Quote:
|
Only if you use the word "technique" in a strange way. Google suggests to me that the word means, "a way of carrying out a particular task, especially the execution or performance of an artistic work or a scientific procedure." Calling mass protests a "technique" seems to me to miss or obfuscate the point, since the term has connotations that are antithetical to the idea behind mass protests, but knock yourself out.
|
This is Spanish Inquisition level word torture. If you have to go to this level, skip the point. (I won't flag you for not addressing every argument.)
Quote:
|
And Yglesias points to 2017. Maybe you were asleep that year and then skipped over that part of his piece?
|
Yeah, the year of the pink hats. Those protests will be recalled right next to Kent State. Next?
Quote:
|
Not only do I admit it, his actual point is that they can work. He doesn't just suggest it -- he says it pretty explicitly. (Does he say that "they're going to succeed in removing Trump"? Again, no.)
|
Um, okay... then why did you raise the distinction?
Quote:
|
I understand that you think this, because you said it before. Thank you for repeating yourself to avoid confusion. If at some point you would like to explain why you think that, that would be swell. If you don't want to bother, that's fine too.
|
I explained in my first reply to you, to which you could only muster, "Thanks for that postcard from America."
It's not a postcard. It's an educated assessment based on facts observed. Were he writing today, de Tocqueville would have said the same. He'd have assessed Yglesias well meaning but delusional.
Quote:
|
Do you really believe that both are equally true here? Of course not.
|
Yes. What do think "drain the swamp" meant? Trump's followers love the idea of defying the Establishment. And most moderates think "a pox on both their houses." I think almost everyone secretly desires a scenario where both sides can lose badly and be replaced.
Quote:
|
In what way does he "wear" that "narrative" effectively?
|
I'm in a purple state. If I'd a dollar for every time I've heard, from moderates, "This guy's an ass, but they people after him are as bad, if not worse," I could buy a decent case of champagne. YMMV. But your state doesn't matter in this election, so no one cares what the average voter there thinks.
Quote:
|
In what way does impeachment help him? Since Nancy's smart, what can we learn from her decision to move on impeachment?
|
He's got the fight he wants, instead of discussions of policies, where Ds would do better. He loves the red meat arguments and loses when it comes to actual plans.
Regarding Nancy, she was pushed into it. She's been left with no choice. If you think she wants this, you're delusional beyond all help.
