You know, after reading 2 TFN articles claiming that "old people" are ostentatiously human beings, I finally laughed. Idk what, or whose, comment you're riffing on, but this "old(er) person" is cackling over here.
That New Republic article is great. I wish they’d presented us with something like that in high school history class.
I remember being told about the depression - pictures of people trading wheelbarrows of Weimar marks for bread.
I didn’t know the depression was already getting better by the time Hitler was voted in. I didn’t really understand the role of the German industrialists.
Great Britain was just as afraid of a Bolshevik revolution as the Weimar Republic. Germany had the option to use the shared fear of Bolshevism and communism to renegotiate the Treaty of Versailles with the Allied powers.
Allied industrial interests could have been appeased by forcing the big German companies to allow foreign investors to become majority shareholders, essentially becoming multinational corporations.
But they wanted everything, and they wanted it by next quarter. So they backed a dangerous lunatic fascist. A populist madman who would harness the worst of Germany’s history to inspire the murder 6 million people outright, while starting a war that would kill millions more.
But, oh yeah, that would have meant letting high school students understand that unchecked capitalism is inherently dangerous. And we couldn’t have had that.
Luckily, our newer generations HAVE gotten that lesson. They’ve been raised in the excesses of late-stage capitalism, and many of them have been smart enough to make the connections.
Our corporate oligarchs mayn’t have learned a damn thing - but I hope enough of our electorate has.
I rather suspect that most people saying Harris "needs" a landslide aren't suggesting it wouldn't be legitimate otherwise but in the sense of wanting a victory big enough to make any reactionary election-stealing chicanery untenable.
Of course the bigots, bosses, and bozos will screech and squawk regardless of whether her electoral vote count is 270 or 470 and regardless of if her popular vote margin is one vote or 40 million. But the harder we can make it for the "Back to 1900" crowd to be taken seriously, the better for all of us.
-
"'Back to 1900' is a serviceable summation of the conservatives' goal." - George Will, syndicated column, January 2, 1995
"When someone shows you who they are, believe them." - Maya Angelou
Nahh, Carlson scratched himself while imitating the talking head monkey he portrays on his “fakecasts” in his sleep. Not sure which condition the DSM uses to describe his antics, but like sleepwalking to the refrigerator for midnight snacks, it’s a helluva lot more believable than poltergeists or unknown intruders sneaking into his bedroom.
I don’t think she needs to clear a higher bar because of her race or sex. I think anyone running against Trump this year would need to clear a higher bar than in the past because a large margin would make it harder for the MAGAts to argue that the election was rigged. They’d probably claim that anyway, but a decisive victory would help to put it beyond doubt for more people.
Yelling "rigged" and spewing idiotic conspiracies works the same either way. If you'll toss 10,000 votes based on bullshit, you'll toss 100,000 based on bullshit. I don't think there's a number that shuts up Trump (desperate to avoid prison) or unfucks the minds of his cult victims.
"Trump was caught on tape bragging that he made sexual advances on women regardless of consent, let alone interest, and said that when you’re a celebrity you can just do it, and even “grab them by the pussy.”
See how Trump and his team ‘protect’ women whether they like it or not with this infographic (including Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, Bill O'Reilly...)
You know, after reading 2 TFN articles claiming that "old people" are ostentatiously human beings, I finally laughed. Idk what, or whose, comment you're riffing on, but this "old(er) person" is cackling over here.
That New Republic article is great. I wish they’d presented us with something like that in high school history class.
I remember being told about the depression - pictures of people trading wheelbarrows of Weimar marks for bread.
I didn’t know the depression was already getting better by the time Hitler was voted in. I didn’t really understand the role of the German industrialists.
Great Britain was just as afraid of a Bolshevik revolution as the Weimar Republic. Germany had the option to use the shared fear of Bolshevism and communism to renegotiate the Treaty of Versailles with the Allied powers.
Allied industrial interests could have been appeased by forcing the big German companies to allow foreign investors to become majority shareholders, essentially becoming multinational corporations.
But they wanted everything, and they wanted it by next quarter. So they backed a dangerous lunatic fascist. A populist madman who would harness the worst of Germany’s history to inspire the murder 6 million people outright, while starting a war that would kill millions more.
But, oh yeah, that would have meant letting high school students understand that unchecked capitalism is inherently dangerous. And we couldn’t have had that.
Luckily, our newer generations HAVE gotten that lesson. They’ve been raised in the excesses of late-stage capitalism, and many of them have been smart enough to make the connections.
Our corporate oligarchs mayn’t have learned a damn thing - but I hope enough of our electorate has.
I rather suspect that most people saying Harris "needs" a landslide aren't suggesting it wouldn't be legitimate otherwise but in the sense of wanting a victory big enough to make any reactionary election-stealing chicanery untenable.
Of course the bigots, bosses, and bozos will screech and squawk regardless of whether her electoral vote count is 270 or 470 and regardless of if her popular vote margin is one vote or 40 million. But the harder we can make it for the "Back to 1900" crowd to be taken seriously, the better for all of us.
-
"'Back to 1900' is a serviceable summation of the conservatives' goal." - George Will, syndicated column, January 2, 1995
"When someone shows you who they are, believe them." - Maya Angelou
Would a decisive victory make it more difficult for the Supreme Court to hand this election to Trump?
https://open.substack.com/pub/sharylattkisson/p/cheating-in-the-2024-election
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽💯
Nahh, Carlson scratched himself while imitating the talking head monkey he portrays on his “fakecasts” in his sleep. Not sure which condition the DSM uses to describe his antics, but like sleepwalking to the refrigerator for midnight snacks, it’s a helluva lot more believable than poltergeists or unknown intruders sneaking into his bedroom.
I don’t think she needs to clear a higher bar because of her race or sex. I think anyone running against Trump this year would need to clear a higher bar than in the past because a large margin would make it harder for the MAGAts to argue that the election was rigged. They’d probably claim that anyway, but a decisive victory would help to put it beyond doubt for more people.
Yelling "rigged" and spewing idiotic conspiracies works the same either way. If you'll toss 10,000 votes based on bullshit, you'll toss 100,000 based on bullshit. I don't think there's a number that shuts up Trump (desperate to avoid prison) or unfucks the minds of his cult victims.
What we need is control of all branches of government.
"Trump was caught on tape bragging that he made sexual advances on women regardless of consent, let alone interest, and said that when you’re a celebrity you can just do it, and even “grab them by the pussy.”
See how Trump and his team ‘protect’ women whether they like it or not with this infographic (including Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, Bill O'Reilly...)
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/10/31/how-trump-protects-women-whether-they-like-it-or-not/
Fuckin A
Thank you!