Trump was shot!

[Elisabetta]

Biden is out of the race! Not sure whether enough independents will vote for a woman of color. That said, last polling I saw, Harris was getting similar numbers to Trump.

This is going to be an interesting Election to say the least. She could very well may up beating him.

[Ray]

I think it says a lot about someone if they do not vote for an individual because of (a) their sex and (b) the colour of their skin.

What it says is not complimentary.

[FranTastic444]

What it says is not complimentary.

Totally agree, Ray. Take a look at recent comments from some quarters regarding the female members of Trump’s security team at the event where he was so nearly assassinated.

As per my earlier post, one needs to pay particular attention to the independents in a US election. Diehard Dems (or the vast majority thereof) would, I think, vote for a candidate regardless of sex and race and sexual orientation. Total speculation on my part, but my feel is that for a small minority of indies, any one of those three criteria could be a blocker. Whether those numbers can tip the balance in a very close election year, we will have to wait and see.

As a counterbalance to what I just wrote, Harris has been much more effective than Biden on the matter of reproductive rights so maybe she will gain more votes to that hot potato issue than she will lose to being a woman of color vying for the top job.

[Dust]

My understanding is that for many years, the two main parties have oscillated just left or just right of center. Trumpism has moved the needle more to the right than the recent norm and the likes of Saunders, Biden, AOC etc. have moved the needle more to the left of recent norm.

I would say that the two parties had for a long time stayed rather close in policy, and slowly drifted left. Thus the apparent "center" has slowly shifted left, and what was a left-wing position 25 years ago, is now a right-wing position. Trump's "far right" positions today were the (mildly?) left-wing positions of the Clinton administration.

Remember that things like "don't ask, don't tell" were a liberal shift away from the policies that preceded them, before they became the "conservative" positions that Republicans tried to preserve.

Really, "Trump-ism" is a return to the "liberal Democrat" policies of 25 years ago, and only feel like a crazy lurch to the right because of how far left we have drifted as a country.

[moonshadow]

Really, "Trump-ism" is a return to the "liberal Democrat" policies of 25 years ago, and only feel like a crazy lurch to the right because of how far left we have drifted as a country.

If we're so far left, then why do I have to fight with my medical insurance company every. single. time. I have to have a procedure done?

It's gotten to the point where I just don't go to the doctor anymore. If I'm in agony, I'll seek treatment, otherwise, f--- it. If I die, I die. Not like anyone really cares anyway. Oh, they pay lip service, they (American society) will say they care...

I just recall the passage:

By their fruits you shall know them.

Nobody cares.

The rhetoric of the last 10 years has been so depressing. I'm just so tired of this place. And you know what... Trump is God here on the "liberal" west coast too. It's hard and disheartening to watch a population so willing to crown him king of kings. I weep for this species.I don't blame Trump though, he's just a symptom of the disease.

Where did all of the empathy go?

[Barleymower]

Try not to spend too much time mulling over things you can't control. Make your forecast of what will happen and act on that in the interests you and your family. It's all you can do.

Good luck to you and all the decent people that the greedy rely on.

[rode_kater]

I would say that the two parties had for a long time stayed rather close in policy, and slowly drifted left. Thus the apparent "center" has slowly shifted left, and what was a left-wing position 25 years ago, is now a right-wing position. Trump's "far right" positions today were the (mildly?) left-wing positions of the Clinton administration.

I'm always amazed by the American version of left/right. Sander would be considered centre-right here, and most of what Americans call "right" is basically off the scale.

If Americans have been tacking left in the last decade I can't see it, because all I see is eroding worker rights/civil rights and more power to the corporations. If anything, I see progression towards authoritarianism/conservatism, with each side saying the other side is doing it while doing it themselves. Where are the actual (small L) liberals?

In a presidential system you're stuck with whoever you get for 4 years. At least here if we vote in idiots we can kick them out again after a year or two if necessary.

[Myopic Bookworm]

I'm always amazed by the American version of left/right. Sander would be considered centre-right here, and most of what Americans call "right" is basically off the scale.

I tend to agree. Obama's policies were regarded here as those of a moderate conservative. The mindset that regards all taxation as a form of socialist theft is regarded in Europe as rabidly right-wing.

[Ray]

I concur. Sorry, Dust.

From a European perspective, I see Democrats as centre to mild right, with Republicans a long way to the hard right. There is no party with a strong socialist* doctrine in the USA.

In terms of trends, I don’t get the sense that the Democrats have moved much, but since the GW Bush era, I feel that the Republicans have moved further to the right.

That’s just my view.

* for the record, and for the benefit of our USA chums, “socialist” is nowhere near “communist”. They are not interchangeable.

[Faldaguy]

I concur. Sorry, Dust.

From a European perspective, I see Democrats as centre to mild right, with Republicans a long way to the hard right. There is no party with a strong socialist* doctrine in the USA.

In terms of trends, I don’t get the sense that the Democrats have moved much, but since the GW Bush era, I feel that the Republicans have moved further to the right.

That’s just my view.

* for the record, and for the benefit of our USA chums, “socialist” is nowhere near “communist”. They are not interchangeable.

My emphasis above:
But we have an extensive list of socialist programs that we Yanks dearly love but nary a soul dare use that term! Too dumb to even know what hypocrites we be!

[crfriend]

Sadly, the entire planet suffered a hard lurch to the "right" in the late 1970s and early '80s, likely triggered by the revolution in Iran, and then followed up with Ronald Reagan in the USA and Margaret Thacher in the UK who were essentially clones of one another in different clothing. The Soviet Union was badly shaken as well and that damaged Gorbachev's policy of Glasnost (which was a watered down version of Nixon's brilliant concept of Detente), and the resulting arms race (unwinnable at any cost) destroyed both the United States and the Soviet Union, which bankrupted within about 15 minutes of each other, with both devolving into oligarchies. The Soviet collapse was essentially uncontrolled, and the collapse of the USA was very tightly stage-managed so the inhabitants were not really aware of what happened.

If one wants to see how the United States works "inside the beltway" study modern Russia.

In response to Andrea's assertion that Trump is a symptom, I'll disagree. Trump is very much the raw face of the disease -- that of a child of Perfect Privilege who's never had to do anything in his life and having no responsibility or sense of place -- much the same way that George "Dubya" Bush was. Little children, born with billion-dollar trust-funds who never grew up.

Trump was allowed power because he was easily controlled; Dubya was allowed it -- in what amounted to a regency -- because he was too stupid to wield it (Cheney ran the show). Of note, Trump's would-be assassin was a registered Republican, and was likely simply seeking to achieve fame for potting somebody "big". And he missed.

Had the would-be assassin put the bullet on the mark, then the Church of Trump would have soldiered on replete with a martyr. This is not going to go away without force, any more than NAZI Germany was going to go away without the use of force. (And note the resurgence on the far-right in lots of Europe now; it's not just the USA.) Perhaps letting it run might be best. But the price of that is going to be measured in the loss of millions of lives due to lack of access to medical care, starvation, and civil strife. It's not a pretty picture.

[Dust]

If Americans have been tacking left in the last decade I can't see it, because all I see is eroding worker rights/civil rights and more power to the corporations. If anything, I see progression towards authoritarianism/conservatism, with each side saying the other side is doing it while doing it themselves. Where are the actual (small L) liberals?

Most politicians on both sides in the US are bought and paid by the corporations. In US political terms, authoritarians can be either "liberal" or "conservative" depending on what they try to do with that power. But US politicians are almost all authoritarian, and will weld that power to benefit those who bankrolled their campaigns.

If you want small government or classical (small "L") liberalism, you either need to look at "third" parties like the Libertarians or fringe candidates. Trump's promise to "drain the swamp" was the closest we've come in a long time to a mainstream attempt at shrinking the authoritarian government power apparatus that the two main parties fight to control, while continually increasing it's power. (Much of that power isn't actually even held by the politicians, but rather the permanent bureaucracy, aka, the "deep state.") Trump obviously did not succeed in dismantling any significant government power structure, and I will leave it to the reader to decide for himself whether he ever really intended to do so.

[Dust]

Sadly, the entire planet suffered a hard lurch to the "right" in the late 1970s and early '80s, likely triggered by the revolution in Iran, and then followed up with Ronald Reagan in the USA and Margaret Thacher in the UK who were essentially clones of one another in different clothing. The Soviet Union was badly shaken as well and that damaged Gorbachev's policy of Glasnost (which was a watered down version of Nixon's brilliant concept of Detente), and the resulting arms race (unwinnable at any cost) destroyed both the United States and the Soviet Union, which bankrupted within about 15 minutes of each other, with both devolving into oligarchies. The Soviet collapse was essentially uncontrolled, and the collapse of the USA was very tightly stage-managed so the inhabitants were not really aware of what happened.

I mostly refer to the shifting of politics AFTER the Soviet Union fell in the late 80's. Since that rightward shift you describe, things have been slowly moving left. I don't remember the lurch you describe, since I'm too young.

...Of note, Trump's would-be assassin was a registered Republican, and was likely simply seeking to achieve fame for potting somebody "big". And he missed.

Pennsylvania is a closed primary state, so there is an incentive to register with the opposing party if that party's primary is more consequential. In rural PA, the Republicans dominate, meaning their primary has more to do with who gets elected locally than the general election does. Also, the recent Senate race had a more "interesting" primary on the Republican side.

Had the would-be assassin put the bullet on the mark, then the Church of Trump would have soldiered on replete with a martyr. This is not going to go away without force, any more than NAZI Germany was going to go away without the use of force. (And note the resurgence on the far-right in lots of Europe now; it's not just the USA.) Perhaps letting it run might be best. But the price of that is going to be measured in the loss of millions of lives due to lack of access to medical care, starvation, and civil strife. It's not a pretty picture.

When Kennedy was assassinated, he became a martyr, but was used to push policies that he never would have supported. We don't know what would have happened if Trump was killed, I just know it would have been bad for the country, likely in a way we wouldn't expect.

I think we can still hope for and work towards a peaceful solution to our country's woes, but it's going to take a lot of people setting their egos aside to work together. The false dichotomy of right and left keeps us fighting, while I think nearly everyone wants to see the authoritarians/oligarchs go away. The social issues, while important, can't be resolved while they are being used by leaders in both parties to stir the pot.

[crfriend]

I think we can still hope for and work towards a peaceful solution to our country's woes, but it's going to take a lot of people setting their egos aside to work together. The false dichotomy of right and left keeps us fighting, while I think nearly everyone wants to see the authoritarians/oligarchs go away. The social issues, while important, can't be resolved while they are being used by leaders in both parties to stir the pot.

I'd like to think so as well, but I'm not confident. These divisions have been actively been being worked, nurtured, and cultivated for decades, and that's because the controlling class knows full well the power of "Divide and Conquer". Keep the plebes fighting amongst themselves and they'll never suss out that they've been had. It's the mid 1930s all over again. We never learn.

[timemeddler]

As far as the "Teflon Don" goes, we had one of those a while ago that turned to Velcro -- and things started sticking. Note that Trump has 34 (and counting) felonies he's yet to answer for.

There is no way he's going to answer for any of that.

The SCOTUS has already ruled, they guy's above the law.

like hilary and every other big wig politician ever.