Again, I obviously haven't made myself clear. I also blame people like Blair and Clinton, (who I DID mention explicitly).
Well, and before that... How different is this interview in 1979 to what Farage is saying now? We have to become fascists because otherwise people will become fascists.
I've come around to the idea that the question is not whether people believe in things but whether they are prepared to suffer for them.
OK. You're beginning to sound like her mum now. Look, I don't want to have a go at Sarah Longwell, particularly. As you say, she seems a lot more reflective now than I'm guessing she would have been back in the days of shrub. Also, (again, as you point out), you've obviously spent a LOT of time, (more than me anyway), listening to her reflect on her previous attitudes to conservative politics. I've watched some of their stuff, (prompted by you as it happens), but I always thought she was more an IC than anything else. So when she started saying she and the other guy had previously been conservatives, it shook me a bit as conservatism has been based on lies and distortions; on finding targets to blame for society's ills, for DECADES. There's nothing new about it, and Trump is simply extending those lies and 'blame-game politics' to their logical conclusion. Now, it's not the fault of organised labour or welfare queens... it's 'antifa' which is worse because at LEAST organised labour and people on welfare actually existed. If these people have finally realised the error of their ways and accepted their part in all that, then fine. All I'm saying is that that's a necessary step.
i think there tends to be a disconnect in terminology in these discussions. For instance all of Longwell, Miller, Carpenter etc are social liberals. They are also old money liberal on constitutional and rule of law questions. They tend to be right of centre on some economic issues. This is why Maitliss makes the joke that she is more conservative than most tory voters. They've all become radical socialists who want to nationalise industry and have the government be involved in every aspect of our lives. From where i sit, your portrayal of conservatives is one particular type of tory or paul ryan reaganite.
Recently i had a disagreement about wokeism in football for this exact reason. The open racism was wild in those days! You can argue the empty corporate slogans were a wrong turn, but it did actually represent a hell of a lot of progress compared to what was still common at the beginning of the 90s IMO
Your comment assumes this was the first time I've seen them. That would be incorrect. First saw them in 1991 at the Georgia Theatre. So, I've seen them play UMass several times, just not this last time.
Social anthropologists of the future, viewing 2020s LLMs' training data, are gonna be so ********ing confused by this Grimes bit.
They don't want to take over industries for any other reason than that they want to steal them for themselves, personally and they only want the government to involve itself in our lives so Trump can crush his opposition.
This kind of brings up the question of who the Never Trumpers are? As it looks, they are intellectual Republicans, which to the MAGA crowd makes them either RINOs or Democrats. Which then poses the question of who they are influencing? How much did they effect the 2020 and 2024 elections? I'm all for them, but I really don't know how many run-of-mill Republicans are Never Trumpers. I haven't listened to Longwell in a while (too depressing) which is where I think I'd get some good info.
This is MAGA. I've said this before, but back when I was in high school and learning about Reconstruction, I didn't understand why all the poor White and poor Blacks failed to unite against the wealthy (in this case, the land owners). To me, it would have meant that they were able to rise out of poverty and subjugation and live better lives if they did that. But as I understood the racism, I began to understand that poor Whites were fine being poor as long as poor Blacks had it worse. And that view, in the context of current day (the last 30+ years for me), this is the Republicans being fine in suffering as long as other people* suffered more. * - By other people, I started out thinking Blacks, but have come to realize that it means some group within the non-White heterosexual Christians. In other words, those that fall within groupings identified as problems for White Supremacy.
There has been a lot of analysis of this by all kinds of people - but many of those voters have all resorted by now, as part of a bigger realignment which has seen college educated move towards liberal parties.
if you are teaching in the 2030's you're bound to come across a student paper declaring how Grimes came to be the dominant political figure of the 20's.
This is an interesting perspective as to why people vote against their own interests and why it probably won't change... TL/DR It's cos they don't matter any more. The supposed 'benefits' of neoliberalism, pushed by people like Biden, are largely a mirage... so nobody gives a shit what they think.
This makes you sound like you want your cake, and to eat it too. On one hand, you say Trump is the logical end game to Conservatism of 30 years ago. I think we can all accept Conservatism is a political ideology, right? But then you cite an example that just backs up the fact Trump has no political ideology other than 'Tribute to the King'. He has as much anti Conservative ideals running through his thought process as any Communist would. He's a malignant narcissist, without any guiding political ideology or moral compass.
I guess since the Israel- Hamas war threads are closed, I will post this here. All living hostages have now been released by Hamas — Kann— NewsWire (@NewsWire_US) October 13, 2025
This same dynamic played out in California during the 30's and 40's and continues to this day. White migrant farm workers always needed to feel superior to the Mexicans or Filipinos, even though they were in identical economic circumstances and being exploited by the same corporations.