Yeah, but remember that the Democrats also spent a mountain of cash. They can’t afford that either.
… You’re secretly John Huntsman, aren’t you?
Stewart Rhodes, the founder and executive director of Oath Keepers, a far-right national militia network, spoke to a group of retired cops and military veterans at a private campground outside of Winston-Salem, North Carolina in early April.
From his exaltation of the drafters of the Second Amendment in 1789, it might be hard to guess that Oath Keepers is assuming the role of a paramilitary security force within the ultranationalist movement backing President Trump.
[…]
Oath Keepers’ name refers to the oath taken by military service members to not only “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” but to a list of orders Oath Keepers believe enlisted service members and law enforcement should not obey. They run from bedrock Second Amendment (“We will not obey orders to disarm the American people”) and standard civil libertarian (“We will not obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people”) to the seemingly improbable and paranoid (“We will not obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps”).
[…]
“By being out there in front and protecting people you now have the best chance of influencing the Trump supporters to make sure that they understand the Constitution and make sure that they hold his feet to the fire,” Rhodes said in an interview on a right-wing program called “The Liberty Brothers Radio Show”, “So I think it’s important for all of us in the patriot movement or the broader liberty movement to be very active, even if you don’t care for some of the things that Trump said during the campaign.”
While claiming to oppose both White supremacists and their antifa opponents, Oath Keepers appeared in Pikeville, Kentucky in late April for a joint-rally of the avowedly fascist Traditionalist Workers Party and National Socialist Movement. Matthew Heimbach, the leader of the Traditionalist Workers Party, was charged with shoving a Black protester at a Trump rally in Louisville, Kentucky last July, but is now reportedly claiming that then-candidate Trump encouraged the behavior in a counter-suit against the protestor.
The Trump administration’s top environmental official met privately with the chief executive of Dow Chemical shortly before reversing his agency’s push to ban a widely used pesticide after health studies showed it can harm children’s brains, according to records obtained by The Associated Press.
People wonder how shit like asbestos, DDT and Agent Orange happen. Well, here’s how that happens.
To the first point, look at that first line of the graph, Ossoff in Georgia. How much money was spent by both sides to move that little circle maybe 5 points to the left? And it STILL wasn’t enough to get the win. I keep seeing pundits touting these numbers and graphs as proof that we’ll see left-leaning movement in the 2018 and 2020 elections, but I also see plenty of evidence that there is even more “us vs. them” Conservative rhetoric happening now than pre-November, and that’s going to show up come election time as circles moving back towards the right. If the margin is 5 points, and you only manage to move 3 points to the left, you still lose.
Exactly. Democrats don’t have the money to run an Ossoff-style campaign for every seat up for grabs in 2018 and 2020. And while the same may be true for Republicans, it certainly seems like Conservative PACs and Republican mega-doners are able to outspend Democrats on a regular basis.
Ha! =)
Huntsman is a little more socially Conservative than I am, but as far as Republicans go I’m hard pressed to think of many I admire more than Huntsman. I especially agree with his views on the need for a third-party system or a reformed version of one of the existing parties to help bring balance back to politics. Since 2012 he’s been warning people that exactly what happened in 2016 would happen (not a Trump victory obviously, but that partisan politics would reach a point where ideological loyalty would take a back seat to common sense at the expense of the entire country).
My personal political/ideological views are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I believe the Middle Class is the key to the American economy and success, and should be protected and grown, not abused and bled into non-existence. I used to think my views were pretty representative of Americans as a whole, that most Americans were cool with gradual social progressiveness so long as it was paired with economic growth and opportunity, but now I am not so sure. Conservative Media has done a damn fine job convincing quite a large block of America that social progressiveness is the antithesis of economic opportunity.
But the invisible hand of the free market will correct this stuff!
The free market concept and general theory would actually require complete knowledge too, for the most part. If someone knows they’re selling poison but the market doesn’t know that it’s not complete information. That’s the part most leave out when they talk about free markets… the complete information component which is one of the reasons why you see politicians spout free market as a real market more often than you see actual economists say that (not to be confused with politicians who are also economists) since most economists know and should know the real market does not have complete information.
What God-fearing patriot would do this?? No. This doesn’t happen. Besides, Christ loved capitalism and money, right? He had that thing with the moneylenders. That means the more money you have, the closer to Christ you are.
People who get poisoned should bootstrap their way into being un-poisoned.
That’s disturbing about the pesticide. Yet another reason to buy organic.
DDT is a poor example here, since it was wildly successful in controlling malarial mosquitos. Leaded gasoline is a better example of industry in bed with government regulators, imo.
Organic pesticides are often worse than those used in conventional farming. You do not dodge pesticides by spending more for organic produce.
http://www.acsh.org/news/2016/04/21/enjoy-your-organic-produce-and-its-toxic-pesticides
Ya, the main issue with DDT was that they sprayed it all over everything in infinity quantities. I believe the impact on endocrine systems, which supposedly led to thinning shells of predatory birds was never conclusively established, but it’s somewhat moot, given we probably could have kept using it without causing problems, simply by using it in a more responsible manner.
Certainly in places where malaria is actually a problem, targeted usage makes sense.
And here is what Ralph Nader has to say about that organization:
A consumer group is an organization which advocates the interests of unrepresented consumers and must either maintain its own intellectual independence or be directly accountable to its membership. In contrast, ACSH is a consumer front organization for its business backers. It has seized the language and style of the existing consumer organizations, but its real purpose, you might say, is to glove the hand that feeds it.
Looks like the initial backing to found the ACSH came from the American Chemical Association. Hmm.
That data on that pesticide seems pretty legit though.
You can look up the toxicity of permitted organic pesticides on your own, without the ACH’s help. It’s all out there in the MSDS sheets. There is a reason the industry moved on from using those compounds, they are more dangerous than the alternatives.
I’ve read similar things regarding non GMO stuff, where the organic pesticide is something which needs to be applied in massive quantities, whereas there are numerous strains of GMO foods which inherently produce the exact same chemical, but are able to achieve effectiveness with minute amounts, since it isn’t being sprayed all over the plants.
Why would you focus only on the first line, when there are four more data points?
If the nationwide movement is 3 points to the left, then Democrats will take the House.
To be fair, I think SlainteMhath’s point was to be cautious with one’s optimism. Midterms almost always swing the other way, as I understand it. It just seems a question of how much and whether that will be enough. If Trump becomes a little less Trump-like, that may take some of the wind out of Democrats’ sails.