monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

The Republican party was the party of abolitionism that was Lincoln's party. The Lincoln-Douglas debates divided political support for Lincoln between north and south, which eventually led to southern secession, and the south never really recovered from its resentment of the Republican party, which is why the Democrats have always remained dominant in the south until recent decades when some Democrats began supporting the Republican party on the issue of smaller government.

Kaepernick never “called for”, suggested or mentioned in passing anything about wanting police not to defend themselves when someone was trying to murder them. That is a rotten lie, central to your rat’s nest of lies you keep barfing up to defend the indefensible.

One of the best things about Trump’s crashing defeat this November will be that it will become even easier to completely ignore you and your unending sick minded bullshit.

That is incorrect. When BLM goons call for the police to be convicted of murder for justified self defense, they are calling for police to be prevented from defending themselves.

I suppose you call Chauvin’s murder of Floyd “self-defense”?

No. I'd probably vote for manslaughter charges against the lead cop were I on the jury. Maybe third degree murder.

Fox News anti-protest segment backfires after business owner says cops did much of the damage
June 7, 2020

By The Conversation

A “Fox & Friends” segment highlighting the damage that looters have done to businesses during anti-police brutality protests took a strange turn when a business owner reveal much of the damage to her store had been caused by police actions.

During the segment, business owner Kelly Kandah was asked about how violent protests in Cleveland had harmed her Colossal Cupcakes store.

While Kandah said that looters did smash her store’s windows, she said the more lasting damage came from the police response to the looters.

snip

She then explained that the teargas used by police has also seeped into the business’s wall and ducts, which she described as “deeper damage than I even would have expected.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/fox-news-anti-protest-segment-backfires-after-business-owner-says-cops-did-much-of-the-damage-to-her-store/

Defund the police? Here's what that really means.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/06/07/defund-police-heres-what-that-really-means/

By Christy E. Lopez

June 7, 2020 at 3:37 p.m. PDT

Christy E. Lopez is a professor at Georgetown Law School and a co-director of the school’s Innovative Policing Program.

Excerpt:


Be not afraid. “Defunding the police” is not as scary (or even as radical) as it sounds, and engaging on this topic is necessary if we are going to achieve the kind of public safety we need. During my 25 years dedicated to police reform, including in places such as Ferguson, Mo., New Orleans and Chicago, it has become clear to me that “reform” is not enough. Making sure that police follow the rule of law is not enough. Even changing the laws is not enough.

To fix policing, we must first recognize how much we have come to over-rely on law enforcement. We turn to the police in situations where years of experience and common sense tell us that their involvement is unnecessary, and can make things worse. We ask police to take accident reports, respond to people who have overdosed and arrest, rather than cite, people who might have intentionally or not passed a counterfeit $20 bill. We call police to roust homeless people from corners and doorsteps, resolve verbal squabbles between family members and strangers alike, and arrest children for behavior that once would have been handled as a school disciplinary issue.

Police themselves often complain about having to “do too much,” including handling social problems for which they are ill-equipped. Some have been vocal about the need to decriminalize social problems and take police out of the equation. It is clear that we must reimagine the role they play in public safety.

Defunding and abolition probably mean something different from what you are thinking. For most proponents, “defunding the police” does not mean zeroing out budgets for public safety, and police abolition does not mean that police will disappear overnight — or perhaps ever. Defunding the police means shrinking the scope of police responsibilities and shifting most of what government does to keep us safe to entities that are better equipped to meet that need. It means investing more in mental-health care and housing, and expanding the use of community mediation and violence interruption programs.

Police abolition means reducing, with the vision of eventually eliminating, our reliance on policing to secure our public safety. It means recognizing that criminalizing addiction and poverty, making 10 million arrests per year and mass incarceration have not provided the public safety we want and never will. The “abolition” language is important because it reminds us that policing has been the primary vehicle for using violence to perpetuate the unjustified white control over the bodies and lives of black people that has been with us since slavery. That aspect of policing must be literally abolished.

The Four Kinds of Trump Supporters

MatthewG

https://democraticunderground.com/100213562523

Like many, I’ve spent a fair amount of time wondering why sizable numbers of Americans support the Presidency of a man as transparently unsuited to high office as Donald Trump.

I’ve tried really listening to Trump supporters on this. With VERY few exceptions, just about every one I’ve spoken with fits one of four categories:

1) Affluent cynics who care about nothing except getting their taxes cut. These are often well-educated people who’s entire politics are “I vote my wallet, first, second, and last.”

2) White identity types. “Why is it racist to ask for an NAAWP? Why is it racist for me to want a White History month? Why is it racist for me to love my White ancestry? Why do people hate me when i point out that Adolf Hitler made some valid arguments? Mean liberals are always calling me racist! Waaaaaah!!”

3) Religious fundamentalists : These are the people who claim to represent traditional godly morality, except when Trump pays porn stars for sex.

4) Stupid people : I mean really stupid people. Not necessarily low IQ, per se - although there’s probably a correlation with that - but willfully stupid people who believe that Bill Gates invented Coronavirus in a lab, protests against police brutality are a “Masonic psyop” and that Trump is our only hope against the Bankers/Illuminati/Secret Fluoridation Conspiracy.

That mostly covers it, as far as I can tell. If anyone here can identify other broad categories of Trump supporters, I’m interested in their thoughts.

You forgot gun rights advocates: People who are similar to group #1 except it's civil liberties that matter to them, not their wallets.

For each of these categories you identify and describe, there is a corresponding category of Never-Trumps that is motivated to dissociate from Trump precisely because their deepest fear is that people will see them as the type of people you mention here.

In other words, Democrats have these bad inner children that they are trying to vote against by projecting them onto Trump-supporters and the Republican party generally.

Identity politics are a form of authoritarianism that scares people into voting a certain way or doing other things to avoid ridicule that they have internalized at some point or other.

So maybe when they were young, they learned that there was an NAACP and they thought it was cool, but they knew they were white and not black, so they had an innocent thought about having an NAAWP. Then, later, people like you ridicule the idea as something only terrible white racists would think, and then the person becomes scared that having a thought about NAAWP makes them a racist so they better hide it by voting Democrat, because they hope that as long as they virtue-signal to other Democrats by voting/supporting the Democrats, no one will suspect them of being the little kid who liked the NAACP idea so much when they were little that they thought an NAAWP would be good too.

And before you start preaching to me about the standard logic of how white privilege makes the NAACP a good thing and how an NAAWP would just be a reinforcement of white privilege against people of color. I understand that, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about how Democrats like you are using white people's fear of looking like stupid ignorant racists to goad/ridicule them into unquestioning support of your party against your scapegoat party/president.

It's not that you shouldn't explain race and racism to people, but what you shouldn't do is manipulate them into supporting/voting Democrat as a way of buying/virtue-signaling exemption from ridicule of racism and racial privilege. What you are doing that point is selling indulgences instead of just teaching about sin so people can become aware of it and thus confess/repent to God.

There's some overlap between 4 and the other categories.

Latest CNN poll. Biden 55- Trump 41. That's well outside the margin of error. People REALLY don't like his mishandling of the pandemic, and his perceived racist bias in the midst of peaceful constitutional unending protests in over 650 communities all across the country.

I'd say that's the best thing you and any other sane minded person can do in this case (ignore their complete and utter bullshit) - they are clearly too much of a very twisted and racist fool to understand any logic.

And that's the problem with people like them; they'll just keep spewing the same twisted bullshit over, and over again, no matter what logic you try and tell them. Unfortunately in this case, their mind is just too sick and twisted to be capable of understanding any logic...

It's pretty silly for you to pretend that you offer logic when the only thing that you are capable of offering is childish name-calling.

You cannot point out a single thing in my posts that is untrue.

Projection.

Still works for me.

They get us to disrupt our own conversations with their "so's yer old man" comments.

The disruption starts with your name-calling. All we're doing is defending ourselves.

They will not happy until everyone is as miserable and hateful as they are. For some here it borders on sociopathy.

That's progressivism in a nutshell.

If anyone wants to see what the nation would look like if progressives got their way, all they need to do is look at Venezuela.