Stingray3906
2mo ago
Stingray3906
2mo ago
I'm gonna be honest. None of this shit is good for my health. Just this whole presidential cycle, the constant hysterics and nonsense about this judge or that prosecutor or some bureaucrat.
That is why it is prudent to limit general media intake.
Yeah, I watched the first debate, because I wanted to see a primary source first hand before the spin machine got to it. That was sad. Biden was old, but Trump seemed old too, just not as much by comparison.
What is the point of the debates, now? I have a general enough idea of what each candidate wants to if elected, enough to make a decision at the polls, so why do I need to watch them?
Stingray3906
2mo ago
Does RFK Jr. become more relevant now that Biden dropped out?
Stingray3906
2mo ago
No
Stingray3906
2mo ago
I find it very fascinating that people are yelling about which of two elderly white men with questionable cognitive abilities should run our country. It just blows my mind that our politics have gotten to this point.
Stingray3906
2mo ago
It sounds like the Biden Democrats are using the same style of populist rhetoric that Republicans are using to try and deflect from Biden's poor debate performance and his responses to calls to step down.
Stingray3906
2mo ago
If so many Americans are as politically disillusioned as polling suggests, why haven't we seen that translate into even lower voter turnout? Why haven't we seen more political groups that meet the needs of disillusioned?
Stingray3906
2mo ago
I'm not swayed by Biden saying, "I'm fine," nor am I swayed by Trump saying, "I'm fine". Would Kamala be a better nominee? Guess it depends on who you ask.
It is rather interesting to me that the DNC is having an internal meltdown over something they should have forecasted when Biden's campaign started.
I'm so apathetic about the presidential election that at this point, it may be better to "suffer" another four years with Trump at the helm and let 2028 be an open field.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
New England Republicans tend to lean moderate to slightly right of center. It is rare to encounter one who supports Trump.
Controversial in the sense that its history not exactly cut and dry. It's certainly not controversial that all women should have the right to vote.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
-
Wait for the convention to do what? Take the cognitive test? Move to replace Biden as the nominee?
-
If Biden wins, he will probably select the most loyal cabinet possible, as Trump attempted to do when he was in office.
What I think Biden should do, if he really wants to set the record straight, is address the nation directly from the White House about his health, being completely transparent about whatever is going on with him. I don't think we have the full picture of the situation, and everything we hear about it is either in a news article, an opinionated tweet or a one-line quote. We need to hear about what's going on, no holds barres, direct from the source.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
But, I kind of get it- the early suffragettes would be a complicated group for modern leftists:
feminism! Women fighting for their rights! Yay! But it's entirely white women. Mostly upper class. Probably they said some things that would be considered racist by today's standards. boo. Also they were highly religious. As I understand it, voting rights was almost a secondary issue for them- what they really wanted was prohibition. Bring their husbands home from the pub and send them to church! very harsh on any sort of open display of sexuality. No doubt they'd be super against homesexuality, if they even mentioned it at all.
All of this is why I question the appropriateness of telling the story in the format of a musical.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
To me, that's an exception to the rule. Hamilton has a diverse cast and a unique style of music (and written by a non-caucasian man) that made it extremely marketable.
Well it sounds like to me, these protestors simply want the appropriate context applied to the show. Was it right to interrupt the show? I'd say no. But to write off their concerns as meritless, I'm not so sure of that.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
So to have a musical — the culture of the wealthy liberal base — extol heroic white women is a faux pas that must be balanced by blackening their reputation.
I think there is some merit to the opinion that a Broadway musical is not an appropriate venue to tell such controversial stories. It's am entertainment product, first and foremost. It exists to make money before anything else. Perhaps it would be more appropriate to put such a show on as a truly non-fictional retelling at a museum or non-profit cultural center, where they have staff that can evaluate the script, characters and cast, sets, music etc. to be period correct and sensitive to context.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
So there's a musical on Broadway, called Suffs, about the Women's Suffrage Movement in the US in the 1910s. It won a couple Tony's last month (https://playbill.com/article/shaina-taub-wins-best-original-score-at-2024-tony-awards-for-suffs). Alas, even the stage is not immune from impromptu protests, as a far-left group of demonstrators interrupted the show and unfurled a banner for approximately 20 seconds before being escorted out. (https://apnews.com/article/suffs-disrupted-broadway-whitewash-05c6df87a220c253b66807f312948a80).
The group's website (https://www.cancelsuffs.com) alleges that the show is whitewashing the history of the suffrage movement. They point out two historical main characters Alice Paul and Carrie Chapman Catt excluded Black women from the NWP and believe white supremacy would be strengthened by the movement. They also bring up Woodrow Wilson's efforts to segregate the federal government and his screening of The Birth of a Nation while the suffrage movement was still ongoing. They also suggest that the 19th Amendment opened the door to women-centered factions of the KKK.
Has anyone here seen the musical? What are everyone's thoughts about the depiction of controversial historical events as entertainment? Is there any merit to this far-left group's position?
Stingray3906
3mo ago
They don't really have anything to lose, with two major party candidates that are unpopular, despite people saying they will still vote for one of them.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
Oh yes, they will attempt to, but I don't think they will ever succeed.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
The problem I have with this decision isn't the decision itself, but the fact that the average person now has to try and understand the complexity of the decision and rely on the (mostly biased) media to tell them how to think through it. I think too many Americans lack the ability to comprehend how nuanced and complicated our government is and will run with whatever headlines and one-liners they emotionally identify with.
I have yet to see an objective, plain-language, sixth-grade-reading-level breakdown of what all of this means from any media outlet.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
I think that we will see a very concerted effort for the next several years to get a constitutional amendment clarifying that any elected official of the US is not immune from criminal prosecution whatsoever. Wouldn't surprise me if that initiative started even before Election Day.
Stingray3906
3mo ago
I think it depends on how much of a support network exists in the community. If I take a job that doesn't give me enough money to afford basic necessities, will there be a food pantry, farmer's market, cooperative drug store, etc. available?
Stingray3906
3mo ago
The DNC always appears to support RCV unless it's an election year. Then they're hell-bent on telling people to vote for the lesser of two evils. Why not campaign on RCV and voting blue?
Stingray3906
3mo ago
In the US, ranked choice voting is often, but not always, associated with the Democratic Party, at least in the sense of pushing for it in Red / Purple, but not Blue, states.
As I understand it, there are Democrats (purposefully with a capital D) that do not support RCV because they believe it will draw voters away from the DNC.
Is the problem that people aren't good critical thinkers, or that you don't like the product of their thinking?
There aren't any good critical thinkers, and if there are, they mask it with their ad homs and personal or partisan attacks.
Polarized hardline stances are, in fact, sometimes the correct response to a sufficiently fraught situation. It seems to me that we're in such a situation.
I don't have a problem with this. What I do have a problem with, is approaching folks on the opposite side of the argument with dehumanization, with bickering, and disrespect.
Like, if the spat that happened in that committee hearing last week between AOC and MTG happened in my presence, I'd tell them they're both wrong for attacking each other and walk away. Like, you wouldn't act like that in public if you weren't a politician, so why is it OK when you're in government? And I know that's very naive to think, but we're talking basic human decency here, even towards people like MTG who say vile and disgusting things every day.
Couple of thoughts:
1: Perhaps the DNC only cares about white men insofar as it helps Kamala get elected, no more no less.
2: I think that the whole "white cops bad" angle of police violence died once we had several high-profile incidents involving Black police officers, such as Tyre Nichols.
More options
Context Copy link