USA Politics

[Florestan]

Yes, for you. There are (or used to be) other people there with a historical right to their own lifestyle for better or worse whether it is the lifestyle you and I would choose. In short, I find where you (or I; I wouldn't want to live anywhere in the region as there are too many religious nuts on all sides) would prefer to live totally without relevance to what is happening in the region. Just to explain my comment without inviting to a long and fruitless discussion.

I got your point alright. I hope you got mine as well. The last thing I want is to be involved in a long and fruitless discussion regarding Israel.

[Daverz]

I'm really confused.

I'm too tired for this nonsense.

Could you please give me an example or two?

You should easily be able to find your own examples.  Some are quite famous like Trump's "good people on both sides".

I just googled "bothsiderism" and found lots of examples.  Like

https://crooksandliars.com/2018/12/chuck-todd-normalizes-republicans-stealing

Chuck Todd is the poster boy of bothsiderism.

[The new erato]

I got your point alright. I hope you got mine as well. The last thing I want is to be involved in a long and fruitless discussion regarding Israel.

We agree on that.

[greg]

Some are quite famous like Trump's "good people on both sides".

How is that even wrong, though? Is he, as a Republican, supposed to think that all Democrats are bad? (which would obviously be a very tribalistic monkey brain attitude)

It's fair to look at both sides and see if they are adhering to actual logic and principles that don't create double standards and transcend group identity. But to the people who think that group identity transcends logic and universal principles, I say "have fun making the world a chaotic hellhole full of lies, violence, and manipulation," because that's what you'll get.

[Daverz]

According to my understanding of the US system, appointing SCOTUS judges is the prerogative of the POTUS

If Mitch McConnell doesn't object.

[Florestan]

I'm too tired for this nonsense.

You should easily be able to find your own examples.  Some are quite famous like Trump's "good people on both sides".

I just googled "bothsiderism" and found lots of examples.  Like

https://crooksandliars.com/2018/12/chuck-todd-normalizes-republicans-stealing

Chuck Todd is the poster boy of bothsiderism.

From bothsiderism to lame-duck sessions. What the hell is a lame-duck sessions? 

And who is Chuck Todd?

[Florestan]

If Mitch McConnell doesn't object.

Todd already corrected me on that one: POTUS nominates and the Senate approves, or not. I guess it's written in the COTUS.

[milk]

I will only interject that one of the false narratives is what I bolded: that Israel is a state based on religion. It is not.
Jews are a people. Which is why there are Jews who are Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, or atheists. But they are still Jews.
Israel is the country of the Jewish people, in which nonJews have full civil rights.
This falsification of history is one of the structural features of antizionism that are inherently antisemitic.

As for Assange, I knew about his hearing, but not about Gabbard's proposed bill.

Good point.

[arpeggio]

Not correct. The Democratic position is that the GOP, having declared that a historical pattern is actually a constitutional principle in 2016, are now ignoring that supposed principle and displaying their hypocrisy.

Had McConnell been honest in 2016 and admitted that he refused to let the Garland nomination go forward simply because he had the power to do so, that argument would not be available.

+1 response.

[Herman]

It's a reflexive need, particularly by the media, to pretend that "both sides do it" in any conflict between the Democratic and Republican party, usually by making false equivalencies and ignoring history and context.  It's a very lazy way to try to appear neutral.

Not quite. The problem with both-sideism and 'equal time', is that the GOP often relies on lies, and since jan 2017 almost exclusively lies in its communications with the press and the public.

For years it was taboo in the media to say "this is not true" when a Trump surrogate floated some outrageous lies. The media (supposedly left wing liberals one and all) just weren't prepared to be this aggresive.

Media now do this, because lies (Benghazi! Emails! Her own server!) are not equal to truthful or factual statements.

You can't say Trump's flagrant abuse of the emoluments act is equalled out by Hunter Biden taking home "billions from Burisma", because there is no there there in the latter case.

[mc ukrneal]

From bothsiderism to lame-duck sessions. What the hell is a lame-duck sessions? 

And who is Chuck Todd?

Lame Duck Session: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame-duck_session. Elections are in early November, but the new members will only be sworn in in early January. So if the current Congress meets during this time, it's called lame duck session. It can also be used for the President (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame_duck_(politics))

Chuck Todd is a journalist for NBC.

[Herman]

How is that even wrong, though? Is he, as a Republican, supposed to think that all Democrats are bad? (which would obviously be a very tribalistic monkey brain attitude)

It's really stunning how little you know and keep on babbling about how other people don't get it because they don't have your superior above-it-all mindset.

Trump saying there were "Good people on both sides" was after the Charlottesville riots with neo-nazis marching with torches and chanting "Jews will not replace us" and one of them killing a woman by driving his car into a group of people. This was August 2017. I guess you weren't born yet at that time.

Trump did not want to alienate the neo-nazis, and so he said there were good people on both sides.

It's kind of funny how people here keep on saying people from Finland or wherever don't get the US, and here is an American kid who knows pretty much nothing about his own country because he's too busy admiring himself. He is however one of the top frequent posters on this topic.

[Herman]

Chuck Todd is the leader of an action group collecting donations to chuck Todd eventually.

He's even got his own television show, all for the greater good.

[JBS]

From bothsiderism to lame-duck sessions. What the hell is a lame-duck sessions? 

And who is Chuck Todd?

Chuck Todd is one of MSNBC/NBC's main political honchos. His primary show is Meet the Press.
A lot of people don't like him because he doesn't challenge Trump supporters and spokespeople enough. I think he is in fact doing a very good job. His method is to prompt them to talk, and when they lie, hand them all the rope they need to hang themselves.

[Herman]

Barrett's uptick in polls (that are essentially meaningless: she's was going to be confirmed even if she had acted as crazily as Kav the Beer Man) is probably because she wore 'warm' red dresses for the first two days and acts demurely.

Never mind that she just lied about whether or not she ever voted by mail.

[MusicTurner]

As a side remark regarding Chuck Todd, I think one could probably publish a quite entertaining book just listing some of the more characterful American names. Maybe it would even become an international bestseller, potentially 😄

[greg]

Trump saying there were "Good people on both sides" was after the Charlottesville riots with neo-nazis marching with torches and chanting "Jews will not replace us" and one of them killing a woman by driving his car into a group of people. This was August 2017. I guess you weren't born yet at that time.

Context would have helped. It could have been a quote from some other time, apparently you have memorized every single word the president has ever said so anything less is being clueless and I should have known already.
Yes, I know that story, I was in Japan at the time and they even had it on TV there...

It's kind of funny how people here keep on saying people from Finland or wherever don't get the US, and here is an American kid who knows pretty much nothing about his own country because he's too busy admiring himself. He is however one of the top frequent posters on this topic.

I'm glad I'm not so full of spite like you. Why do you have to be so negative all the time? And why do you talk to people who don't agree with you with so much contempt?

[Todd]

This term keep popping up in this thread. Can anyone please explain it to me in no uncertain terms?

It means nothing, despite what its fans may write or say.

Not correct. The Democratic position is that the GOP, having declared that a historical pattern is actually a constitutional principle in 2016, are now ignoring that supposed principle and displaying their hypocrisy.

Had McConnell been honest in 2016 and admitted that he refused to let the Garland nomination go forward simply because he had the power to do so, that argument would not be available.

No one believed McConnell in 2016.  People who adopt his argument in any way are as dishonest as he was.

[greg]

So in the context of that quote "Good people on both sides," is it supposed to mean that there are good right-wing extremists and good left-wing extremists?

[drogulus]

So in the context of that quote "Good people on both sides," is it supposed to mean that there are good right-wing extremists and good left-wing extremists?

     No, that's what it would mean if there was no context. Trump was interested in excusing one side for their deplorable actions. The reaction from these groups was very positive. They knew exactly what Trump did. Antifa types understood it the same way. Both sides meant nothing for them except for how it legitimized their opponents.

     Most non-extremists also understood that Trump favored one side by a remark that superficially favored no one. In context, the meaning was clear.