[OT] What is happening in/to the US ?

[Simon Clubley]

And I really don't see any reason to expect riots in Boston that week or
two weeks later.

Recent history on both sides of the political spectrum in the US does not
exactly fill me with confidence in this area.

I really, really, wish I had been wrong about that. :-( :-( :-(

Given that Massachusetts (and Boston, specifically) are solidly in the Biden camp,
I suspect there won't be a lot of ads airing near the election.
Both sides will be spending their advertising money in the six states where the election
is actually up for grabs.

I can only imagine what that US would look like right now if the shooter
had not missed. :-(

You have the US mainstream media not informing the population about
Mr Biden's decline and acting more like the political wing of the
Democratic party.

You have the media saying the shooter was registered as Republican (which
I understand doesn't really mean much when tactical voting is involved)
while not mentioning that he apparently contributed to far-left causes,
so it is _very_ unclear what his politics really are.

You have a part of the population which is becoming more extreme on the
right, egged on by certain narrow-minded interests.

And while the right-wing is correctly called out for certain things, you
have an underlying current of hate flowing through the so-called "nice"
Democrats:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-assassination-bennie-thompson-aide-b2579916.html

Her employer also wanted to cut off all Secret Service protection for
Mr Trump. Charming. :-(

Mind you, you now have a Secret Service which appears to have gone from
being highly disciplined and effective to being absolutely bloody useless.

What on earth is happening to the US ?

The above is spoken by someone who is an old-school liberal BTW (although
my old-school values seem to be seriously out of fashion these days...)
and is disturbed by what very nearly just happened.

Simon.

[bill]

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the media saying the shooter was registered as Republican (which
I understand doesn't really mean much when tactical voting is involved)
while not mentioning that he apparently contributed to far-left causes,
so it is _very_ unclear what his politics really are.

They did mention that he donated Democratic. But being a typical
brainwashed teenager he doesn't work for a living so he has very
little to donate, Lives off mom and dad.

As for being registered Republican. A lot (and I mean a really big
lot) of Democrats registered Republican so they could try and sway
the primary away from Trump. They didn't need to worry about the
Democratic Primary as it was a typical communist election with only
one candidate.

One of the next big questions is going to be what happens to daddy.
Did he give the kid the gun to use or does he not keep his firearms
secured? Heck, I have trigger locks on all my .177 cal pellet target
guns.


bill

[Single Stage to Orbit]

They didn't need to worry about the Democratic Primary as it was a
typical communist election with only one candidate.

COMMUNIST?!?!?!

OMG.

THey are what we'd call them over here in the UK, socialists. They are
definitely not communists.

And the quality of life under socialism is far, far greater than with
pure capitialism because they tax people more fairly and use that to
provide services such as the NHS amoongst other important things.

We pay nothing for our healthcare because part of our taxes in the UK
are used for funding it.

Billionaires are not taxed fairly compared with the rest of the
population. Even slicing off just 10% off all the billionaires would
pay for free healthcare for everyone.

These billioniare fascist bastards are souring the american dream for
everyone.

I warn you, Trump will not be good for the planet. Nor the people. They
will get richer and the rest will get poorer.

[John Dallman]

Post by bill
They did mention that he donated Democratic.

This has now been debunked: someone else of the same name, living in the
same county, was the donor. The investigation is apparently puzzled about
the shooter's motive.

John

[Single Stage to Orbit]

Post by John Dallman
This has now been debunked: someone else of the same name, living in
the same county, was the donor. The investigation is apparently
puzzled about the shooter's motive.

The ony explanation and most likely is that he sacrificed himself to
boost votes for Trump in November.

Biden will have to do something extraordinary next to knock Trump off
the table.

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Single Stage to Orbit
The ony explanation and most likely is that he sacrificed himself to
boost votes for Trump in November.

I doubt it, but maybe. There are still some traditional pro-business
conservatives out there who have not yet consumed the Trump kool-aid.
They are increasingly being forced out and I would not be surprised if
some reached that level of frustration.

Post by Single Stage to Orbit
Biden will have to do something extraordinary next to knock Trump off
the table.

Sadly that is pretty much true.
--scott

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by Single Stage to Orbit
Biden will have to do something extraordinary next to knock Trump off
the table.

He may be forced to finally quit. I notice another senior Democrat has
now come out in favour of this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9473edpeeo

I also notice some, using Ohio as an excuse, are trying to force through
his nomination to avoid the possibility of an open convention.

Post by Scott Dorsey
Sadly that is pretty much true.
--scott

Mr Trump's sentencing is now due in September. Assuming it doesn't get
delayed again, what are the chances it might result in a prison sentence ?

Simon.

[John Dallman]

Post by Single Stage to Orbit

Post by John Dallman
This has now been debunked: someone else of the same name, living
in the same county, was the donor. The investigation is apparently
puzzled about the shooter's motive.

The ony explanation and most likely is that he sacrificed himself to
boost votes for Trump in November.

Trying to hit a person giving a speech, and thus moving a bit, in the ear
without doing significant harm is the act of a fool with a greatly
exaggerated idea of his own marksmanship. He was much more likely to kill
the target than get the result that eventuated.

I'm really not convinced by the self-sacrifice idea.

John

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by John Dallman
Trying to hit a person giving a speech, and thus moving a bit, in the ear
without doing significant harm is the act of a fool with a greatly
exaggerated idea of his own marksmanship. He was much more likely to kill
the target than get the result that eventuated.
I'm really not convinced by the self-sacrifice idea.

America is filled with people who have guns and who know that they are safe
because they have a gun. The NRA told them so. They can't possibly be safe
without a gun, but with a gun they are completely safe. And so they don't
need to actually practice at the range or do any weapons or situational
training, because just having the gun there keeps them safe.

These people are all convinced that they could hit anything and that they
will always behave rationally in a tense situation because they have never
seen this stuff on television.

So, I am not surprised that someone would attempt a crazy shot like this
with a crappy weapon like that. I haven't heard if he was using the stock
sights on the thing or if he'd got something intended for proper sniping.
--scott

[Simon Clubley]

Post by John Dallman

Post by Single Stage to Orbit

Post by John Dallman
This has now been debunked: someone else of the same name, living
in the same county, was the donor. The investigation is apparently
puzzled about the shooter's motive.

The ony explanation and most likely is that he sacrificed himself to
boost votes for Trump in November.

Trying to hit a person giving a speech, and thus moving a bit, in the ear
without doing significant harm is the act of a fool with a greatly
exaggerated idea of his own marksmanship. He was much more likely to kill
the target than get the result that eventuated.
I'm really not convinced by the self-sacrifice idea.

I guess Alex was been a bit too subtle. :-)

As a Brit, I interpreted his statement as not exactly been serious. :-)

On a more serious note, remember that if Mr Trump had not turned his
head at the exact moment he did, he would now be dead (and the US would
now be in the middle of a civil war).

Simon.

[Dan Cross]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by John Dallman

Post by Single Stage to Orbit

Post by John Dallman
This has now been debunked: someone else of the same name, living
in the same county, was the donor. The investigation is apparently
puzzled about the shooter's motive.

The ony explanation and most likely is that he sacrificed himself to
boost votes for Trump in November.

Trying to hit a person giving a speech, and thus moving a bit, in the ear
without doing significant harm is the act of a fool with a greatly
exaggerated idea of his own marksmanship. He was much more likely to kill
the target than get the result that eventuated.
I'm really not convinced by the self-sacrifice idea.

I guess Alex was been a bit too subtle. :-)
As a Brit, I interpreted his statement as not exactly been serious. :-)
On a more serious note, remember that if Mr Trump had not turned his
head at the exact moment he did, he would now be dead (and the US would
now be in the middle of a civil war).

While the former may well be true, the latter almost certainly
is not. _If_ Trump's would-be assassin had been successful, the
country would have been plunged into widespread political
turmoil, for sure, but I found it doubtful that it would have
been sufficient catalyst to kick off a full-on civil war.

As a former US Marine, and 4 time Expert Rifleman, I can tell
you that headshots are very hard to make. That's why in the
military you are trained to fire at center-of-mass. Had the
shooter done so, it's far more likely that Trump would have been
killed or seriously wounded.

As an American who despises Trump and all he stands for, but who
also abhores political violence, it's hard to see how the
attempt did anything other than benefit the former president's
election bid. Had it been successful, it would have just turned
Trump into a martyr and mythologized his ideology. As it
failed, it just seems to have generated sympathy for him.

- Dan C.

[Robert A. Brooks]

Post by Dan Cross
As an American who despises Trump and all he stands for, but who
also abhores political violence, it's hard to see how the
attempt did anything other than benefit the former president's
election bid. Had it been successful, it would have just turned
Trump into a martyr and mythologized his ideology. As it
failed, it just seems to have generated sympathy for him.

+1

[Single Stage to Orbit]

  

Post by Dan Cross
As an American who despises Trump and all he stands for, but who
also abhores political violence, it's hard to see how the
attempt did anything other than benefit the former president's
election bid.  Had it been successful, it would have just turned
Trump into a martyr and mythologized his ideology.  As it
failed, it just seems to have generated sympathy for him.

 
+1

I read the other day that the predicted "bump" in sympathy hasn't
happened.

[Bob Eager]

As an American who despises Trump and all he stands for, but who also
abhores political violence, it's hard to see how the attempt did
anything other than benefit the former president's election bid. Had
it been successful, it would have just turned Trump into a martyr and
mythologized his ideology. As it failed, it just seems to have
generated sympathy for him.

+1

Now, if it had been a lightning bolt...

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Dan Cross
As an American who despises Trump and all he stands for, but who
also abhores political violence, [...]

Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

IMO, those people are somewhat culpable for creating an environment
where violence is deemed OK by nutjobs because it makes them feel like
they are the "heroes", although ultimately responsibility for any violence
comes back to the perpretrators.

I'm also assuming that you condemned tha attempted assassination of
Republican Congressman by a deranged leftist at their baseball practice
a few years ago.

[Dan Cross]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Dan Cross
As an American who despises Trump and all he stands for, but who
also abhores political violence, [...]

Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.
IMO, those people are somewhat culpable for creating an environment
where violence is deemed OK by nutjobs because it makes them feel like
they are the "heroes", although ultimately responsibility for any violence
comes back to the perpretrators.
I'm also assuming that you condemned tha attempted assassination of
Republican Congressman by a deranged leftist at their baseball practice
a few years ago.

Yes.

The rest of your rant is not worth replying to.

- Dan C.

[Single Stage to Orbit]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
IMO, those people are somewhat culpable for creating an environment
where violence is deemed OK by nutjobs because it makes them feel
like they are the "heroes", although ultimately responsibility for
any violence comes back to the perpretrators.

You Repugnants started this with threats of violence against
minorities.

I am very very glad I live in a country where guns are heavily
restricted.

*plonk* Welcome to my /dev/null

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Single Stage to Orbit
You Repugnants started this with threats of violence against
minorities.

Nice ad-hominem attack. Oh, how I miss the old usenet!

Since you don't live in the US, I'm not going to take your opinions
that seriously, just like you shouldn't take my opinions about living
the EU that seriously.

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

Therefore many Americans react badly to a politician who promotes
authoritarian ideals. Just making jokes about how you'd love to be
President for Life or talking about tyrannical dictators as being
your good friends is offputting to many Americans.

The American government is supposed to be a government of laws and not
of people. People who do not believe that laws should apply uniformly
to everyone or who believe that one person should get a pass because
that person will fix everything remind us of dictators, and we do not
like dictators.

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
IMO, those people are somewhat culpable for creating an environment
where violence is deemed OK by nutjobs because it makes them feel like
they are the "heroes", although ultimately responsibility for any violence
comes back to the perpretrators.

How so? It strikes me that if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a
duck, it is probably a duck. That doesn't mean violence is acceptable.

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
I'm also assuming that you condemned tha attempted assassination of
Republican Congressman by a deranged leftist at their baseball practice
a few years ago.

I certainly did, although of course I am a conservative. And as a
conservative, I am looking forward someday to a time when I can vote
Republican again.
--scott

[Single Stage to Orbit]

Post by Scott Dorsey
You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments.  We did actually start the country in reaction to a
British king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

It was your rich folks that wanted to get rid of the British so they
could keep all their profits to themselves.

Today you've got your billionaires doing the same thing with the
Repungnants. Restrictions on abortion, birth control, racism and anther
forms of overt fascism, and misuse of social media to control hearts
and minds.

[Gary R. Schmidt]

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

[SNIP]

It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along. ;-)

It's not like they don't have much the same power...

#dontmissnexttime

Cheers,
Gary B-)

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Gary R. Schmidt

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

[SNIP]
It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along. ;-)
It's not like they don't have much the same power...

And you now have a choice between someone who has openly declared he
is going to tear down the system and rule for the benefit of his friends,
or someone who makes Bernie Sanders look right-wing (and I didn't think
_that_ was even possible. :-))

I also strongly disapprove of Mr Trump's choice of VP. That guy sounds
utterly clueless about the rest of the world and the realities of the
real world. He sounds like he would utterly burn the rest of the world
for his own benefit if he could get away with it.

OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Simon.

[Craig A. Berry]

Post by Simon Clubley
And you now have a choice between someone who has openly declared he
is going to tear down the system and rule for the benefit of his friends,
or someone who makes Bernie Sanders look right-wing (and I didn't think
_that_ was even possible. :-))

Sanders is pretty middle-of-the-road by the way things are done on your
side of the pond and Harris is well to the right of him.

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?

Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

[Dave Froble]

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
And you now have a choice between someone who has openly declared he
is going to tear down the system and rule for the benefit of his friends,
or someone who makes Bernie Sanders look right-wing (and I didn't think
_that_ was even possible. :-))

Sanders is pretty middle-of-the-road by the way things are done on your
side of the pond and Harris is well to the right of him.

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

Why is it that one cannot say anything about some female without getting that
silly word flung at them?

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

Why is it that one cannot say anything about some female without getting
that silly word flung at them?

He didn't "say anything." He specifically belittled her for how she
expresses emotion in public, which is about as classic as misogyny gets.
If you don't get that, educate yourself. Here might be a good place to

And that reply is a perfect example of what I meant in my followup.

You have taken a legitimate comment about the personality of a person
wanting to do what is one of the most important jobs in your country
and rewritten it to state that any such criticism is an attack on all
women for being women, instead of discussing the criticism itself.

This seems to be quite common in your country at the moment, although
at least it's not as bad as the Google employees who released an AI image
generator that refused to draw white men and were so out of touch with
reality they simply couldn't see why anyone would have a problem with that.

I hope the rest of your country does not end up as bad as that.

https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/07/kamala-harris-laugh-trump-sexism/679215/

That's an interesting piece of gaslighting by them...

As already mentioned, one of the problems with Mr Biden leaving it as
late as he did is that Ms Harris has not been tested in your country's
primary election process. It also means that there are candidates
(both male and female) who were unable to have their chance to be tested.

That is not a good thing for your country and I really wish your country
had a viable alternative to Mr Trump.

Simon.

[Dave Froble]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

Why is it that one cannot say anything about some female without getting
that silly word flung at them?

He didn't "say anything." He specifically belittled her for how she
expresses emotion in public, which is about as classic as misogyny gets.
If you don't get that, educate yourself. Here might be a good place to

And that reply is a perfect example of what I meant in my followup.
You have taken a legitimate comment about the personality of a person
wanting to do what is one of the most important jobs in your country
and rewritten it to state that any such criticism is an attack on all
women for being women, instead of discussing the criticism itself.
This seems to be quite common in your country at the moment, although
at least it's not as bad as the Google employees who released an AI image
generator that refused to draw white men and were so out of touch with
reality they simply couldn't see why anyone would have a problem with that.
I hope the rest of your country does not end up as bad as that.

https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/07/kamala-harris-laugh-trump-sexism/679215/

That's an interesting piece of gaslighting by them...
As already mentioned, one of the problems with Mr Biden leaving it as
late as he did is that Ms Harris has not been tested in your country's
primary election process. It also means that there are candidates
(both male and female) who were unable to have their chance to be tested.
That is not a good thing for your country and I really wish your country
had a viable alternative to Mr Trump.

Well, we didn't 4 years ago, but enough were astute enough to vote against
Trump. I just really hope the voters do so again.

But the damn Democrats sure aren't doing anything helpful ...

[Single Stage to Orbit]

Post by Dave Froble
But the damn Democrats sure aren't doing anything helpful ...

They have done:
Affordable Care Act (which Repugnants hate because they don't profit
from it)
Job creation (6m new jobs)
Net Zero investment at a record high
More new judges
Violence against Women etc

There's more.

And next term, there'll be federal laws enshrining women's rights over
their bodies.

OK that's quite enough of politics.

[Dave Froble]

Post by Single Stage to Orbit

Post by Dave Froble
But the damn Democrats sure aren't doing anything helpful ...

Affordable Care Act (which Repugnants hate because they don't profit
from it)

Horrible!!!

What is needed is universal health care, without the medical insurance companies
telling doctors how to practice medicine.

[Chris Townley]

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Single Stage to Orbit

Post by Dave Froble
But the damn Democrats sure aren't doing anything helpful ...

Affordable Care Act (which Repugnants hate because they don't profit
from it)

Horrible!!!
What is needed is universal health care, without the medical insurance
companies telling doctors how to practice medicine.

Funnily enough, that is what we have in the UK

[Dan Cross]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

Why is it that one cannot say anything about some female without getting
that silly word flung at them?

He didn't "say anything." He specifically belittled her for how she
expresses emotion in public, which is about as classic as misogyny gets.
If you don't get that, educate yourself. Here might be a good place to

And that reply is a perfect example of what I meant in my followup.
You have taken a legitimate comment about the personality of a person
wanting to do what is one of the most important jobs in your country
and rewritten it to state that any such criticism is an attack on all
women for being women, instead of discussing the criticism itself.

Perhaps if you hadn't phrased it in terms of her acting, "like a
giggling teenage schoolgirl" others wouldn't have found it an
expression of misogyny. After all, you were the one who phrased
it in terms of her being a woman.

- Dan C.

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Dan Cross
Perhaps if you hadn't phrased it in terms of her acting, "like a
giggling teenage schoolgirl" others wouldn't have found it an
expression of misogyny. After all, you were the one who phrased
it in terms of her being a woman.

No, I phrased in terms of her personality. I later said I would apply
the exact same language to a man if he behaved in the same way.

What I want to see in a leader is someone who has the gravitas and
mindset/strength to deal with a critical world crisis such as a Taiwan
invasion, a pandemic with a higher death rate than the last one, or
another financial collapse. I also want to see them being able to
prepare for this in advance.

Ms Harris does not have the skills or character needed for this and
Mr Trump would sell us out in the long-term to our enemies in return
for short-term gain.

No thanks to either of them.

Simon.

[Craig A. Berry]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Dan Cross
Perhaps if you hadn't phrased it in terms of her acting, "like a
giggling teenage schoolgirl" others wouldn't have found it an
expression of misogyny. After all, you were the one who phrased
it in terms of her being a woman.

No, I phrased in terms of her personality. I later said I would apply
the exact same language to a man if he behaved in the same way.

That really strains credibility.

Post by Simon Clubley
What I want to see in a leader is someone who has the gravitas and
mindset/strength to deal with a critical world crisis such as a Taiwan
invasion, a pandemic with a higher death rate than the last one, or
another financial collapse. I also want to see them being able to
prepare for this in advance.
Ms Harris does not have the skills or character needed for this ...

Like pretty much any candidate, she has a number of strengths and a
number of weaknesses. You have yet to mention a single one of either
and have provided no basis for any of your claims.

You made the dubious claim that she is to the left of Bernie Sanders,
which is not only false but also not really possible in U.S. politics.
Then you simply repeated the smear about her laughter that is not new
but has been revived and circulated again lately by the Trump campaign
and some of his supporters in the right-wing media. I would consider
her laugh about as relevant as Trump's orange hair, but since you
brought it up, a lot of people actually like Harris's laugh; they feel
it lends warmth, approachability, and humanity to someone with a
reputation as a cold, ruthless prosecutor. And it is not a girlish
giggle but more of a throaty cackle, so you're wrong on the facts, too.

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Dan Cross
Perhaps if you hadn't phrased it in terms of her acting, "like a
giggling teenage schoolgirl" others wouldn't have found it an
expression of misogyny. After all, you were the one who phrased
it in terms of her being a woman.

No, I phrased in terms of her personality. I later said I would apply
the exact same language to a man if he behaved in the same way.

That really strains credibility.

Not from where I come from. BTW, I was born and raised in a small
Yorkshire town.

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
What I want to see in a leader is someone who has the gravitas and
mindset/strength to deal with a critical world crisis such as a Taiwan
invasion, a pandemic with a higher death rate than the last one, or
another financial collapse. I also want to see them being able to
prepare for this in advance.
Ms Harris does not have the skills or character needed for this ...

Like pretty much any candidate, she has a number of strengths and a
number of weaknesses. You have yet to mention a single one of either
and have provided no basis for any of your claims.
You made the dubious claim that she is to the left of Bernie Sanders,
which is not only false but also not really possible in U.S. politics.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4793371-kamala-harris-sanders-biden-liberal/

You can ignore the blatant infantile language in the following obviously
right-wing article (which I also did) and focus on the facts it raises:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/jul/28/kamala-harris-had-more-leftist-voting-record-in-se/

(I like to read articles from all sides of the political spectrum, not
just the side I agree with. Sometimes you find out things that the side
which you normally agree with "forgets" to mention.)

Post by Craig A. Berry
Then you simply repeated the smear about her laughter that is not new
but has been revived and circulated again lately by the Trump campaign
and some of his supporters in the right-wing media. I would consider
her laugh about as relevant as Trump's orange hair, but since you
brought it up, a lot of people actually like Harris's laugh; they feel
it lends warmth, approachability, and humanity to someone with a
reputation as a cold, ruthless prosecutor. And it is not a girlish
giggle but more of a throaty cackle, so you're wrong on the facts, too.

It's about the lack of a serious trustworthy personality. The laugh
is about her bursting into nervous giggles at the most inappropriate
of times instead of giving a serious and well thought-out response.

I like my politicans to be serious people who have the gravitas to
run a country.

BTW, just in case it is not obvious by now, I am _not_ a fan of Mr Trump.

Simon.

[Chris Townley]

On 30/07/2024 13:39, Simon Clubley wrote:

<snip>

Post by Simon Clubley
Not from where I come from. BTW, I was born and raised in a small
Yorkshire town.

That explains a lot ;)

[John H. Reinhardt]

Post by Chris Townley
<snip>

Post by Simon Clubley
Not from where I come from. BTW, I was born and raised in a small
Yorkshire town.

That explains a lot ;)

That's funny. I was raised (though not born there, it doesn't have a hospital) in a small town called Yorkshire (NY).

[Chris Townley]

Post by Chris Townley
<snip>

Post by Simon Clubley
Not from where I come from. BTW, I was born and raised in a small
Yorkshire town.

That explains a lot ;)

That's funny.  I was raised (though not born there, it doesn't have a
hospital) in a small town called Yorkshire (NY).

Ah...
But our Yorkshire be somehow different!

[John H. Reinhardt]

Post by Chris Townley

Post by Chris Townley
<snip>

Post by Simon Clubley
Not from where I come from. BTW, I was born and raised in a small
Yorkshire town.

That explains a lot ;)

That's funny.  I was raised (though not born there, it doesn't have a hospital) in a small town called Yorkshire (NY).

Ah...
But our Yorkshire be somehow different!

No doubt! lol I'm sure mine is "Yorkshire" in name only! ;)

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Chris Townley
<snip>

Post by Simon Clubley
Not from where I come from. BTW, I was born and raised in a small
Yorkshire town.

That explains a lot ;)

:-)

Yes, it probably does. :-)

Simon.

[Dan Cross]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Dan Cross
Perhaps if you hadn't phrased it in terms of her acting, "like a
giggling teenage schoolgirl" others wouldn't have found it an
expression of misogyny. After all, you were the one who phrased
it in terms of her being a woman.

No, I phrased in terms of her personality. I later said I would apply
the exact same language to a man if he behaved in the same way.

That really strains credibility.

Not from where I come from. BTW, I was born and raised in a small
Yorkshire town.

Sorry, it's just factually true that you brought up the
"giggling teenage schoolgirl" trope. Perhaps you didn't intend
that as a misogynist remark; I'll grant you the benefit of the
doubt there. But if you really can't see how it would be
interpreted that way, particularly given the volume of clearly
sexist attacks the American right wing is lobbing against her,
and as you continue to double down on it, then yes...it does
strain credibility.

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
What I want to see in a leader is someone who has the gravitas and
mindset/strength to deal with a critical world crisis such as a Taiwan
invasion, a pandemic with a higher death rate than the last one, or
another financial collapse. I also want to see them being able to
prepare for this in advance.
Ms Harris does not have the skills or character needed for this ...

Like pretty much any candidate, she has a number of strengths and a
number of weaknesses. You have yet to mention a single one of either
and have provided no basis for any of your claims.
You made the dubious claim that she is to the left of Bernie Sanders,
which is not only false but also not really possible in U.S. politics.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4793371-kamala-harris-sanders-biden-liberal/
You can ignore the blatant infantile language in the following obviously
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/jul/28/kamala-harris-had-more-leftist-voting-record-in-se/
(I like to read articles from all sides of the political spectrum, not
just the side I agree with. Sometimes you find out things that the side
which you normally agree with "forgets" to mention.)

I'm not going to get into this right now for lack of time.

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Craig A. Berry
Then you simply repeated the smear about her laughter that is not new
but has been revived and circulated again lately by the Trump campaign
and some of his supporters in the right-wing media. I would consider
her laugh about as relevant as Trump's orange hair, but since you
brought it up, a lot of people actually like Harris's laugh; they feel
it lends warmth, approachability, and humanity to someone with a
reputation as a cold, ruthless prosecutor. And it is not a girlish
giggle but more of a throaty cackle, so you're wrong on the facts, too.

It's about the lack of a serious trustworthy personality. The laugh
is about her bursting into nervous giggles at the most inappropriate
of times instead of giving a serious and well thought-out response.

Really? She was a prosecutor for most of her career, and was
elected to be the attorney general of the state of California,
the most populous state in the United States, with a population
slightly larger than that of Canada. That's not done by a
person who is given to characteristically "busting into nervous
giggles at the most inappropriate of times".

There's plenty of evidence of this. When serving as a US
Senator, she has visibily frightened members of the previous
administration; look for clips of her grilling Bill Barr before
the Senate, for example, as he stumbles over his words. Perhaps
that happens because they know not to fuck with her.

Gravitas, indeed.

Post by Simon Clubley
I like my politicans to be serious people who have the gravitas to
run a country.

Indeed. Shall we go into the personalities of those in charge
of your own country for the last however-many years? Despite
all of the gravitas of their Posh public school upbringing and
Ox-bridge education, they seem to have run the UK into the
ground. Perhaps the man on the bicycle can repair things a bit,
even though he appears to have the personality of dry white
toast.

Post by Simon Clubley
BTW, just in case it is not obvious by now, I am _not_ a fan of Mr Trump.
Simon.
--
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

[Dave Froble]

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

Why is it that one cannot say anything about some female without getting that
silly word flung at them?

He didn't "say anything." He specifically belittled her for how she
expresses emotion in public, which is about as classic as misogyny gets.
If you don't get that, educate yourself. Here might be a good place to

What about how I express emotion in public?

[Craig A. Berry]

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

Why is it that one cannot say anything about some female without getting
that silly word flung at them?

He didn't "say anything." He specifically belittled her for how she
expresses emotion in public, which is about as classic as misogyny gets.
If you don't get that, educate yourself. Here might be a good place to
start:

https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/07/kamala-harris-laugh-trump-sexism/679215/

[Dave Froble]

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?

You are damn bloody right I would (provided it reflected the rest of their
personality) and I would probably use the exact same language.
And it's not about the giggling laugh which she uses at the most
inappropriate of times, it's about the whole persona of which this
is one part.
There is a certain gravitas expected in someone when they want to become
the leader of a major country and Ms Harris is totally lacking in this.

I was not a fan of Ms Harris 4 years ago ...
I have not been a fan of hers for the last 4 years ...
I am not a fan of her now ...

But damn it Simon, what's wrong with just being human? We'd be better off if
more people were.

Your specific complaint just isn't "right", but, you are entitled to your opinion.

There are certain Republican female leaders in your country who appear
they would do a better job than Ms Harris, but due to Mr Biden refusing
to stand down when he should have done (ie: _before_ the primary elections)
they have not been given the opportunity to show the US people what they
are capable of.
Your country desperately needs a viable alternative to Mr Trump, but
Ms Harris is not it.

+1

Post by Craig A. Berry
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

That comment is deeply offensive and way OTT, but accurately reflects
the current trend in your country to make outrageous allegations about
someone to avoid having to deal with the legitimate issues they raise.

It seems to be a common thing these days. Don't agree with someone, just accuse
them of something that some might consider bad. Don't bother with logic and
reason. Take the shortcut. Call people names. Ought to say something about
those using such a tactic.

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Craig A. Berry

Post by Simon Clubley
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)

Would you describe a male politician whose laugh you didn't like as
"like a giggling teenage schoolgirl"?

You are damn bloody right I would (provided it reflected the rest of their
personality) and I would probably use the exact same language.

And it's not about the giggling laugh which she uses at the most
inappropriate of times, it's about the whole persona of which this
is one part.

There is a certain gravitas expected in someone when they want to become
the leader of a major country and Ms Harris is totally lacking in this.

There are certain Republican female leaders in your country who appear
they would do a better job than Ms Harris, but due to Mr Biden refusing
to stand down when he should have done (ie: _before_ the primary elections)
they have not been given the opportunity to show the US people what they
are capable of.

Your country desperately needs a viable alternative to Mr Trump, but
Ms Harris is not it.

Post by Craig A. Berry
Please take your ignorance and misogyny elsewhere.

That comment is deeply offensive and way OTT, but accurately reflects
the current trend in your country to make outrageous allegations about
someone to avoid having to deal with the legitimate issues they raise.

Simon.

[Dave Froble]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Gary R. Schmidt

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

[SNIP]
It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along. ;-)
It's not like they don't have much the same power...

And you now have a choice between someone who has openly declared he
is going to tear down the system and rule for the benefit of his friends,
or someone who makes Bernie Sanders look right-wing (and I didn't think
_that_ was even possible. :-))
I also strongly disapprove of Mr Trump's choice of VP. That guy sounds
utterly clueless about the rest of the world and the realities of the
real world. He sounds like he would utterly burn the rest of the world
for his own benefit if he could get away with it.
OTOH, Ms Harris needs to learn gravitas and to stop behaving like a giggling
teenage schoolgirl if she wants to be elected (and to be taken seriously
by the rest of the world.)
Simon.

And once again, the USA is incapable of coming up with anything better, even
with over 300M people to choose from. It's all about matter1 no matter which
side you're looking at.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front
of "King" and toodleloo along. ;-)

The US Founding Fathers spent a lot of time worrying about “kings”, but
they never thought about “dictators” ...

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Gary R. Schmidt

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along. ;-)

Some folks wanted to do that. Jefferson was totally against it.

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
It's not like they don't have much the same power...

They don't at all, as Mr. Trump discovered to his amazement. It's true
that since the constitution was written, a lot of rights were delegated
to the president by Congress (such as the ability to make war) and across
the board that has been a bad thing. It's not too late to undo some of
them.
--scott

[Chris Townley]

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by Gary R. Schmidt

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along. ;-)

Some folks wanted to do that. Jefferson was totally against it.

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
It's not like they don't have much the same power...

They don't at all, as Mr. Trump discovered to his amazement. It's true
that since the constitution was written, a lot of rights were delegated
to the president by Congress (such as the ability to make war) and across
the board that has been a bad thing. It's not too late to undo some of
them.
--scott

Then we should hope that Kamala gets in

[Dave Froble]

Post by Chris Townley

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by Gary R. Schmidt

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along. ;-)

Some folks wanted to do that. Jefferson was totally against it.

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
It's not like they don't have much the same power...

They don't at all, as Mr. Trump discovered to his amazement. It's true
that since the constitution was written, a lot of rights were delegated
to the president by Congress (such as the ability to make war) and across
the board that has been a bad thing. It's not too late to undo some of
them.
--scott

Then we should hope that Kamala gets in

I'd rather hope that Trump doesn''t ...

[Henry Crun]

Gentlemen (and Ladies, though these seem to be in the minority)

Could you please take the display of political polemic to a more-relevant newsgroup?
Thanks,

Mike

-- No Micro$oft products were used in the URLs above, or in preparing this message. Recommended reading:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#befor

[Gary R. Schmidt]

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Chris Townley

Post by Gary R. Schmidt

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments.  We did actually start the country in reaction to a
British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along.  ;-)

Some folks wanted to do that.  Jefferson was totally against it.

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
It's not like they don't have much the same power...

They don't at all, as Mr. Trump discovered to his amazement.  It's true
that since the constitution was written, a lot of rights were delegated
to the president by Congress (such as the ability to make war) and across
the board that has been a bad thing.  It's not too late to undo some of
them.
--scott

Then we should hope that Kamala gets in

I'd rather hope that Trump doesn''t ...

He could just ask Putin to step in for him, does that seem satisfactory?

Cheers,
Gary B-)

[Dave Froble]

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by Gary R. Schmidt

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
Just out of curiosity, how have you been responding to all the people
who repeatedly ratched up the hysterical incendiary rherotic by constantly
calling Trump "Hitler" and constantly claiming he is a threat to democracy
and so-on.

You see, Americans traditionally have not approved of authoritarian
governments. We did actually start the country in reaction to a British
king who was becoming increasingly oppressive.

It always amuses me that the USA didn't just stick "Elected" in front of
"King" and toodleloo along. ;-)

Some folks wanted to do that. Jefferson was totally against it.

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
It's not like they don't have much the same power...

They don't at all, as Mr. Trump discovered to his amazement. It's true
that since the constitution was written, a lot of rights were delegated
to the president by Congress (such as the ability to make war) and across
the board that has been a bad thing. It's not too late to undo some of
them.
--scott

Ok, at the risk of upsetting some, I'm going to say that the President actually
is above the law. The President has to be at some times. The President is the
implementation of the will of the people. Sometimes he has to "break the laws".
Or is Obama guilty for having Bin Laden killed? Killing is illegal, isn't it.
The only judge and jury for a President is ultimately the voting public, and
sometimes, congress, but we've seen how that doesn't seem to work, haven't we?

Now once again I'm hoping the voters find Trump guilty for "find me 12,800
votes", which I consider his worst crime.

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Dave Froble
Ok, at the risk of upsetting some, I'm going to say that the President actually
is above the law. The President has to be at some times. The President is the
implementation of the will of the people. Sometimes he has to "break the laws".

No. This is the case in some countries, but not in the American system
where we have (or are supposed to have) a government of laws rather than
people. Nobody is above the law. You may recall that there was a lot of
discussion about this during Watergate.

The president IS the implementation of the will of the people, but so is
Congress and so is (to a slightly lesser extent) the Supreme Court.

Post by Dave Froble
Or is Obama guilty for having Bin Laden killed? Killing is illegal, isn't it.

No, because (unfortunately) during the cold war one of the abilities
delegated from Congress to the President is a (limited but still broad)
ability to make war. So it was legal for him to have Bin Laden killed.
That's an easy question.

Was it moral? Was it a good idea? Should he have the ability to do
this? These are all much harder questions to answer.

Post by Dave Froble
The only judge and jury for a President is ultimately the voting public, and
sometimes, congress, but we've seen how that doesn't seem to work, haven't we?

In the past it's been pretty effective, though we have had occasional
blips here and there like Warren G. Harding's presidency. But the huge
virtue of having a government of laws and having those laws enforced
is that it takes a lot more than just one person to cause permanent damage.

This doesn't, of course, mean that permanent damage isn't possible. But it's
a lot harder than it was for von Hindenberg.
--scott

[Dave Froble]

Post by Simon Clubley

And I really don't see any reason to expect riots in Boston that week or
two weeks later.

Recent history on both sides of the political spectrum in the US does not
exactly fill me with confidence in this area.

I really, really, wish I had been wrong about that. :-( :-( :-(

Given that Massachusetts (and Boston, specifically) are solidly in the Biden camp,
I suspect there won't be a lot of ads airing near the election.
Both sides will be spending their advertising money in the six states where the election
is actually up for grabs.

I can only imagine what that US would look like right now if the shooter
had not missed. :-(

While I deplore such actions, one individual trying to dictate what options are
available to everyone, I must admit to a few thoughts about too bad he was such
a poor marksman.

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the US mainstream media not informing the population about
Mr Biden's decline and acting more like the political wing of the
Democratic party.

Why does everyone harp on this? In one week I'll be 78 years old. I don't work
as quick, or long, as in the past. Sometimes I have a bit of trouble
articulating things. But in my head I know what I'm thinking, and perhaps with
experience am better at thinking than in the past. Perhaps a bit lazier also.

Now, I have no idea about Biden's capabilities. But neither does all the press
and such. Just makes for a good story on slow news days.

Example: Some years ago is was seeing my allergist. Very good in his field.
But then 90 years old. He had some trouble articulating, but I could tell he
knew what he was trying to say.

Speech may be one of the hardest things we can do. I does not always indicate
our thought processes are not working so well.

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the media saying the shooter was registered as Republican (which
I understand doesn't really mean much when tactical voting is involved)
while not mentioning that he apparently contributed to far-left causes,
so it is _very_ unclear what his politics really are.

A confused child, only 20, and a shame. We may never know what he was thinking.

Post by Simon Clubley
You have a part of the population which is becoming more extreme on the
right, egged on by certain narrow-minded interests.

I'll tell you what the real problem is. The far left trying to push agendas on
the country that a large part of the population is just not too keen about.
And so you get pushback. That's what elected Trump in 2016. The Democrats
still haven't learned, and so Trump still has support. It is the extreme left
that is causing much of the extreme right.

Post by Simon Clubley
And while the right-wing is correctly called out for certain things, you
have an underlying current of hate flowing through the so-called "nice"
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-assassination-bennie-thompson-aide-b2579916.html
Her employer also wanted to cut off all Secret Service protection for
Mr Trump. Charming. :-(
Mind you, you now have a Secret Service which appears to have gone from
being highly disciplined and effective to being absolutely bloody useless.

I don't see that. It is impossible to be 100% all the time.

Post by Simon Clubley
What on earth is happening to the US ?

See above. Maybe bring back Bill Clinton ???

Post by Simon Clubley
The above is spoken by someone who is an old-school liberal BTW (although
my old-school values seem to be seriously out of fashion these days...)
and is disturbed by what very nearly just happened.
Simon.

[Arne Vajhøj]

Post by Simon Clubley
What on earth is happening to the US ?

See above.  Maybe bring back Bill Clinton ???

He is not eligible due to the 2 terms limit.

But he was the last US president to have a balanced
budget!

Arne

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the US mainstream media not informing the population about
Mr Biden's decline and acting more like the political wing of the
Democratic party.

Why does everyone harp on this? In one week I'll be 78 years old. I don't work
as quick, or long, as in the past. Sometimes I have a bit of trouble
articulating things. But in my head I know what I'm thinking, and perhaps with
experience am better at thinking than in the past. Perhaps a bit lazier also.

You are not running a major country. There are different standards for
people who are running a major country.

Post by Dave Froble
Now, I have no idea about Biden's capabilities. But neither does all the press
and such. Just makes for a good story on slow news days.

Well, he thinks Mr Trump is his VP and he has a rather interesting opinion
on who is running Ukraine. :-)

Post by Dave Froble
Example: Some years ago is was seeing my allergist. Very good in his field.
But then 90 years old. He had some trouble articulating, but I could tell he
knew what he was trying to say.
Speech may be one of the hardest things we can do. I does not always indicate
our thought processes are not working so well.

This is not an articulation problem. Those problems are when you are
trying to construct a sentence and failing. That happens to all of us.

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Simon Clubley
You have a part of the population which is becoming more extreme on the
right, egged on by certain narrow-minded interests.

I'll tell you what the real problem is. The far left trying to push agendas on
the country that a large part of the population is just not too keen about.
And so you get pushback. That's what elected Trump in 2016. The Democrats
still haven't learned, and so Trump still has support. It is the extreme left
that is causing much of the extreme right.

The extreme elements on both sides are equally at fault.

You are correct in what you say above, but it looks like Mr Trump is
going to remove what remains of your social and environmental protections
if he gets back into power. That is not going to be good for anyone
(apart from a few business people).

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Simon Clubley
And while the right-wing is correctly called out for certain things, you
have an underlying current of hate flowing through the so-called "nice"
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-assassination-bennie-thompson-aide-b2579916.html
Her employer also wanted to cut off all Secret Service protection for
Mr Trump. Charming. :-(
Mind you, you now have a Secret Service which appears to have gone from
being highly disciplined and effective to being absolutely bloody useless.

I don't see that. It is impossible to be 100% all the time.

_Everyone_ else seems to think they screwed up. Badly.

Post by Dave Froble

Post by Simon Clubley
What on earth is happening to the US ?

See above. Maybe bring back Bill Clinton ???

Well, he was the last person to deal with your country's finances in
a responsible way...

Simon.

[Robert A. Brooks]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Dave Froble
See above. Maybe bring back Bill Clinton ???

Well, he was the last person to deal with your country's finances in
a responsible way...

Well, that's definitely not true, or perhaps at best, damning with faint praise.

You can lay the financial world meltdown in 2008 directly at Clinton's feet.

He removed several regulation checks on the banking world that had they been in place,
would not have allowed the mortgage mess and overleveraging of investment banks.

He was a bit of a breath of fresh air after 12 years of Reagan/Bush, but he was perhaps
only slightly left of center.

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Robert A. Brooks

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Dave Froble
See above. Maybe bring back Bill Clinton ???

Well, he was the last person to deal with your country's finances in
a responsible way...

Well, that's definitely not true, or perhaps at best, damning with faint praise.
You can lay the financial world meltdown in 2008 directly at Clinton's feet.
He removed several regulation checks on the banking world that had they been in place,
would not have allowed the mortgage mess and overleveraging of investment banks.
He was a bit of a breath of fresh air after 12 years of Reagan/Bush, but he was perhaps
only slightly left of center.

OTOH, he was responsible with the budget, unlike the people (Democrat
and Republican alike) who followed him.

If the US deficit continues to increase at its current rate, you will
not have a viable country in 20 years (maybe even 10 years).

I notice once again nobody is talking about this (ie: hiding the truth
from the US public), and by the time the US public realise the horrific
implications of this deficit, it is going to be too late to fix it.

Simon.

[Robert A. Brooks]

Post by Simon Clubley
If the US deficit continues to increase at its current rate, you will
not have a viable country in 20 years (maybe even 10 years).
I notice once again nobody is talking about this (ie: hiding the truth
from the US public), and by the time the US public realise the horrific
implications of this deficit, it is going to be too late to fix it.

I do not know where you are getting your information, but the knowledge of the deficit
is not a surprise, nor is it being buried in the media.

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Robert A. Brooks

Post by Simon Clubley
If the US deficit continues to increase at its current rate, you will
not have a viable country in 20 years (maybe even 10 years).
I notice once again nobody is talking about this (ie: hiding the truth
from the US public), and by the time the US public realise the horrific
implications of this deficit, it is going to be too late to fix it.

I do not know where you are getting your information, but the knowledge of the deficit
is not a surprise, nor is it being buried in the media.

Yes, but are the implications been hammered home in the way that they
should be ?

IOW, the US public may "know", in some abstract way, that the US has a
large deficit, but do they understand the full implications of that,
and the relatively short timescale in the future that it could become
a devastating crisis for the US ?

Simon.

[Robert A. Brooks]

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the media saying the shooter was registered as Republican (which
I understand doesn't really mean much when tactical voting is involved)
while not mentioning that he apparently contributed to far-left causes,
so it is _very_ unclear what his politics really are.

I'm not sure what you are reading, but both the New York Times and Washington
Post articles were quite clear that he was a registered republican, and had
contributed to a progressive organization shortly after Biden was inaugurated.

[Arne Vajhøj]

Post by Simon Clubley

And I really don't see any reason to expect riots in Boston that week or
two weeks later.

Recent history on both sides of the political spectrum in the US does not
exactly fill me with confidence in this area.

I really, really, wish I had been wrong about that. :-( :-( :-(

I don't think there are any bigger risk for riots in Boston in
late October early November than before.

That it can be dangerous to be US president or candidate for
US president is not new.

4 out of 46 presidents has been killed.

And if we look at the time after WWII then:

1 killed (Kennedy)
1 seriously wounded (Reagan)
1 wounded (Trump)
2 shot at (Truman, Ford)
4 other attempts or planned attempts (HW Bush, Clinton, W Bush, Obama)
3 nothing (Eisenhower, Johnson, Biden)

Plus 2 high-profile candidates killed: Kennedy in 1968 and Wallace
in 1972.

Post by Simon Clubley

Given that Massachusetts (and Boston, specifically) are solidly in the Biden camp,
I suspect there won't be a lot of ads airing near the election.
Both sides will be spending their advertising money in the six states where the election
is actually up for grabs.

I can only imagine what that US would look like right now if the shooter
had not missed. :-(

Probably not that different from how it actually look like right now.

Based on history then no immediate disaster.

Obviously there has been some long term impact. But difficult to
say exactly what.

If Kennedy had not been shot and Johnson had not taken over some
things would have been different, but nobody can say exactly how.

If the other Kennedy had not been shot, then maybe Nixon would not
have become president, but maybe he would have anyway - who knows.

If Reagan had died and HW Bush had become president in 1981 instead
of 1989, then something would have been different.

If Trump had dies then again something would have been different. First
they would need to sort out whether Hailey as runner up in
primaries or Vance as VP candidate would become candidate.

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the US mainstream media not informing the population about
Mr Biden's decline and acting more like the political wing of the
Democratic party.
You have the media saying the shooter was registered as Republican (which
I understand doesn't really mean much when tactical voting is involved)
while not mentioning that he apparently contributed to far-left causes,
so it is _very_ unclear what his politics really are.

You must be living in a parallel universe.

All media both right leaning and left leaning has focused a lot
on Biden's poor performance in the debate.

And practically all media has mentioned that the shooter donated
15 dollars to a left leaning PAC 3 years ago.

Post by Simon Clubley
Mind you, you now have a Secret Service which appears to have gone from
being highly disciplined and effective to being absolutely bloody useless.
What on earth is happening to the US ?

Most agree that Secret Service did not do a good job.

A shooter less than 150 meter from Trump on a white roof should
be as difficult to spot as a pink elephant in a dining room.

It will be investigated.

But do not expect a conspiracy - some mistakes and
slacking is way more likely.

There has been a number of scandals in recent years
(2012, 2015, 2017 and 2022) where secret service agents
have been drinking or been entertained by prostitutes.

Arne

[David Meyer]

Post by Arne Vajhøj
Plus 2 high-profile candidates killed: Kennedy in 1968 and Wallace
in 1972.

George Wallace was not killed in the assassination attempt, but
paralyzed from the waist down. He died in 1998.

[Arne Vajhøj]

Post by David Meyer

Post by Arne Vajhøj
Plus 2 high-profile candidates killed: Kennedy in 1968 and Wallace
in 1972.

George Wallace was not killed in the assassination attempt, but
paralyzed from the waist down. He died in 1998.

Ooops. You are correct.

My mistake. Sorry. Thanks for the correction.

Arne

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Arne Vajhøj
4 out of 46 presidents has been killed.

Taft was kind of an outlier. He was shot by an anarchist, but he was
mostly killed by bad doctors.
--scott

[Arne Vajhøj]

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by Arne Vajhøj
4 out of 46 presidents has been killed.

Taft was kind of an outlier. He was shot by an anarchist, but he was
mostly killed by bad doctors.

McKinley?

Arne

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Arne Vajhøj

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by Arne Vajhøj
4 out of 46 presidents has been killed.

Taft was kind of an outlier. He was shot by an anarchist, but he was
mostly killed by bad doctors.

McKinley?

Sorry, I get all those fat guys confused.
--scott

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Arne Vajhøj

Post by Simon Clubley
I can only imagine what that US would look like right now if the shooter
had not missed. :-(

Probably not that different from how it actually look like right now.

Look at the riots the far-left organised when police officers killed
a black person because of excessive force.

Now imagine that reaction from the other side of the political spectrum
if Mr Trump had been killed.

Post by Arne Vajhøj
Based on history then no immediate disaster.

Recent history says otherwise.

Post by Arne Vajhøj

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the US mainstream media not informing the population about
Mr Biden's decline and acting more like the political wing of the
Democratic party.
You have the media saying the shooter was registered as Republican (which
I understand doesn't really mean much when tactical voting is involved)
while not mentioning that he apparently contributed to far-left causes,
so it is _very_ unclear what his politics really are.

You must be living in a parallel universe.

No.

Post by Arne Vajhøj
All media both right leaning and left leaning has focused a lot
on Biden's poor performance in the debate.

That is only because Mr Biden had such a high-profile meltdown they
could no longer cover for him.

What about the 4 years of covering for him prior to that meltdown ?

Post by Arne Vajhøj

Post by Simon Clubley
Mind you, you now have a Secret Service which appears to have gone from
being highly disciplined and effective to being absolutely bloody useless.
What on earth is happening to the US ?

Most agree that Secret Service did not do a good job.
A shooter less than 150 meter from Trump on a white roof should
be as difficult to spot as a pink elephant in a dining room.
It will be investigated.

The report (or at least the bits we are allowed to see) will no doubt
make for very interesting reading.

Simon.

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the US mainstream media not informing the population about
Mr Biden's decline and acting more like the political wing of the
Democratic party.

It's been that way for a long, long time. It's only now so amazingly
blatant that it's impossible to hide anymore.

[Simon Clubley]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Simon Clubley
You have the US mainstream media not informing the population about
Mr Biden's decline and acting more like the political wing of the
Democratic party.

It's been that way for a long, long time. It's only now so amazingly
blatant that it's impossible to hide anymore.

Unfortunately, there are other things, such as the increasing deficit,
and the fact the US is no longer in control of its destiny, that are
not been discussed with the US public.

That last item is a reference to China now effectively controlling
manufacturing for the US. If they want to control the US, all they
have to do is to cut off that manufacturing or (more likely) disrupt
it as a warning about what could happen if the US does not comply
with China's wishes.

That would hurt China, but it would hurt the US a _lot_ more as the
US would never be able to rebuild its manufacturing base before
it collapsed economically. The real blame here lies with the US
sleepwalking into this, not with China, as the US should never have
allowed this in the first place.

And for the record, we are not exactly perfect in Europe when it comes
to this last part either.

Simon.