politicians anyway as they tend to escalate corrupt behavior quickly, but they don't like to leave once they get in and so it sometimes can't be done. Then you treat the symptoms of narcissism-- for example, if an narcissist bases his entire emotional well-being on the idea that everybody he or she meets likes him or her because he or she is always right, you might be able to teach said narcissist that showing respect and willingness to cooperate and compromise, even when he or she thinks he's right, will make people more likely to express how much they like them.

But its all very hard to do because the narcissist being treated has to cooperate. And narcissists often don't want to. After all, as far as they're concerned or want to convince themselves of, they're the best, the cream of the crop of humanity. And they feel that the best need to be recognized and sought after for their greatness, not sent to a therapist-- they may even believe that those who don't view them as highly as they do are the crazy ones who need help.

1 hour ago, Lucid Dream said:

Following that source, I found this piece of info too.  “I don’t like talking about the past,” he said, later adding, “It’s all about the present and the future”. "All types of fights. Any kind of fight, I loved it, including physical. ..." 

They say history repeats itself. With Trump, it's not hard to figure out what part of history is likely to repeat itself. Please let him drop out after 4 years, otherwise there's going to be guarenteed war. Especcially with Trump not being the only violent unempathetic maniac on his team. Especcially when Muslims are considered the bane of all things evil. And if you think I'm overblowing this, check this out https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/republican-voters-bomb-agrabah-disney-aladdin-donald-trump. There is no way anyone is going to kick up a massive enough fuss over this. 

This is looking really, really bleak. 

 

I'm hoping for no war. For one, senseless, needless death and suffering everywhere that war touches. That should be enough but unfortunately warmongers are a global phenomenon. Setting that aside, war would be very bad for the US-- wars are costly affairs, and it stands to have no economic gains and several losses from a war in the areas Trump is likely to hit, like China and Iran. Plus Trump and his cabinet of hate would be apt to advise actions that prove unpopular domestically and worldwide, damaging critical alliances.

I bet they'd have the gall to use the very war they instigated for pro-Trump propaganda, too.

1 hour ago, SenEDtor Missile said:

I'll probably get carted off by some GOP controlled secret police in the future (or the NSA; whichever's worse) for saying this, but a dark part of me wants Trump and the American Fascist Party to succeed in every evil thing they've probably planned, just simply so America (and hopefully the rest of the world) will finally realize things can't keep on going like this and will throw their crap back in their face and disgrace America so thoroughly that it will have no choice but to realize how awful it's become. The problem is that I don't have much faith in the other nations to do so since some of them are worse in many aspects of social and political progress, and might just take America's downfall as an excuse to turn into dictatorships themselves.

On one hand, Germany as a whole learned its lesson from its days with fascism. There's no country more opposed to anti-Semitism and fascism now than Germany... and no country better prepared for dealing with it as it makes waves through Europe.

But on the other hand, millions of Jews, gays, the mentally ill, and many more were forcibly removed from their homes and tortured and killed in a horrific manner. Families were ripped to shreds. Many lived in fear and saw terrible things no man should ever have to see. The German landscape looked like an apocalyptic wasteland with buildings and streets, and it had morale and an economy to match. It only stopped because Hitler committed suicide (though I do suspect that he would have been killed by somebody else if not himself). It took years, and many smaller tactical battles fought, to fully recover Germany's infrastructure and economy, and to finally succeed in implementing true democracy. It only recovered within that timeframe at all because the US was nice and smart enough to learn from the mistakes of WWI and focus on reparations rather than revenge, so that Germany would recover well enough to resist the allure of the next would-be dictator who rose up, and be grateful for the mercy granted to them instead of angry at the world for humiliating it and taking everything it had. It was also on top of dispelling any doubt in the German public that they shared responsibility for Hitler's rise and Nazi atrocities with Hitler and the Nazis by condoning and/or ignoring their hate crimes instead of fighting them-- you bet that had an impact, and Germany still hangs its head in shame even though, as I mentioned before, its amongst the best protected countries in Europe from the rise of fascism and dictators in general and has some of the toughest laws in the world prohibiting anti-semitism. And even then, the Nazis became cultural icons in their own way and you now get alt-righters using stuff like Sieg Heils and swastikas as unifying symbols. In short, if we have other options in ending fascism, we really shouldn't take the option of letting fascism burn everything to the ground first.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

3 minutes ago, Mad Convoy said:

we really shouldn't take the option of letting fascism burn everything to the ground first.

I just don't have any faith in the American Fascist Party to do anything EXCEPT burn everything to the ground first.

[Mad Convoy]

Just now, SenEDtor Missile said:

I just don't have any faith in the American Fascist Party to do anything EXCEPT burn everything to the ground first.

So you send in security to keep an eye on things and try to stop a bad situation from getting worse, and catching and punishing would-be or not so would-be arsonists along the way. When the flames go up, you get the firemen to rescue those caught in the flames, keep them from spreading too far, and put them out. Watchdogs, vigilant citizens, and pro-progress congressmen and other government officials (remember, its not just the American Fascist Party in Congress and other government positions) can fill either or both roles.

War should only be employed as the last option, when everything else has failed. Everything else has not yet failed. Prevention and rapid action are the most ideal cure.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

5 minutes ago, Mad Convoy said:

So you send in security to keep an eye on things and try to stop a bad situation from getting worse, and catching and punishing would-be or not so would-be arsonists along the way. When the flames go up, you get the firemen to rescue those caught in the flames, keep them from spreading too far, and put them out. Watchdogs, vigilant citizens, and pro-progress congressmen and other government officials (remember, its not just the American Fascist Party in Congress and other government positions) can fill either or both roles.

War should only be employed as the last option, when everything else has failed. Everything else has not yet failed. Prevention and rapid action are the most ideal cure.

I suppose. 2016 has just been an exhausting year; everytime something positive comes along, stuff like Trump and the GOP drag it 100 steps back. The fact that the elections reveal so many people supporting the ideals of the GOP also makes me realize that for the 50% of America that embraces diversity and non-prejudicial behavior, there's at least nearly that many who despise my very existence for not being a white (I'm Asian), straight (sexuality I'm not sure of), and Christian (not religious) male and would love to embark on a crusade to destroy all progress just to send America back to the imaginary perfect world they want, all the while in reality being nothing more than pawns in the grand schemes of the white corporate elite who just trash the world without a care for short term profit.