Over 400,000 people have already signed the petition to rename the section of 5th Ave. that Drumph Tower sits on. The new name would be President Barack H. Obama Ave. (Ha!). Here is link to the petition, if anybody would like to sign it. (You do not need to be a NYC resident) https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/rename-fifth-avenue-in?source=petitionshomepage
@polarberry, you are ABSOLUTELY right. And yes, we are living in strange times and should make d*mned certain we know who we're voting for.
Which is why I believe it's equally valuable to integrate logic and intuition, and when in doubt, to rely on the former rather than risk moving toward extremes (certainly, I fail at this at times). It doesn't take a genius—stable or otherwise—to see that, in a relatively short span (maybe more than 15 years, maybe less) an American president has been radicalized. And while that's certainly a historical near-anomaly, it isn't a contemporary social one; so many, many Americans have, as well. On both sides. When we're living in these conditions, I believe it's easier for otherwise sane people to begin to resonate toward extremes.
Like I said, I don't know the truth about Gabbard one way or another, but your points are valid. I just want to encourage all of us to keep the larger conditions of our present social field in mind as we tap into whatever we're feeling and sensing.
And FWIW, in the run-up to 2016, while The Putin Machine was churning out mass online propaganda in favor of Trump, RT and the Cambridge Analytica troll farms were also heavily promoting Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders. That fact alone doesn't make those candidates Russian plants. It was done strategically in an attempt to rob Clinton of electoral votes. And whatever her own campaign errors were, it worked.
I've already said that, until or unless there's harder evidence, the psychology of Gabbard's politics can more reasonably explained by her personal history. Beyond that, it also seems reasonable (to me) that someone like Gabbard makes a worthwhile "useful idiot" for Russia. In other words, she conveniently supports some of the causes Putin favors, maybe without deeper understanding of the consequences—or of Putin's motives. (As we've all learned, no evidence of conspiracy is required for someone to nevertheless become Putin's golden egg of useful idiots.)
Valid points, but I DO believe Jill Stein was a stooge for the Russians. Remember she collected millions of dollars after the '16 election? Supposedly to investigate the results and initiate lawsuits? Yes? Well, what happened to that money? She pocketed it and walked away from public life, mission accomplished, never has to work for a living again.
As for Bernie, he made a fatal mistake in not accepting the VP slot on he Dem ticket. The Russians saw an opportunity because he was a third candidate. EVERY TIME a Dem/Liberal has run as a third candidate, the presidency goes to the conservative/ultra-right wing candidate. Here's hoping no one pulls that crap again (I'm looking at you, Marianne Williamson).
I was sick about Stein—not that I wanted to see a third party progressive candidate in the race in the first place (for the very reason you stated). I'm not sure whether by "stooge," you mean "useful idiot" or Russian "asset." However f'd up either is, there's still a critical difference. Not recognizing the nuance is just the sort of vulnerability Putin has so successfully exploited.
Again, even with the story as we know it (regarding Gabbard or Stein or anyone else), there are ample reasons not to vote for these candidates based strictly on their merits, no conspiracy necessary. As far as my vote was concerned, Gabbard eliminated herself before she entered the race due to her LGBTQ position history alone.
I feel it's important for all of us to consider—especially in the current environment—that making logical leaps in the direction of conspiracy territory has become all too commonplace (again, I've made plenty of them on this very site myself and likely will again). My prayer is that progressive minded people everywhere will see the utility in weighing more clear and evident factors into the mix. Failing to do so further fractures our society, and fragmentation and division are just the sort of slippery slope a civilization rides toward oblivion.
I genuinely admire and respect the minds of everyone in this discussion, and I value all of your insights—intuitive and otherwise. I'm grateful we're discussing this!
Re: the thread topic, has anyone else noticed a sudden increase in public claims that Trump has dementia (including from Republicans)? Wondering whether there may be movement to 25th Amendment the guy...
I always wondered why the media don't look into Jill Stein more. I don't think Bernie was willingly accepting Russian help in 2016, but I think Jill Stein was totally into it. And now, not a peep out of her. Always found that so suspicious. I certainly hope no other "liberal" allows him/herself to be used as a third party candidate to derail the democrats in 2020.
@VesturaLux,
Yes, I have noticed a large uptick of people of suggesting he has dementia or is at least mentally unstable.
I have also noticed that more and more seem to be calling him out. Even Flake just said he would vote for a Dem over Trump (though I believe that was if nobody else ran). I think that perhaps this break with Trump is orchestrated to some degree. These same people will announced backing a different Rep or Independent Candidate. Trump will be gone but the question remains who will the Dems truly end up running against? Will people follow those who start to disassociate themselves from Trump now or will they call those people out for supporting him for so long?
As far as DT's conservative detractors go, I think the ones who're speaking out right now are carefully and deliberately priming the electorate for what's ahead. I feel big(ger) change on the wind. So, maybe while legislators are away on break, GOP proxies are making smoke signals on primetime.
@lawrence, have you had a vision regarding who the GOP might run in his place? Anyone else? (I personally don't see Pence lasting more than a little while in the oval, if he even makes it there. I pray I'm not wrong.)
@vestralux I'll give it some further thought. I agree about Pence. He has never vibrated for me. Weak. I do feel Nikki Haley has been considered for a while now. Overall, the GOP has dug it's own grave and will soon reap their bitter pill karma. You can't step on innocent people's rights and not pay a price. It's coming.
VestraLux -- I've noticed the same thing, Suddenly "the Mooch" is all over the place with his criticisms. He's been on TV mentioning Nikki Haley (not as a candidate, but just saying he's spoken to her, why would hey say that?). A few other republicans doing similar things. A really fear they're planning something (because the repubs always have something up their sleeves). Maybe a candidate just as extreme but less vulgar. So the policies will be just as mean-spirited with with a better veneer. And then I can just see them all talking about how they stayed quiet for the good of the country, that they were in the inside trying to keep things from getting too bad. That they were the true patriots. That's going to be their talking point.
Lawrence -- I really hope you're right and that the GOP has dug a hole and will reap a bitter pill. I would hate to have endured the last years, and one more, only to have more of the same with prettier words and less orange.
About Jill Stein, Tulsi Gabbard, & Russian interference:
My sense is that there is no formal arrangement or conspiracy but that the Russian intelligence behind the bot/trolls and media disinformation campaigns just sees a rift on the left that they can exploit to their end. I'm seeing former "Bernie Bro" types get behind Gabbard & push for Gabbard or Sanders only, arguing that the rest of the candidates are corporate tools. Many of these folks follow Democracy Now & The Intercept, which are legit news sources that critique corporate influence in ways you won't see in mainstream media, but through these networks I imagine they get sucked into Russian-generated propaganda that cements their position against any other candidates. Same mechanism behind Jill Stein in 2016. A local city council representative that I used to support fell into this spiral and was posting all kinds of questionable anti-Hilary pieces, and he was so vehement & angry about it. It cost him his last election and he is no longer in office.
But there are genuine issues and problems that these conspiracy theories ignore and gloss over. No one is suggesting Nader was supported by the Russians in 2000. Many people, myself included, were deeply disappointed with the Clinton Admin., for various reasons. Around the turn of the century I moved to New Mexico and I registered with the Green Party, and yes, I was one of those who voted for Nader. I wanted to see real action on environmental issues, economic equality, LGBTQ rights, etc., and I had lost faith in the democratic party. I did not vote for Stein, but I did vote Sanders in the primary and it was REALLY REALLY hard for me to vote for Clinton, especially after her remarks that she saw Henry Kissinger as a model for foreign policy. My husband & I both felt sick after voting, but we felt strongly (and rightly) that the orange goblin was a much greater evil. We are both registered as independent.
My point is that we ought to listen to the reasons so many are fed up with politicians, our two party system, corporate influence over elected officials, etc. Sanders made the gains he did because many people care more about these issues than just voting for your "team." There was a clear effort working against him from mainstream media and within the DNC--the Russian's merely exploited that to further enrage the Bernie Bro set.
Gabbard lost me when after the Mueller Report she publicly stated that it was clear there was no collusion with Russia and we should be glad the nation won't need to go through impeachment, etc. I don't see this as Russia telling her what to do, but her pandering to her base, who also follow Glen Greenwald and the narrative that there's nothing substantial to be found in the Russian Investigation. Reports have shown that Russian troll bots & disinformation are working to support Gabbard's campaign, and to my knowledge, she hasn't spoken out against that practice, so I don't have much respect for her and I question her motivation and integrity.
I'm not sure we should worry about Gabbard or Stein as much as the potential hacking of our voting systems and making sure way more folks get to the polls and their votes actually count. Stacey Abrams just launched an initiative to this end: https://www.apnews.com/1d13865afb764435b6122c8812f7668e