The Republican candidates

[The spartan]

They won't pro-slavery because the Democrats have already instituted the prison-slave system.

Schrodinger's Democrat: someone who simultaneous wants to let evil criminals out of prison to terrorize normal citizens but also want to put more people in prison to support a for-profit prison system (which they totally came up with, btw!).

[conon394]

Schrodinger's Democrat: someone who simultaneous wants to let evil criminals out of prison to terrorize normal citizens but also want to put more people in prison to support a for-profit prison system (which they totally came up with, btw!).

Really they did yet the total population of for profit prisons is vastly in red states - hard red states?

Do please enlighten me. And don't wave some wand hast 150 history the fact is in the US private for profit prions ballooned under the effects of the war on drugs lead by saint ronny in 1980s.

[The spartan]

I am not entirely sure what you are asking, but the "which they totally came up with, btw!" on my part was sarcasm; assuming that wasn't clear.

[conon394]

Sorry on that real life some time times means I am tired/distracted etc and missed that without a font/or marker. And frankly unfortunately since I know in was in Louisianan in the 1840s that the first for profit prison was opened in the US. I assumed you were cheating by pointing to a party that has no real connection to modern democrats to make a easy point. My bad - sorry again.

[Ramashan]

My real concern with this pack of Conservative candidates the move to a more authoritarian view of the Executive Office.

Even though they like to use the words; Socialist, Marxist, Facist in regards to the the Democrats, multiple conservative candidates, specifically Vivek, DeSantis and Trump, all want to increase the Executive power by removing Fed employees who do not agree with them and replacing them with, for lack of a better word, sycophants who will enforce what ever policies they want, regardless of Constitutional or Congressional limitations.

I'm not just making this up, Trump has stated this often: We will pass critical reforms making every executive-branch employee fireable by the president of the United States.

And both Vivek and DeSantis, as well as Trump and others, have stated that their first day goals will be abolish multiple Federal Departments, make executive-branch employees fireable, and send the military into foreign nations to enforce U.S. policy.

This is what these GOP candidates are stating on the campaign trail and during the recent debate, it's not radical misinterpretation.

To any conservatives out there I ask: How am I to embrace candidates who so despise the system of government the U.S. has had for almost 250 years that they are running on making it into an Executive Autocracy?

[Coughdrop addict]

To any conservatives out there I ask: How am I to embrace candidates who so despise the system of government the U.S. has had for almost 250 years that they are running on making it into an Executive Autocracy?

You are supposed to embrace it because they will outlaw and imprison the icky transgenders, run the government to punish blue states, close down all universities, allow you to carry your guns into preschools in case some 3-year old looks at you wrong, and lock up all known or suspected Democrats without charges or trial.

Serious answer, conservatives in the US know they have no future unless they can institute an autocracy. Fear of "Marxism" and hatred of the other was all they ever had to run on, and now that those have lost effectiveness they are flailing in desperation to stay relevant.

[Lord Thesaurian]

To any conservatives out there I ask: How am I to embrace candidates who so despise the system of government the U.S. has had for almost 250 years that they are running on making it into an Executive Autocracy?

You might need to be more specific. I’ve only seen one side of the political aisle backing the most destructive riots in modern history, arguing that constitutional institutions like the Senate and Supreme Court should be abolished because the country they despise is built on racism and misogyny and compromised by Russians and Nazis. 69% of Republicans believe America is the greatest country in the world, versus roughly a third of Democrats. Which side would you say is more likely to hate America and its system of government?

[conon394]

You might need to be more specific. I’ve only seen one side of the political aisle backing the most destructive riots in modern history

That would be which ones again?

arguing that constitutional institutions like the Senate and Supreme Court should be abolished because the country they despise is built on racism and misogyny and compromised by Russians and Nazis

And you have a source for this? Who is arguing to abolish the senate or the SCOTUS vs reform them.

69% of Republicans believe America is the greatest country in the world, versus roughly a third of Democrats. Which side would you say is more likely to hate America and its system of government?

BAsed on what question in what context please. I grant great in the most neutral use but do need a better social safety nets and a return to 1960s era taxes sure so 'greatest' with a a significant series of notes - but you don't get those in polls do you?

[Lord Thesaurian]

THat would be which ones again?

The “fiery but mostly peaceful” ones Democrats bowed down to and fundraised for, affiliated with a radical leftist racial identitarian extremist organization that also turned out to be a massive fraud built on a false narrative.

And you have a source for this? WHo is arguing to abolish the senate or the SCOTUS vs reform tham.

Abolition of the Senate has high profile Democrat support because constitutional checks and balances hinder their “dominate national politics by controlling a handful of urban centers” strategy. Not hard to work out. SCOTUS for similar reasons. Both dressed up as “reform.” Half of Democrats would rewrite the entire constitution to suit their political agenda if they could, compared to a fifth of Republicans. If you’re going to pick a side that hates America, the numbers are overwhelming.

[conon394]

The “fiery but mostly peaceful”

That is really your source - really?

First to reach that conclusion the source concatenates 20 different locations and uses a a complexly windy estimate with massive error range compared to discreet events. And of course suspiciously only includes riots based on black protests - because there were no other ever in us History - might normalizing the cost of those might be you know work.

In any case sources differ on the Detroit riots.

https://policing.umhistorylabs.lsa.u...dings%20burned.

But I am sure LBJ's commision and the U of M ore lefty sources to be ignored.

In any case they put the current dollar cost of Detroit riot a 1.2 Billion.
Dead 20 likely more and ~800 wounded sent to hospital.

2020 that all that violent for the whole year and give easy topped by a random US mass shooting event (Or several in one year).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...l-unrest-acled

that also turned out to be a massive fraud built on a false narrative.

Fraud is unfortunately not uncommon in charitable donor efforts. Can be found on the left and right and everywhere in between and in business and churches etc. False narrative what that the guy was not absolutely instantly obsequious for a over militarized police who shoot first and mostly never ask questions - or get asked questions. The annual rate of US cops killing citizens is over 30 per 1000 a year that puts us in the fine company of of third world dictatorships delightful. That rate is insane. Even a peer like France that has comparatively liberal gun laws, large land borders and its own race issue with the police clocks in at only 5.5.

Abolition of the Senate has high profile Democrat support because constitutional checks and balances hinder their “dominate national politics by controlling a handful of urban centers” strategy.

You know Dingall is dead right? So its a seeming malicious strategy to want balance representation more toward where actual people live and not empty states? Or is just bad when the other side does something benefit their side politically. You do realize how many of said empty states where the rushed political creation of politics in the 18th century to lock in a senate vote or two? Personally I would argue it be easier to make the house 1000 seats thus restoring the ratio of representatives to voters (as environed by the founders) and appropriability making at least one house properly biased to actual warm bodies.

Not hard to work out. SCOTUS for similar reasons. Both dressed up as “reform.” Half of Democrats would rewrite the entire constitution to suit their political agenda if they could, compared to a fifth of Republicans. If you’re going to pick a side that hates America, the numbers are overwhelming.

Ahh so correct demi god slave owners from over 200 hundred years ago are always right. Not sure what you are riffing off on SCOTUS its size has been changed before and realistically it should have to conform to ethics rules not enforced by itself that seems pretty basic. On balance the Survey you point to is weak. So what about all those elected judges in states?. Given Marshal's innovation is sorta made up probably is a good to reform how the SCOTUS is populated given its power. Personally I be for limiting time(on the SCOTUS) or at least a retirement age.

[Lord Thesaurian]

That is really your source - really?

Yeah? I’m not sure how using a different one to argue other riots were actually more costly detracts from the observation. I’m willing to amend my statement to “Democrats backed some of the most destructive riots in modern history” if it makes you feel better.

Fraud is unfortunately not uncommon in charitable donor efforts. Can be found on the left and right and everywhere in between and in business and churches etc. False narrative what that the guy was not absolutely instantly obsequious for a over militarized police who shoot first and mostly never ask questions - or get asked questions. The annual rate of US cops killing citizens is over 30 per 1000 a year that puts us in the fine company of of third world dictatorships delightful. That rate is insane. Even a peer like France that has comparatively liberal gun laws, large land borders and its own race issue with the police clocks in at only 5.5.

Ok? I guess Democrats should have done police reform, considering they’ve spent years in charge of most of the places that have more police brutality problems, more economic inequality and higher violent crime rates, instead of advocating to abolish the police because a bunch of commie fraudsters they fundraised for demanded it and threatened more violence if they didn’t get what they wanted. It backfired so hard on the Party, they actually had the audacity to turn around and claim it was Republicans who were anti police all along. Lmao.

You know Dingall is dead right? So its a seeming malicious strategy to want balance representation more toward where actual people live and not empty states? Or is just bad when the other side does something benefit their side politically. You do realize how many of said empty states where the rushed political creation of politics in the 18th century to lock in a senate vote or two? Personally I would argue it be easier to make the house 1000 seats thus restoring the ratio of representatives to voters (as environed by the founders) and appropriability making at least one house properly biased to actual warm bodies.

“It’s not happening, and if it is that’s good.”

Ahh so correct demi god slave owners from over 200 hundred years ago are always right. Not sure what you are riffing off on SCOTUS its size has been changed before and realistically it should have to conform to ethics rules not enforced by itself that seems pretty basic. On balance the Survey you point to is weak. So what about all those elected judges in states?. Given Marshal's innovation is sorta made up probably is a good to reform how the SCOTUS is populated given its power. Personally I be for limiting time(on the SCOTUS) or at least a retirement age.

My interlocutor claimed an alleged desire to change procedures in the executive branch or eliminate departments is a constitutional crisis and implies hatred of America. Hence my observations. Nothing you’ve posted here addresses those in the context of the conversation, and your support of measures to abolish core components of the constitution and alter the structure of American government because muh slavery only further underscores those observations.

But let’s look at what Republican candidates are actually saying about this:

The candidates pledged to cut federal workforces, spending and, in some cases, entire agencies. They criticized the Biden administration and lawmakers for growing the size of the “administrative state.” Here are the main takeaways from the contenders at the Milwaukee debate on how they would change or reform federal agencies and their workforces.

https://www.govexec.com/management/2...debate/389687/

Gosh, the same things Republicans have been saying for decades. I’m always tickled when Democrats call shrinking the government and curtailing its power “autocracy,” in true Orwellian fashion.

[conon394]

Yeah? I’m not sure how using a different one to argue other riots were actually more costly detracts from the observation. I’m willing to amend my statement to “Democrats backed some of the most destructive riots in modern history” if it makes you feel better.

No it does not because it fails to address my points of a biased list and a thus a biased conclusion nor ist rather selective version of defining so called 'costly US civil disorders' . Moreover in fact on a bit of second check the isolation of Detroit makes the breathless attempt to make BLM protests so costly even more silly. Since if really if you are going to cite 1967 your really need to cite the whole of the long hot summer of 1967 and not just two isolated event events Detroit (where clearly the damage is low balled) and Newark. But rather the not complete list at wiki for 67 over 150 events you could include.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long,_...aughlin20141-2

Overall BLM was a peaceful and not too costly really in comparison considering the source of the anger was the same.

Ok? I guess Democrats should have done police reform, considering they’ve spent years in charge of most of the places that have more police brutality problems, more economic inequality and higher violent crime rates, instead of advocating to abolish the police because a bunch of commie fraudsters they fundraised for demanded it and threatened more violence if they didn’t get what they wanted. It backfired so hard on the Party, they actually had the audacity to turn around and claim it was Republicans who were anti police all along. Lmao.

Not sure what or who you are replying to. Certainly not my points.

“It’s not happening, and if it is that’s good.”

? - so you don't support the move to restore the house to ratio of represented to representative that is much closer to what the sainted founders had in mind?

My interlocutor claimed an alleged desire to change procedures in the executive branch or eliminate departments is a constitutional crisis and implies hatred of America. Hence my observations. Nothing you’ve posted here addresses those in the context of the conversation, and your support of measures to abolish core components of the constitution and alter the structure of American government because muh slavery only further underscores those observations.

You are loosing me I not how any of this is a response to my text

But let’s look at what Republican candidates are actually saying about this:

Quite a funny link.

I sure governor Ron DeSantis is for example going to reiterate that today how he is all in favor for slashing the deep state big government all except that bit you know like FEMA and national flood insurance that subsidizes living in his small government state during hurricane season... and nothing like seeing a bunch of rich people attack the IRS staffing. Oh an across the board cut of the federal government but not defense ? Odd the Pentagon can't account for 100s of millions of dollars in in audits but its funding is secure but hey slash the USDA ARS or NOAA (maybe they can just buy weather data from the EU). WHo needs those NIH grants.

[Lord Thesaurian]

No it does not because it fails to address my points of a biased list and a thus a biased conclusion nor ist rather selective version of defining so called 'costly US civil disorders' .

You don’t have a point. You made an assertion regarding a source you apparently don’t like, but there’s no evidence Axios is biased just because you don’t like their article. If anything, the publication leans left, so you have alot of dots to connect, to say the least. Had you read the title of the article, let alone the rest of it, you might have avoided confusion.

Moreover in fact on a bit of second check the isolation of Detroit makes the breathless attempt to make BLM protests so costly even more silly. Since if really if you are going to cite 1967 your really need to cite the whole of the long hot summer of 1967 and not just two isolated event events Detroit (where clearly the damage is low balled) and Newark. But rather the not complete list at wiki for 67 over 150 events you could include.

If you meant statistical bias, that’s no more apparent than the other interpretation, I’m afraid. Axios’ source calculated insurance losses (hence the title of the article) because the group analyzes insurance claim data, rather than whatever your source used. Thus insurance claims are bound to underestimate the total cost of the damage, which means the 2020 riots actually cost even more according to your metric, not less.

That could be why your source estimates property damage to be worth 132 million whereas Axios comes up with 42 million. In any case, 132 million in 1967 is around a billion dollars in 2020, not 1.2. And even if we use your figure, it’s still either equivalent to or less than the 1-2 billion dollar cost of the 2020 riots, which actually cost much more than even that if I go by your count. So even if you’re right, you’re wrong.

Overall BLM was a peaceful and not too costly really in comparison considering the source of the anger was the same.

Like I said, I could concede that the 2020 riots were “merely” among the most and not the most costly in modern history, and it wouldn’t make your assertion any more true.

Not sure what or who you are replying to. Certainly not my points.

You dismissed BLM fraud based on your assertion that everyone does it and pivoted to a general complaint about police brutality. Again, you made no relevant point here, I simply provided context highlighting the irony of your complaint.

so you don't support the move to restore the house to ratio of represented to representative that is much closer to what the sainted founders had in mind?

What?

You are loosing me I not how any of this is a response to my text

Ditto.

[Sir Adrian]

Schrodinger's Democrat: someone who simultaneous wants to let evil criminals out of prison to terrorize normal citizens but also want to put more people in prison to support a for-profit prison system (which they totally came up with, btw!).

Last time I checked none of the democrat presidents did anything against the private prison system and the Clintons actually strengthened it.

[Vanoi]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-hea...100327765.html

So Biden goes to survey storm damage and neet with residents, while DeSantis is no where to be found. Even Rick Scott came out with Biden despite their disagreements.

DeSantis truly has no charisma. And that's the guy who can supposedly best Biden?

[conon394]

Last time I checked none of the democrat presidents did anything against the private prison system and the Clintons actually strengthened it.

Obama allowed Federal contracts with private prisons to expire. Biden has continued that and expanded the scope of Obama's actions (covering US Marshall's and jails for example). Can't really see either had much room to act legislatively that impact states - you only got so much political capital.

the Clintons

I was only aware of one Clinton presidency. In case Clinton had to run to the right of what would considered current democrat policy positions.

[NorthernXY]

Get a room you two.