American Unseriousness
- Thread starter CO. Hoosier
- Start date
And, while the Trumpers/Republicans on this board act like there's an avalanche of inevitable Republican-only victories queued up on the mountainside, there are clear signs that Republicans are not 100% unified:
McConnell's leadership PAC announces a $7m ad buy to back Murkowski
Mitch McConnell's leadership PAC announced a $7 million ad buy on behalf of GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who is fending off a primary challenge from Trump-backed Kelly Tshibaka.
No, it is stupid people like you who will literally shot themselves in the foot because of stupid hatred the media convinced you of. Have you ever in your life once had an original thought? Just once? You post 16 straight times in a thread, respond to your own posts. You have troubles
Thank you.
I'm honored to be the person that saved America by single-handedly defeating Trump in the last election.
Here is an excerpt from your last post; see if you can see anything wrong with it (and then go change DANC's diaper): "people like you who will literally shot themselves in the foot."
Why don't you tell me ? What I said was in better terms, a**holes like you that literally shot themselves in the foot ? Tell me? You would voted for dogs**t because you cared more about hating Trump than you did actually voting for something and look where we are. So Please, Please tell me. I think it is great you are honored by being stupid and its quite obvious . Oh I get your grammar police GFY
When serious, substantive people like Mitch Daniels bows out of politics, you know something's wrong.An interesting piece about where we are as a country and society at this moment. Read the whole thing
The Case for American Seriousness
We don't need aging institutions to pave the way for 21st-century dynamism. What we need is will. And audacity.bariweiss.substack.com
As noted, in many important ways, the United States is in a period of decline in the world. While many will contend this decline is part of the natural rise and fall of great societies, I refuse to accept that. Societies decline for reasons, reasons that we see right now.
There are reasons why we have a group of geriatrics well past their sell-by dates in office and in charge.
There are reasons why we elect unaccomplished and incapable people instead of the best and brightest.
There are reasons why unfettered free expression and open discussion of ideas and opinions is under attack.
Most people in the world do not live under a system that features the consent of the governed. We do. There are reasons for that. There are also reasons why it is now fashionable to reject those who gave us that system.
Most importantly our racial struggles was on the cusp of seeing people for character apart from skin color, we then slammed on the breaks and now again make race and skin color the most important and defining human attribute. There are reasons for that too.
Our decline is by no means inevitable but it is clearly unmistakable. All we need to do is refocus and stop government and policy by irrelevant BS. Dare i say Make America Great Again?
His record as Governor was superb and he received little consideration for a Presidential run, even though he supposedly took himself out. The media would have made his personal life into a soap opera and played it every hour of every day.
That's why quality people don't get involved anymore. They don't want to put themselves and their families through it.
I agree with this. Even when quality candidates like Daniels do put themselves through the process, they get little traction. The public is just not qualified to select the best candidates in this era. We are very easily distracted, accept the candidate with the most name recognition or money as the best choice, and are easy prey to “different” or outrageous.
In 2016, I bet on Martin O’Malley because I saw a boring centrist with baggage on one side in Clinton, and an old socialist in Bernie. I assumed an intelligent, experienced, handsome 53 year old would rise to the top in that three way primary. But he had to drop out after Iowa (not long after I sent his campaign 1000 of my favorite dollars, which still pisses me off, btw).
On the Pub side, you guys came up with Trump over Christie, Rubio, or 16 other sane people. I believe in democracy, but think the old school smoke filled rooms and convention fights, may have been a better way to select Presidential nominees because Americans may not be serious enough these days, as the OP opines.
It's possible that Trump being the vile person he is will make it possible for other less than perfect people to make a serious play.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Yes. Anybody on the left who dismisses the rise of substack - formed almost entirely of now politically homeless non-Woke liberal journalists - is free to do so at their own political hazard. We have much to learn from the Bari’s and Matt Taibbi’s of the world but because they are out of lock step with the big liberal machine, they are dismissed as kooks.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the reason Trump beat out the other Republican contenders was, of course, his star power, but also he voiced a lot of concerns people actually had.
Christie and Rubio are great on policy - I'd vote for either one. But they don't address a lot of the issues core Republicans care about. And he pushed back - hard - on the media and Democrats. Republicans have long been too loathe to take on Democrats like they take on Republicans.
Whatever else he is, Trump's a fighter, and people like the fact that he was not afraid to give voice to issues they care about. His MAGA theme came about as a throwaway speech at a rally, where he vowed to make American great again. It was such an applause line, he adopted it as his campaign slogan.
There are a lot of intangibles that go into the decision to vote for a candidate. I'd vote for Mitch because I agree with 99% of his policies (his DST issue being one I don't like) and he's clever and funny, in his own way. But he's not the most charismatic person, which hurts him against the more bombastic candidates. He is a Calvin Coolidge kind of guy.
If Democrats want a chance of winning in 2024, they'll nominate Joe Manchin. But they won't.
I would posit that, at least in part, Putin's overcompensation issues may have something to do with his height.
Overall she presents a compelling case but it has a fundamental if not fatal flaw — seriousness is an ambiguous catchword for the all-important trait she describes.
The problem is, serious can mean sincerely intent but also gravely concerning, which is almost the opposite of the passionately creative spirit she is describing.
It’s challenging to find an English word meaning the opposite of serious. Perhaps insouciant. Insouciance is another characteristic of many of the great innovators throughout history.
I’m not quibbling here.
My point is, seriousness can stifle insouciance and thus stifle creativity. This wouldn’t be a problem for the born creators but it is highly likely to be a problem for those who want to “get serious” about being creative.
I don’t know what a better catchword would be, because she’s trying to combine passionate intensity with ingenuity and creativity.
Similar threads
