***Official Political Discussion Thread***

I went to a commercial retail store with my brother last weekend. There was a trump rally in the parking lot that was about to start their caravan down the freeway. Exactly what you'd expect. Lots of trucks, lots of flags (confederate, US, and these back the blue flags), and lots of firearms. My brother was going to take an IG story of it and I snapped at him. Told him keep his head down and keep it moving. Don't want to even engage with them. The normalization of these trump caravans is legit terrifying.

edit for reference: this is TX-10, which includes all that country in the middle to dilute that austin vote.

1604340590660.png
 
Last edited:
Well, even though I’ve never eaten here.. guess I’ll die without that happening





Outrageous. And I’ve seen similar reports of people knocking down Trump signs. As the poster above said, leave people alone. That’s wild.
 
I hadn't thought about that - that's a really good point. They could do what they did with the Supreme Court and bash through a "trial" in a few days at most?
Don’t know the time able but he’s out ASAP. The house is WAY more important than the president. Remember, he was already impeached. The GOP just voted to keep him anyway.
 


I don't know much about the judge aside from what's been said the last few days, but I kind of think the opposite here. In a lot of these situations it's the reverse. Someone who is tough will make things seem easy. And someone who ultimately easy, will put up a tough front. Those teachers and professors that tried to make their class seem like it was super hard, those were the classes you could get through. It was those teachers who just went about their day, handed you some ridiculous syllabus and started teaching like everything was chill, those MFs would have you reading whole books once a week.

So I'm completely guessing here, but I feel like the judge will say they did what they had to do, met the bar, and allow them to 'win' the case.

To put it a simpler way, this judge is the guy that comes onto the court in some Js, dressed head to toe in official nba gear, with a shooting sleeve, slapping the ground ready to play defense. He's getting blown by. The real player you gotta worry about is some dude that shows up in a tattered shirt & cutoffs and some beat up nikes and is like "what's game to?" That dude is going to light you up.

I hope I'm spectacularly wrong because our democracy hangs in the balance🙏
 
From the comments:
I actually did the same, minus the baseball hat! At my early voting site there were a bunch of Trump supporters, I smiled at them, gave them a thumbs up, they smiled back at me and then I cast my ballot for Biden and all the Democrats down the ticket.
:rofl:
 
An interesting perspective on Clarence Thomas:

The truth, though, is that we don’t know all that much about Thomas apart from his public pronouncements. And if a new book by political theorist Corey Robin, called The Enigma of Clarence Thomas, is correct, it turns out Thomas’s worldview is more complicated than we thought.

Arguably the most reactionary member of the Court, Thomas is also, according to Robin, a bundle of contradictions. His position on affirmative action, for instance, is basically in lockstep with the largely white Republican Party. And yet Robin argues that Thomas has always been a “black nationalist” with a very coherent and fatalistic view of race in America. And it’s that skepticism about progress and the belief in black self-determination that pushed Thomas down the road to ultra-conservatism.

Thomas assumes that racism and white supremacy is ineradicable in America. It’s a permanent feature of the American condition. And the problem for him with contemporary liberal America, which he thinks really begins with the New Deal, is that white supremacy to a certain degree changed its spots but not nearly as much as most people think.

Sean Illing
And that means what, exactly?

Corey Robin
For Thomas, it means that there’s an assumption among white liberals that the job of the American ruling class through the state is to improve the lot of African Americans and to use the state to rectify these past injustices. And Thomas just doesn’t believe that it’s impossible to remedy these injustices, he also believes that the acts of paternalism end up perpetuating the injustices.

It’s true that black nationalism has had very strong leftist elements and traditions, but there’s also very strong conservative elements focused on self-help and discipline going all the way back to Marcus Garvey and, some would argue, Booker T. Washington. I don’t have a dog in that fight, and I don’t make any claims about what black nationalism ought to mean. But it’s important to at least acknowledge that history.

One thing to understand about Thomas’s conservatism is that there’s a strong belief in patriarchy. He has said quite plainly that the salvation of the black race depends upon black men. This is one area where his conservatism and black nationalism converge.

And yet, unlike many conservatives, he’s not that much of an individualist because he’s very much rooted in black communalist traditions. And he doesn’t really believe in colorblindness. All of this distinguishes him from most white conservatives
 
Back
Top Bottom