Speaking of Propaganda…
Stephen Miller and Fox News.
It is easy to be enured to all that is going on, but here we have the Deputy Chief of Staff of this administration delivering a hateful, spittle-inflected rant on Hannity’s TV show, and then the clip is edited and posted on X.
He calls the Democratic Party (or, you know, the “Democrat Party”) “a domestic extremist organization.” He goes on about how the party does not represent citizens but is “exclusively” dedicated to representing “hardened criminals” as well as “gangbangers” and “illegal aliens.”
This is a dangerous attempt to delegitimize political opponents and to set up in the minds of viewers that if force is necessary to deal with illegal immigrants, then surely force may be needed against those who represent them.
Can Miller’s overt fascism be denied at this point?
In terms of DC, Rolling Stone notes: Trump Declares D.C. a ‘Crime Free Zone’ Despite 442 Crimes Reported in Past Week.
Following his National Guard takeover of Washington, D.C., Donald Trump has declared the capital “crime free.”
[…]
According to available crime statistics from D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department, there were 442 crimes reported in the district in the past seven days. These include 50 reports of violent crime: one homicide, 23 instances of assault with a dangerous weapon, 24 robberies, and two cases of sex abuse. There were also nearly 250 thefts reported over the past week.
Like Noem claiming the LA would have burned down without the National Guard, there are a lot of lies flying around about Trump’s ability to use deployments to fight crime. This, while he talks openly, as does Miller above (and as Trump has), about deploying to other cities.
Meanwhile, stuff like this has Miller written all over it.
And a coda for the post.
I think enough Americans believe that their fears are rooted in objective reality, however exaggerated they might be. Nationalism attaches a wisdom to prejudices. It says that even if you go too far there’s wisdom in the prejudiced arrangement executed by power. This is basically the defense of how black people were treated post-Reconstruction.
So these blatant lies are truths, especially if you believe that They are taking away your right to be a nationalist and have these prejudices. You don’t have to believe that everything Miller or Noem says is true, but you can still believe they are offering a wise path forward.
Honestly, I hate to say it but Stephen Miller is expressing what a lot of democrats felt as the party prioritized virtue signaling on social issues, crime and immigration over pragmatic policies. Now is the PERFECT opportunity for democrats to be talking about and pushing pragmatic policies on social issues, crime, and immigration but like scared little chickens, they are afraid of their own base. Look, I fully support an agenda that includes respect and non-discrimination of gender issues/marrage/etc, reform for how cities address crime, and an actual immigration policy that addresses need for workers and a path to citizenship but they are playing to the extreme left, and that strategy does not work for practically minded people, who tend to be democrats.
His language is extreme but he is exploiting the opportunity to keep the focus on how poorly democrats have related to their base since about 2016/2017. And since no democrats are pushing back with pragmatic solutions the administration is winning the hyperboly game (wich has strong influence of people).
@HelloWorld:
Citations, please.
The fact that a handful of Dem pols said “defund the police” immediately after the George Floyd murder doesn’t count.
@HelloWorld: I actually understand, intellectually, where you are coming from (more or less).
But how is it we are in a world in which one of the most powerful members of the Republican Party, as well as of the government, can attempt to utterly delegitimize the opposition party writ large, and even people who are supposedly sympathetic to the opposition party can say, “Well, he kind of has a point because some Dem somewhere said something?”
This is a version of the messaging argument I see here all the time.
No wonder the majority of the country is falling for fascism if Dem-leaning people are willing to respond like this.
I choose to believe there is a silver lining in the prominence of Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller as mouthpieces of Trump 2.0. You’d have a hard time finding two more odious people to put out in front as barkers trying to draw people into a big tent.
@HelloWorld:
Democrats, Walz/Harris first among them, talked plenty about pragmatic policies on immigration, high prices, social issues, and even crime during the course of the 2024 election. Not coincidentally, the Biden administration had actually delivered pragmatic policy in the form of the CHIPS and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure bill.
Sadly, pragmatism didn’t win the day over blatantly Unrealistic promises like the end of the Ukraine war in a day, non-inflationary tariffs, and an easy & humane mass-deportation program that would only remove the worst of the worst.
@Steven L. Taylor: “A handful of democrats said”? Try local governments passed legislation and city policies which help define the word “WOKE”. You want citations? I’ll give you public policy. For example, crime is only down in DC if you go by the very unpopular NEAR act passed by the looney left in DC: https://nearact.dc.gov/page/about-near made even worse by DC’s revisions to the Youth Act: https://cjcc.dc.gov/page/districts-youth-rehabilitation-act-analysis
@Scott F.: Are you kidding me? The Harris/Walz campaign is a perfect example of what I am talking about. Walz was hitting hard at the beginning of the campaign, but was told to tone it down and hence stopped lobbing the thoughtful zingers he is so good at. Harris was afraid of Joe Rogan, and all you ever heard about regularly during the election was trans issues. How could Harris tackle inflation when her party was in control? Too much poor messaging.
Like it or not, Trump is making a lot of in roads with people who do not like him at all because of all the reasons I’ve listed above.
@HelloWorld: Why do I get the feeling you don’t really “hate to say Stephen Miller is right.”?
@HelloWorld:
You needed to get out more in 2024, seriously. If your narrative of the last election is Harris was afraid of Rogan and trans, trans, trans, then you badly need to expand your news sources.
Harris didn’t advance magic anti-inflation policies, but rather went after price gouging. Made sense, because the Biden administration was in the process of delivering a “soft landing” (that rare feat when inflation was reduced without a recession) and not getting any credit for it – because the Trump campaign was LYING about the true economic conditions and their snake oil fixes.
I do not like that Trump made a lot of in roads with people who do not like him at all because Trump and his enablers in the press misrepresented true national conditions and offered simpleton-easy remedies. That Joe Rogan, and apparently you, bought into this Unreality is kind of making Steven’s point, isn’t it?
@becca: No, you are wrong about that. I do hate to say it. Reality check for democrats: People – dems included – are sick of hearing about the same old non-working “solutions”. Trumps tactics are disgusting, but at the end of the day my friends and neighbors in DC are saying “it really is safer”. Dems – myself included – are sick of hearing about the problems of the .0001% and want solutions for the >99%. My fear is that the midterms come and people will say “hhmmm…I’m not getting swarmed by people wanting to work for me at Home Depot, I go to restaurats and my busboy is an American, I feel safer in cities that have had extreme crackdowns after decades of poorly implemented “programs” only made matters worse, and I don’t feel shamed for not playing to white guilt politics”. The time for dems to wake up was last week…not today, not tomorrow. Last week.
Drew/Guarneri
ETA: Nm, I did a site search on google and he’s an infrequent commenter.
“If you think they did so well with messaging and fighting back then I am even more perplexed as to how Trump has ALL branches of government under his control.”
No, it’s clear by your comments here that Trump’s message was very well received by some.
@Scott F.: “You needed to get out more in 2024, seriously”. I’m not the messenger. If you think they did so well with messaging and fighting back then I am even more perplexed as to how Trump has ALL branches of government under his control.
@Neil Hudelson: Whoever it is, it certainly smells of concern troll.
@HelloWorld:
Except no. No, you didn’t.
This is a tell. It is tell that either you listen too much to right wing news services or that you are being disingenuous in your concerns.
The Harris campaign was not focused on trans issues.
@Neil Hudelson: I’ve been posting here for > 10 years. Over the last few years I haven’t posted much. Can’t we have a conversation? Are people so intent on their own point of view that you can’t have a discussion without calling someone a troll? Have I insulted anyone or manipulated anything? I’m sharing my honest opinion, and open to yours. This used to be the go to site for a political discussion, then something happened.
@HelloWorld: You’ve gone from the Democratic Party gave Miller the opening to call them extremists to vague assertions about local governments and an argument over DC crime stats?
Color me unpersuaded.
BTW, I have no idea what this means.
BTW: HelloWorld has been around for a long time and I have never had any reason to associate them with Drew or anyone else.
@HelloWorld: Trump won the election largely because of anti-incumbent backlash over inflation.
Note that he won a plurality and only bested Harris by 1.5 points, IIRC
The Senate is skewed in favor of Republicans.
House races are largely noncompetitive and the GOP only won a bare majority.
Trump controls SCOTUS because McConnell denied Obama the chance to replace Scalia and then happenstance led to another vacancy by death of a liberal (plus a conservative retired so he could be replaced by a conservative)
Can we please dispense with the notion that we have open, competitive politics that can be assessed solely on how well each side messages?
@Steven L. Taylor: Pardon me, the Harris/Walz campaign did a spectacular job with messaging. The strength of the campaign messaging speaks for itself. Everyone knows what they stood for and all the successes of the Biden administration. You can ask anyone what bill is responsible for the infrastructure in their city and they will cite the ARA.
I’ll sacum to group think, thanks for setting me straight.
I’d wondered what became of James Pearce…
@Steven L. Taylor: What is vague about the laws DC council passed that have opened up dems to the criticism of woke policies ? I provided links to the legislation. I could provide links to other cities legislation that passed similar policies, especially AFTER George Floyd, maybe if I have time I will later but for now it seems like no one is listening anyway.
BTW, I largely agree with what you are saying about the system of how republicans get power, but thats no excuse for weakness or silence.
@HelloWorld:
I never said we couldn’t have a conversation. When someone with a name I don’t recognize pops up with familiar ‘concerns,’ my mind goes to the commentor who has popped here under two dozen names, thinking that his name is what the commentariot objects to and not the content of his ideas.
As I mentioned in my comment, I had already searched your name and realized I was mistaken. This occurred a full 20 minutes before you replied.
I welcome other ideas, but like most commentors here, I want some sort of substance to them.
Ah yes, the words of a person desiring sincere political discussion, open to other ideas.
@HelloWorld:
What is vague about them? Besides giving no explanation of how these bills do what you claim to do? Well, one point that’s incredibly vague to me is that you provided links to a 2016 DC city council legislation, and then referenced similar city policies following George Floyd’s murder, both of which happened ahead of Biden winning in 2020. And from that we are to conclude that the 2016 dc council legislation (and others like it) are what turned voters off of Dems in…2024.
That’s some vague causation!
It’s so vague, one might be tempted to find other explanations. For instance, seeing the success of Dems in 2020 following four years of pro-racial-equality legislation and protests–most acutely following Floyd–and the Dems’ losses in 2024 after running on a strategy of “activate the moderates and never-Trumpers,” as a sign that energizing the progressive base wins elections.
Or, given the correlation I’ve laid out, one might be tempted to find a completely different reason for the Dems’ losses in 2024–for instance, Professor Taylor’s inflation assertion, which is certainly backed by historical and contemporary data (and which I largely think is the reason).
What one shouldn’t do, if they want to be taken seriously as desiring open conversation, is to present evidence that doesn’t back up their assertions whatsoever, and then become a huffy little twit when asked to explain oneself.
I suspect crime really did decrease a bit in DC with the NG active (but it didnt disappear). If you pour thousands of NG or police into any large city I think you will have some effect, but what happens when they leave? DC has roughly 3,000 police, excluding Metro and Capitol forces. Somewhere between 2k and 3k troops were sent in. I will stipulate that if you increased the police force in every city by 70%-100% that you will see some effect on crime. However, who is going to pay for that? How much of the effect will last? Anyway, there are several cities with higher crime rates than DC and dozens with higher rates than Chicago and NYC, Trump’s next targets. It’s hard to ignore, unless you want to, that the actions in DC were meant to be performative. **
Walz and Harris lost because we had inflation. That was largely because the Fed favored employment over inflation. However, note that that the Fed brought back the economy and lowered inflation with a soft landing, which people thought was not possible.
No Democratic campaign I am aware of was concentrated on trans issues. The GOP was focused on it. Note that only 2 speakers at the Dem convention even mentioned the issue. Neither of those speakers was a prime time speaker.
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/dnc-2024-missed-trans-rights-implications-election-rcna167990
On immigration the GOP has convinced many people that immigrants are the source of all their troubles. Several Dems have offered solutions and they have come close on some votes even having passage in the Senate but the right has always blocked things. But, as documented above, ICE is not really concentrating on people with prior criminal records.
* Just some more data. We are pretty much back to pre-covid crime rates which are close to record lows for the last 75-100 years. While doubling the police force likely has an additional effect it’s unlikely it is cost effective. Cost estimates for doubling our police forces across the country run in the $200 billion range.
Steve
@Neil Hudelson: I accept your apology for calling me a troll. I also apologize for my sarcasm on dem messaging. All I know is the republicans are already compaigning for the mid-terms, and Stephen Millers speech is proof. It is my opinion that Dems still have no plan, and no message and the republicans are using failed democratic local city policies to gain strength. I feel the Dems could have done better with messaging in the last election and should be doing even better on it now. I’m not seeing it. They are letting this administration control the debate, maybe because of fear from the far left of the base. I don;t know why, I can only wonder because responding to people like Trump and Stephen Miller should be easy.
Neil, read the NEAR ACT and the Youth act. Note that since implementation crime in DC went up each year from 2016 to 2022. Also note that prior to these local laws crime in DC was going down, down, down until their passage. So, the DC WOKE council – who get in office with < 50% of the primary vote – created the environment that allows Trump to be the hero. On that, I'm done and will just hope that you understand what I am really trying to say without speculation of motives.
@HelloWorld:
You have my apologies as well. I do enjoy and welcome differing views. Things can get heated, and quickly, but I will try to tamp down my sarcasm. Looking forward to engaging with you more–we agree on more than we disagree.
@HelloWorld: The Biden administration was a quietly competent administration, in a world where quiet gets spoken over by people screaming “Socialism!” and other lies.
Utterly piss-poor communications. Not in quality (although I could quibble there), but mostly in quantity and volume.
@Steven L. Taylor:
A lot of America gets their news from less than savory news sources, and the Trump campaign was running countless commercials about Harris’s Woke Trans Ideology (or whatever).
The job of the campaign is to cut through that, and define themselves. And the longer the campaign went on, as they began to get a handle on the message they wanted to send, the worse they got. They reigned in Walz a bit, and it looked like they got afraid to offend.
The campaign either had to change the topic to something they wanted to talk about (they tried, they failed) or take it head on and make a case for supporting trans folks that ties to American Values(tm) of Freedom, Liberty, Equality and Individualism.
@steve222:
Restaurant business decreased. It turns out that if people stay away and stay home there is less of everything.
Ha! Was it the DC woke council that urged antiwoke hero Trump — a convicted felon who heroically helped Epstein rape children — to heroically pardon and release the Jan 6 criminals after their violent terrorist attack led to the deaths of multiple Capitol officers?
I’m surprised such a thug could make inroads with anyone, let alone Democrats. But neither the Republicans nor the Dems I know fall for a rapist career criminal’s failed attempt to play hero because he uses”trans” as a pejorative, and wastes $1 million/day placing troops to D.C. to take selfies with tourists at the National Mall, do trash pickup and landscaping, and destroy foot traffic — thus killing local businesses, as MAGA tariff inflation wasn’t catastrophic enough.
Probably cause those in my orbit think independently for themselves, past the bobblehead media’s “tRumP iS sEtTinG a cRiMe tRaP foR dEmOcRaTs” manufactured consent groupthink.
Incidentally, it’d cost only $250,000/day to house D.C.’s homeless population, in case anyone still wonders how Donald bankrupted casinos.
Just 38% of Americans support Trump’s use of troops to police DC (Reuters/Ipsos)
Voters 56% – 41% oppose deploying the National Guard to D.C. (Quinnipiac)
Are Trump’s inroads in the room with us right now? Can someone show me on the doll where the inroads are?
@HelloWorld:
I find this fascinating for multiple reasons. I know a democratic voter here who swears all the democratic party talked about was trans. Yet literally the only ads played here that mentioned trans anything were GOP commercials.
Here’s the democratic platform for 2024.
https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/FINAL-MASTER-PLATFORM.pdf
Do a search for trans.. You’ll find a ton of transit, transportation and such but that’s about it.
The GOP really are the masters at manipulating low information voters..
Have to admit I was surprised to see Hello World wasn’t banned as part of troll enforcement. Nice to see he’s at least somewhat trying to take a more reasonable approach to commenting here now. Still working the concern troll angle as always though..
@Scott F.:
“Harris was afraid of Joe Rogan” is a common MAGA refrain without substance. Trump had never been on Rogan’s show either, until a week and a half before election day. Only after he was on the show did Trumpies begin crying out that Harris needs to go on Rogan’s show right away. Assuming that Rogan could have offered a reasonable show date on short notice, it would have involved canceling other events in the final days of Harris’ campaign to go to Texas for that particular show, because… Trump just did it.
@Matt: I did not say ” all you ever heard about regularly during the election from the democratic party was trans issues”, but that seems to be what you read. My point is that Republicans will do whatever they have to to get their message out, and in the process control the debate – because the democratic party is full of wimps who do not know how to sell their policies. For about 5 minutes earlier this year Mark Kelly started showing some communication-messaging skills, and Bernie and AOC definitely deserve credit….but who else and who now? If you think the general voting public is not so easily swayed then the problems of the democratic party are a lot more serious than I thought.
Matt, I have no idea what is meant by “Nice to see he’s at least somewhat trying to take a more reasonable approach to commenting here now”. Seems to me, you put words in my mouth, then echo my basic point. Additionally, I’ve never been anything but respectful when I’ve posted – weather its serious political discussion or a small humorous one liner.
Crime Festers in Republican States While Their Troops Patrol Washington (New York Times)
Dang. Even the NY Times — known for laundering fascist propaganda since the early days of Hitler — ain’t buying the desperate ANTIWOKE agitprop on remaking America’s biggest criminal into a heroic crime-fighter. Explains why the pedophile’s approval on this is trash.
The Biden-Harris admin brought crime to multi-decade lows, with real anti-crime policy: reducing poverty, creating jobs, investing in the general welfare.
Epstein’s best friend puts violent, cop-beating Jan 6 terrorists back to the streets while gutting healthcare, killing jobs, and ruining small businesses — and expects non-stupid Americans to believe wasting millions per day for troops to cosplay in MacArthur Park and dilly-dally at the Lincoln Memorial is some Batmanesque attempt to fight crime? Get real.
All while doing nothing to address the reality that the majority of America’s most dangerous places are in red and/or Trump-voting states. And for much the same reason 9 of the 10 poorest states and 95 of the 100 poorest counties are Republican: “conservative” policy increases despair and worsens quality of life.
The MAGA White House ANTIWOKE Council would better position Republicans for 2025-26 elections by deploying troops to decrease our electricity and grocery bills, skyrocketing on tariff Trumpflation.
@HelloWorld:
I am not asking you to succumb to anything. I am not telling you that the Harris campaign was perfect. I am telling you that the campaign was not focused on trans rights, because it wasn’t.
And asserting that some local laws fit your definition of “woke” is not good evidence for your broader assertions.
Groupthink is insisting this fake, fascist lunacy makes Trump look like a hero, because the chuckleheads on cable news tell you what to believe — when the data says the opposite.
Groupthink is not when Democrats decline to be lectured about crime by supporters of a corrupt rapist, convicted felon, career criminal, and Epstein-bestie pedophile.
Orwell would have a field day with Trump apologists and their easily-manipulated lackeys.
@Gustopher:
That’s fair. Again, I am not saying that the Harris campaign was perfect or that it said everything the way I want it said.
But I continue to believe, and think that the evidence supports the position, that messaging is not as important as many commenters on this blog tend to argue.
There is simply no way that the trans issue was as central as inflation.
@HelloWorld:
Well that explains why Trump had the troops and quasi-police deployed to the mean streets of Georgetown. And later to rake leaves in and around the Capital Mall and White House. The rough districts of DC? Not so much, if at all.
@Steven L. Taylor:
I’ve probably made it clear that I agree with your take on messaging’s unimportance here. But, I also believe we haven’t come to terms with what “messaging” even means in the post-fact, self-selected info-systems, propagandist times we are living in.
As noted repeatedly above in this thread, the Biden/Harris administration actually delivered meaningful positive pragmatic outcomes across a spectrum of economic, foreign policy, and domestic issues. The Harris campaign messaged those outcomes and one can certainly argue that they did or didn’t do that well in good faith. OTOH, the Trump campaign promised rainbows and unicorns then, and they are claiming now that they saved LA from conflagration and they’ve eliminated crime in DC in just weeks.
How does “messaging” or “Dems defining themselves” even begin to work in such an untethered information landscape?
This is “Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… MASS HYSTERIA!” Ghostbusters level surrealism and all we have to counter with is political science taxonomies.
All in all, society in general and the world at large should be very, very grateful that Luddite is NOT allowed to fix the people around him. Seriously, folks, it would not end well.
I just need to keep reminding myself of that truth.
ETA – no, this has nothing to do with all y’all. It’s just been the kind of day when the fact that I’m a recovering “_____path” (you pick which one, they all probably apply) is a very very good thing.
ETA 2 – moved this over from the general topic area, as I’m only now calm enough (2nd drink before dinner) to actually read OTB today. Hoping that the sun comes out tomorrow!
@Scott F.:
This is a valid and very important point.
@Flat Earth Luddite:
I’m guessing empath or oseteopath.
@Scott F.: @Steven L. Taylor:
They could have blamed corporations, PE, and finance for causing inflation and stealing money. They could have demonized all of tech by simply showing what those people look like and how they talk. Instead, they played it nice and from the get-go. Tech is so bad that nobody actually wants anything they produce. Even some tech oligarchs are homeschooling their kids to keep them away from phones. Why not demonize and demagogue? Are they going to send out Curtis Yarvin to offer a defense?
We live in a time when people aren’t organizing to go off and knock off CEOs. But what a random unhinged man decided to kill the CEO of United Health, everyone understand why this might happen. No one is like that’s great, that will make change. But still, who is going to miss another robot CEO? But no one is out there trying to kill ICE agents. And yet if some random unhinged man decided to kill an ICE agent or five, it would be very hard not to see where they’re coming from.
Trump’s advantage with messages is that trans people or Haitians eating cats aren’t actual threats. It’s all message, no reality. They can laugh about a random migrant being shipped to a gulag for fortune because they aren’t really threatened. His entire base lives kissing up to actual threats. That’s why on social media, MAGA guys rant about HR (women) firing underserving people, but love it when bosses (men) fire liberals and weak women. The Democrats are bad at calling out punching down (because a lot of them love it) and terrible at punching up (because their leaders need jobs).
@Modulo Myself: Again, a better campaign would have been better. And yes, there are things I wish they had said.
But none of that would have changed the way enough people felt viscerally about inflation to make a difference.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Maybe. Biden dropping out at the last minute without a primary was just as bad, I think. That was an absolute disaster, and one completely under the control of Democrats. The finger can’t be pointed at the economy or left-wing activists. It’s comparable to Trump botching the Covid response in spring of 2020 and telling people to drink Drano, but in the end worse.
Trump probably would have won in 2020 had he not been so nuts about Covid and then about BLM. But I think an actual president capable of engaging America after Covid would have had a better shot with inflation than Biden with his mediated appearances and the endless vociferous defenses of how lively and aware he was. Inflation wasn’t that bad. This was not Weimar. But when your President is stumbling through his speech and everyone supporting him is shouting about how great the stumbling is, it does appear to be Weimar.
How is a Trump supporter supposed to respond to Taylor’s post in a constructive manner? Because the only way I can imagine a Trump supporter responding is…
“You guys have employed every smear, slur, and outrageous bit of demagoguery from calling Trump a fascist and a Russian asset to implying JD Vance had sex with a couch, and NOW you’re complaining about mean rhetoric? Go fuck yourself.”
What other kind of response could possibly be expected?
I would have thought that Trump returning to the White House by winning the popular vote would have demonstrated that the adolescent “resistance” fetish of the last decade was counter-productive. I guess I underestimated the degree to which some people care less about the country and more about making themselves feel better.
@DK:
unfortunately you did not phrase your answer in the form of a question.
According to a DA, several police officers, the president of the lifers’ club & my post release shrink, psycho and socio were the appropriate prefixes.
But I’m a much calmer one than earlier today, thank you very much.
@Modulo Myself: Biden’s age and all that went with it related to him seeking re-election was a problem.
But, on a mass level, people tend to treat presidential elections like a referendum on the current administration, with economics being a major component. Inflation was historically high during the Biden administration. Voters don’t like inflation. We saw incumbent parties do poorly worldwide for this reason in a similar timeframe.
I am not saying this is the only explanation, but it is likely the single most important variable to explain Trump winning.
I think it was close because Trump is such a bad candidate. If the Reps had nominated a “normal” candidate, I expect they would have won a bigger popular vote margin.
@PepperPrepper: Welcome back. The new name is a bit odd, but whatevs. I guess enough people said your name and it conjured you.
Here’s the problem: if you think this is all about rhetoric, you are wrong.
Also, if you think you have to defend Miller, you are part of the problem. If you see him as on your team, you are on the wrong team (and worse, feel the need to defend some of the worst members. of your team),
A rather detailed argument can be made about Trump’s fascistic tendencies.
The notion that the Democrats don’t represent Americans is false. As is the assertion that they are extremists who only represent criminals.
I would note, for example, that Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on J6 and engaged in extremist violence, and Trump’s response was to tell them that he loved them and he later pardoned them/commuted some of their sentences.
I could go on, and have written thousands of words that you can read.
Reality is what it is.
@PepperPrepper: I’ll say one more thing, because it is important. If you find yourself inclined to do the mental gymnastics necessary to defend Miller because he is on your political team, try to give some thought (I am not asking for public statements) about what he is saying and what you are finding yourself being indoctrinated into.
How much of this are you willing to ignore or rationalize because your party is telling you to?
Why are you cool with being lied to? (Or, to pick a recent example, do you really believe LA would have burned to the ground without National Guard troops being deployed?).
Why do you like the kind of rhetoric that comes out of Miller, Homan, Noem, Trump, etc?
Why are you in favor of ignoring due process?
Why do you support the president ignoring Congress?
I could go on and on and on.
And if you like all of this stuff, don’t be surprised if someone lumps you in with the fascists.
@Steven L. Taylor: “The notion that the Democrats don’t represent Americans is false”. I disagree. The dems have relied too heavily on identity politics instead of a unifying message. White people in poverty hear things differently than black people in poverty. Immigration is a hot button with poor whites. For example, I don’t want to hear about keeping people who are here illegally becoming legal, this is pandering to a demographic. I want to hear about how we need migrants of all sorts to help our farmers and keep our economy moving, and a plan to do that. I know some will accuse me of ignoring the platform, but I go back to what I was posting yesterday. Messaging is wrong with the dems and that gives control of the topic(s) to the repubs rhetoric.
@HelloWorld:
If you mean from Trump and the Republican establishment, yes. The “She’s for They/Them; He’s for Us” slogan was quite effective. If you mean that it was somehow central to the Harris/Walz campaign, that’s categorically false.
@HelloWorld: The GOP, from my POV, relies even more heavily upon identity politics. Their identity groups are several but chief among them are evangelicals and white males. They have always canceled those with whom they disagree when they have had the power to do so. Even within their own party they coined the term RINO to apply to anyone who wasn’t ideologically pure.
So I actually agree that the Dems have some messaging issues. As several have noted and I provided evidence the trans issue wasn’t big on the Dem side, just on the GOP side. The issue they needed to overcome was the high level of inflation we had under Biden. They didnt know to message about this or refused to acknowledge it. Honestly, I dont know if it is something you can overcome. We also had a peak in crime during covid for which Biden was blamed. Crime decreased a lot, as did fentanyl deaths BTW, in 2024 but the guy in office gets blamed. Finally, Biden should have dropped out way ahead of time so there could have been a real primary.
Given all of the negatives the Dems faced the GOP should have won the popular vote by 7%-8%. It was only as close as it was because Trump was running.
Steve
@HelloWorld: By this defintion, no party represents America.
Did you actually listen to the Miller clip?
@Steven L. Taylor: Well gosh golly Steven, yes I did, which is why I originally commented that as a 25-year resident of the district he (Stephen Miller) strikes a lot of nerves with people LIKE ME – who are liberal but experienced FIRST HAND the damage that DC democrats did to public safety, starting in 2016 with the NEAR ACT and blah, blah blah. It’s clear to me that you and some others don’t really care to listen or understand my POV or the POV of my former neighbors who ARE EXPERINCING POSITIVE AFFECTS, but only want to parse and twist my posts into a non-productive discussion (example, you accused me of saying that the Harris campaign talked to much about trans issues, which I never said. I said that was the prevailing message because democrats don’t know how to control the public debate, now you’re questioning if I even “watched the clip at the center of discussion”, because – because why? I have no idea why you would ask that. Sorry, Stephen Miller is disgusting and manipulative but since I HAVE BEEN at city council meeting where my former rep Brianna Nadeau told a pregnant woman who had been mugged that she should “put herself in the shoes of someone who can’t afford a laptop computer and cell phone, but they see people walking around with these things”. Yes, I believe this type of thinking has permeated a lot of the democratic party – and its evident in some of the comments here. And it is killing us in elections, and it is being successfully exploited by the right. I’m sure someone will have a problem with what I feel and will school me instead of try and understand. I think I will go back to browsing this website once in a while. I remember the good old days when it was an exchange of ideas.
@HelloWorld:
Don’t know how to tell you this, my dude, but when you type “Harris was afraid of Joe Rogan, and all you ever heard about regularly during the election was trans issues” the only way to read that post of yours is that “trans issues were all that the Dems were talking about”. No one here will at all disagree with the idea that Dems were weak on the messaging and terrible at hitting back hard where needed.
And if Brianne Nadeau said such a tone-deaf thing one would think there would be some record of it, but my google-fu skills are insufficient to find it. I do see, though, that she has been in office since 2015 so I guess she’s doing something right.
@HelloWorld:
Then @your statement,
is a problem in my view because it is one thing to criticize Democrats, either in general, or in specific cases, but to watch the Miller clip and to agree with that statement, regardless of what legitimate gripes you may have about Democrats, makes it very difficult to take you seriously. Or, worse (in my mind at least) to think you are sympathetic to Miller.
And, to be honest, you sound a lot more sympathetic to the Trumpian worldview than you seem to want to admit.
We are currently exchanging ideas. If we weren’t, I wouldn’t be talking to you right now, nor would there be a vigorous interchange under this post.
I understand you don’t like crime and think that the Dems are failing on that score. I agree, by the way, that the story you recount from a city council meeting is pretty awful. I disagree as to the degree to which it represents the entirety of the Democratic Party.
I wholeheartedly disagree that this means the Democratic Party does not represent America, at least insofar as any party definitionally only represents the interests of certain segments thereof.
What I do not understand, and the reason I keep pushing back, is how you are willing to agree, in part, with Miller. I think it is dangerous and problematic to say that when a politician like Miller uses rhetoric like that in the clip to say that he at least in part has a point. No, he doesn’t. He is engaging in eliminationist rhetoric against a political opponent. He is not engaging honestly. He is trying to convince people on his side that the other side is criminal and not even American. Given the way this administration deals with such people, hearing Miller should send a chill down your spine, not get you to say “he kind of has a point.”
I asked whether you had watched the clip because you are agreeing with him about the Democratic Party not representing America, and I wanted to make sure that you understood that you were doing so. There was a chance that maybe you were reacting to me and not the clip. It was making sure that you had heard what he said.
Note: I am not saying that you can’t criticize Democrats. But don’t succumb to using a fascist as a means of doing so.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Other than “And, to be honest, you sound a lot more sympathetic to the Trumpian worldview than you seem to want to admit.” you’re not putting words or thoughts on me that are not mine. I accept that we disagree. I don’t accept that there is not some truth to what Stephen Miller said in that speech. I’m sure you don’t agree with that. I think you and I do agree that Miller and republicans in general use rhetoric violently.
What I hope, and know I have not convince you on, is that more and more dems start looking at the thread of truth that might be in republican rhetoric and find a unifying way to talk to everyone directly about an issue. Stop pandering to hispancis on Immegration – its an economic issue. Stop pandering to white guilt on crime – all races want safety. If you lived in DC and had to deal with a councilperson that really does mirror some of Millers statements, maybe you would understand better.
“I remember the good old days when it was an exchange of ideas.” I enjoy the perspective, as long as my point of view isn’t attacked. If you want clarity on a point I am trying to make, just ask.
@HelloWorld:
Which is why I said, and stand by “you sound a lot more sympathetic to the Trumpian worldview than you seem to want to admit.”
@Steven L. Taylor: Understanding that there is a thread of truth to something does not account for a worldview. Think about it, that’s pretty insulting to say. A world view is very strong. I’ve been to multiple No Kings protests and have committed myself to writing at least 1 letter per month to my house and senate reps and regularly argue with my Trump brain washed relatives, and you’re trying to negate any point I am trying to make by equating my message to a sympathetic world view. Gaslighting in simple terms.
@Assad K: In DC, one gets elected with < 50% of the vote in the primary. It's a long-standing issue that needs to be corrected. She has had recall petitions put against her and – thankfully – she has decided not to run again. Her 1st election she beat Jim Graham – who was an amazing rep – with 38% in the primary (because he was under a bogus FBI investigation). The primary has always allowed her the advantage of having 5 or 6 other people running. Democrats in large cities have often been criticized for pandering to people who want hand-outs to get votes the same way republicans do with corporations/religious groups. That about sums it up with her.
@HelloWorld:
Sincere kudos for that. Honestly–no snark.
I am not trying to “negate” anything. I am not gaslighting you. I honestly think that if one can say that Miller kind of has a point (along with using terms like “virture signalling”/”woke”/”identity politics” while using one Democratic politician as a stand-in for the broader party) then, in fact, “you sound a lot more sympathetic to the Trumpian worldview than you seem to want to admit.”
Note the verb I used: “sound.” I am telling you how you sound, i.e., how you are coming across. I am not saying what you think, believe, or do. I will say that all I have to go on is what you say in these little boxes.
Here’s a transcript of Miller’s rant. I would agree that he notes that crime has existed, which is true. I suppose you probably agree with the notion that Democrats have “handcuffed law enforcement.” But the rest of it is a combination of lies, exaggerations, and fascistic rhetoric.
To me, saying that “Stephen Miller is expressing what a lot of democrats felt” (as you did above) about the following, and when you “disagree” with “The notion that the Democrats don’t represent Americans is false,” then you are taking a lot of ownership of the rant (or, maybe, you are just annoyed with me and therefore doubling down).
If you want to say that crime is a problem and Miller is saying some truth in that sense, fine.
But to me that is like a rapist telling a woman, “You are so beautiful” before he rapes her, and then at trial part of the defense being how honest he was about the beautiful part.
I would note that we have a president who thinks declaring someone a terrorist means he can arrest and deport, if not murder, that person.
As such, having a powerful member of the administration say, “The Democrat Party does not fight for, care about or represent American citizens. It is an entity devoted exclusively to the defense of hardened criminals gangbangers and illegal alien killers and terrorists. The Democrat party it’s not a political party it is a domestic extremist organization.” Then whatever other truth can be gleaned from the rant is rather beside the point, is it not?
@Steven L. Taylor: Ok, at least we are coming to more of an understanding of each other, but here are a few things I’d like to point out:
– “virtue signalling”/”woke”/”identity politics” while using one Democratic politician as a stand-in for the broader party” – Yes, I used 1 politician as an example, but I could easily provide others, on local and national scale. I also realize those kind of examples are a slipper slop. Far left virtue signaling works against the democratic party when dems are not providing context and policy. It works for republicans and their use of fear tactics because people respond to fear.
– Democrats have “handcuffed law enforcement.” – Yes, Stephen Miller is correct here, I believe. Thats why I brought up the NEAR act and Youth Act. Did you know the DC council made the age of a juvenile in DC anyone under 25???? Did you know if you are under 25 and arrested for many serious crimes, including armed robbery, you can enter a diversion program (which the Washington Post documented as a nothing program) and have the entire arrest expunged – with no record of it anywhere??? These programs have been implemented in MANY other cities – such as NYC and Chicago.
-“The Democrat Party does not fight for, care about or represent American citizens. – Hyperbole, but on some levels. Again, I revert to my experience in DC where I can show you strings of emails from said Councilperson, and at-large council person(s) who literally state that “I have no heart for people suffering from addiction” because people kept ODing in my alley and the police were not allowed to make arrests.
-In DC, there was murder on this town every other day / Now we are two weeks homicide free – Again, Stephen Miller is pointing out something that is true.
-Homeless encampments / the druggies – Yes, these were really, really bad for several years and not for the reasons woke-liberals would lead you to believe. They became worse after..you guessed it – the NEAR act
-I do not recognize that party Sean – This is his most important statement in my view. I believe the deomcratic party works best when it is pragmatic. Stephen Miller wins this point because I know how fed-up with crime democrats are in cities. They will not admit that their strategy – while good hearted and redeaming – has failed. They outright refuse. This makes someone like me a little despirate for something new. Yes, I do think to myself “geez…authoritarianism seems to be working with issues that neither party could resolve over decades” but then I have to remind myself that deporting people isn’t an economic plan nor is it the America that my father joined when he came over from Italy in 1954. What Trump is doing in DC has a short term success, but without reform – its only short term. This is where democrats could rise to the occassion. Bowser has always been good on crime, if you ask me, and even she sees some of the benefits.
@HelloWorld: I appreciate the back and forth.
But you keep convincing me that you are, in fact, more sympathetic to the Trumpian POV than you are admitting to yourself.