"Firing Fauci" will not get Democrats reelected. It will likely lead to much greater losses. A majority of the country supports what Fauci is doing and supports vaccination. Giving in to the noise will not only alienate nearly all of the base but will greatly add to the impression that Democrats are weak. Even if polling was the otherway on this issue in regard to efforts to combat COVID-19 with few exceptions from Biden on down nearlly all Democrats strongly support them and I don't believe they would drop them just for reelection.
This has been the problem all along with how this has been treated. It's seen as rolling over because it was a tactical mistake to tie the two bills together and it will be an incredibly costly strategic mistake not just for the Democrats but for the whole country if nothing is passed. Getting the $1 trillion Bipartisan Bill passed in the Senate was a major win and not just for moderates as it contains many provisions that Progressives have said they are for. It's only that their rhetoric portrayed it as a loss if they didn't get much much more. That painted them in a corner that now anything less is seen as a failure.
You can see contemporaneous video inside the house chamber. It is barricaded and there are multiple armed agents behind the barricade covering it with guns. I will concede an error though. They were not on the other side of the Capitol as I previously stated. I forgot joint sessions were held in the House Chamber, not the Senate Chamber. Even so, she was clearly not an imminent threat. In their own internal investigation by an agency that didn't sanction the same officer when he left his loaded weapon in a public bathroom. Their analysis (or at least that which has been publicly reported) was also incredibly flawed and didn't even mention the standard for the use of deadly force. On that note, the drone strike that killed 10 people including an aid worker and multiple children was determined to be justified and non-negligent by the Department of Defense. I guess if the government says something is okay, it must be true, right?
I've seen the video, and it's evident how close she was. They had been in that area just minutes before. She was an imminent threat. She was part of a violent mob. That had already attacked law enforcement, threatened to continue to attack, were aggressive, refused to follow issues commands by law enforcement, and she was encouraging others to join her in breaching the barricade. That alone shows that she was willing to break into barricaded areas. The next closest area was the area with staff right there. The officers themselves were also at risk. It is more than reasonable to think that shooting her prevented injury and possible death of those behind the barricade.
I've already discussed this ad nauseum in the 1/6 thread with video links. I disagree and we aren't changing each others mind. Anyone that cares for further analysis can look at the other thread.
This truck driver just defeated New Jersey’s most powerful lawmaker Ed Durr’s stunning defeat of state Senate President Steve Sweeney delivers a severe blow to Democrats in the Garden State — and to their most effective political machine. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/04/ed-durr-defeats-steve-sweeney-519502 excerpt: Meet Edward Durr, giant slayer. Durr, a truck driver for the furniture store Raymour & Flanigan, was declared the victor Thursday in a race against one of the most powerful people in New Jersey: State Senate President Steve Sweeney, a top officer in the international Ironworkers union whose influence rivals that of governors. In a week filled with surprises beyond the razor-thin New Jersey governor’s race, the election in South Jersey’s 3rd Legislative District was the biggest shocker of all — and one with massive implications for the future of New Jersey politics. Sweeney, who’s led the state’s upper legislative chamber for 12 years, was talked up in Democratic circles as a likely 2025 candidate for governor. He had amassed significant power in Trenton, shrewdly cutting deals with former Republican Gov. Chris Christie and frequently standing in the way of Gov. Phil Murphy’s agenda. Even Durr harbored doubts about his chances and wasn’t ready to declare victory in a Wednesday interview, telling POLITICO he was “walking on eggshells” until the results became official. State Republicans quickly jumped on victory — despite deploying no resources in the race. “I kept telling myself and telling people I was going to do it, but in the back of my mind I was like, ‘You know, how am I going to beat the Senate president?” said Durr, who ran unsuccessfully for state Assembly in 2019 and has never held elected office. But Durr said that, as he sat in his living room with his family Tuesday night as results rolled in, it dawned on him that there was a decent chance he’d soon be a member of the state Senate — and the man who took down Sweeney. “My daughter was sitting next to me. She laughed at me and said ‘Dad, you’ve got tears running down my face,” Durr said Wednesday morning. Durr, a 58-year-old father of three and grandfather of six who grew up in South Jersey, estimates he spent less than $10,000 on the race. By contrast, the New Jersey Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, spent about $5.4 million on a 2017 effort to unseat Sweeney, yet he still won by 18 points. This was a far different election, with Republican districts and those with large blue-collar populations turning out in droves for Republicans. It wasn’t just Sweeney. Durr’s Assembly running mates, Bethanne McCarthy Patrick and Beth Sawyer, appeared on track to defeat incumbents John Burzichelli and Adam Taliaferro (both D-Gloucester). Democrats will see their majorities shrink in both chambers of the state Legislature. And Murphy, despite claiming victory, appears to have significantly underperformed his own campaign’s expectations.
Edward Durr is the story of this election as well as 2022. The Dems just don’t seem to get it. People are sick and tired of being hosed by crooked, tone deaf politicians. Durr and Youngkin are prime examples of why they were elected. The people are fed up with all the BS in politics and they want a fresh new voice.
OPINION THE EDITORIAL BOARD Democrats Deny Political Reality at Their Own Peril https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/opinion/democrats-election-results.html
It's racism because they examine the policies and positions of the candidates rather than simply praising them for being a person of color?
is there an essential blackness that correlates to left-leaning politics and beliefs? as in Biden suggesting 'if you don't vote for me, you ain't black?' if not, I could see a charge of racism here being something one could at least debate
It is racist to denigrate a person of color for their political views absolutely When ugly phrases are used like “token” black mouth moving, white idea that target people on skin color ..it’s not just wrong it’s bigoted and real racist. We should be all celebrating what this lady accomplished. Comes here legally, joins Marines, Gets a freaking Masters degree from a real school, …runs a homeless shelter to help people of color,….makes a point to mention increasing funding for black colleges in her win speech so others can have the ability to get the opportunity she got. As a conservative this is winning. I love her and her beautiful family , I want more people of color to win at life like she did and if she can do it certainly others can. She has been black her whole life and I love her as a conservative. We are not a racist party. Best thing Youngkin could do was stand beside this beautiful and awesome and historic lady. I want more
What are her thoughts on teaching the history of why the median white family has 1000% if the wealth of a median black family to children so they understand that the reason isn't some inherent trait of races but rather socioeconomic history of oppression? Modern racism towards Black Americans has more to do with a generation of people not understanding why there is such a wealth gap between the two races with very different crime statistics to where they assume it's something inherently "cultural" amongst the Black community. So if a Black person is against Americans learning the real reasons, I can understand why Black activists would call them "token" because they are protecting the "it's cultural" narrative which generates actual racism.
What I posted was not a defense of anything Biden said. There are policies that serve predominantly African American communities. Some of those policies are increased financing to education, judicial reform, training programs, family leave, community medical services and insurance, greater opportunity for jobs... Other issues that would affect predominantly African-American communities would be protections put in place to avoid the deliberate and admitted attempt to made it more difficult for African-Americans to vote. So minorities that speak out against those policies are often used by whites to shield them from the criticism that their positions are harmful to African American communities. Discussing that is in no way racism. It is based on the issues.
the Biden reference was just an illustration of a black essentialist type of position. The comments being discussed are Dyson's "mouth moving" etc etc comments. Dyson's comments seem to imply that Dyson believes the words actually coming out of that black mouth (Winsome Sears's mouth) are not legitimate because they do not conform to Dyson's politics. The way Dyson expresses his views is not in any way a subtle or nuanced discussion of any issues at all--as far as I can see. As such I take it that Dyson has received a LOT of criticism for the implicit racism in such comments.
