Was Will ever a Trump supporter? Somehow I thought he was smarter than that, but I haven't read an essay of his in decades.
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
This is starting to get scary.
Why are all these warhawks endorsing Harris?
Because think of how Trump is now. Now add two, three, or four more years to his obvious decline.
Even if he doesn't end democracy, they're afraid he could literally end the Republican party.
George Will can eat shit.
I’m going to keep pointing this out until it becomes a part of the narrative.
The strategy of prominent Republicans flipping to vote for Harris is specifically designed to help Republicans win Congress.
If Republican voters are demoralized by the prospect of Trump, a lot are going to just stay home and not vote at all. That would lead to a Democratic electoral sweep.
Cheney, George Will and other Republican ghouls’ best option to avoid this is to give permission to their voting base to toss their Presidential vote to Harris, but also get them into the polls so they can be reliable Republican voters down the ticket and try to keep the House and take the Senate.
FFS, quit giving the enemy oxygen.
Interesting angle. If it wasn't so close (how tf is it this close) I might agree more. But gop voters staying home, this way they vote for Harris and GOP Congress is also an interesting point. But maga Congress right now is a disaster, shutdowns and defaults are insane. So I think they want maga gone.
Not everything has to be 18D chess. Maybe they just hate Trump.
It doesn't have to be 18D chess, but it can also be a result that republicans will take advantage of.
Everyone will take whatever advantage they can from any result. Apply previous sentence to any scenario.
I will join you in this
That guy’s still a cunt.
This really isn't that surprising. The Republican party has become a cult of personality around Trump, putting it at odds with actual, ideological conservatives.
I don't know what Trump's ideology is, or if he even has one. He seems to only believe in his own ambition, for wealth, power, and control.
However, conservativism does lend itself to people like Trump rising to power, because it promotes a central authority and/or aristocracy that preserves tradition, culture, and the established social order. Conservatism doesn't just tolerate social hierarchies, like class, it promotes them, and, in fact conservatism believes that such hierarchies are not only necessary, but natural and essential. It makes sense that malignant narcissists would take advantage of such a system to try and take their "rightful place" at the top of the hierarchies, because they believe that they are inherently superior to everyone else.
This really isn’t that surprising. The Republican party has become a cult of personality around Trump, putting it at odds with actual, ideological conservatives.
Luckily for them, they still have a party.
Do you mean the Democrats? If so, yeah, the Democrats do seem willing to accept anti-Trump conservatives into their party.
The Democrats really want to be a big tent party. They'll take just about anyone within a certain ideological range, centered around the American political middle. This definitely includes many conservatives.
I question the effectiveness of this strategy, though, as when you include too many opposing ideologies in a single party, it can be difficult for the party to choose a clear path to take. It's often the case that when you try to appeal to as many different people as possible, you end up not appealing to very many people at all.
Do you mean the Democrats? If so, yeah, the Democrats do seem willing to accept anti-Trump conservatives into their party.
Willing to accept? They've been desperate to please them for decades.
The Democrats really want to be a big tent party. They’ll take just about anyone within a certain ideological range, centered around the American political middle. This definitely includes many conservatives.
And excludes progressives.
I question the effectiveness of this strategy, though, as when you include too many opposing ideologies in a single party, it can be difficult for the party to choose a clear path to take.
It would be if the default weren't "pander to the right and only the right."
Will is conservative, but also believes in America, and in Democracy. He knows that Trump is terrible for both of those things. So even though he's going to disagree with Harris on damn near every policy position that she has, he recognizes that she's the far, far better option for the country.