Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/09/12/trump-plays-both-sides-against-middle
Trump is gaining a lot of traction in the Midwest by detailing how it was that Guys like Biden gutted Industry in those areas with all of their Free trade deals and policies they implemented. Even though Trumps own record a disaster these people are listening. Playing both ends against the middle is rather easy when both Political Parties cater to the same 1 percent and the Corporations and the people refuse to vote for alternatives.
BlueLeaks Documents Bolster Whistleblower Account of Intelligence Tampering at Homeland Security
The Department of Homeland Security has become an armed extension of Trumpism.
Last month, the Government Accountability Office issued a report concluding that both Wolf and Cuccinelli are illegally occupying their positions atop DHS. But what the two men lack in legal authorization to work, they make up for in fealty to the president.
This article links to a piece from April to demonstrate why the Afghanistan Peace Agreement is “fraught.”
So are we supposed to ignore the Afghanistan Peace talks now getting underway in Qatar? Are we supposed to ignore the phased withdrawal of US troops from that country – this article doesn’t mention them. And if these negotiations result in a Peace Agreement, will the author then admit that Trump did indeed “halt a Middle East war?”
I get it, there’s plenty to attack with Trump. But in mentioning that “He hasn’t started any new wars because we already at war with every country we could be at war with,” I notice that the author didn’t mention the previous Administration, which got us involved in two wars and did not halt any Middle East wars, as they said they would. In fact, they bombed seven countries in one year. So that’s two wars Trump couldn’t start because Obama already did.
And that’s the problem. Trump can talk his shit about America first and getting out of dumb wars because he’s backed it up in comparison to the guys he replaced. See how that works?
One last thing: The author states that Professor Zunes believes that Biden is “more malleable and subject to grassroots pressure” than Trump. About that, he says “We’ll see.”
But we have seen Biden in action for 50 years. He doesn’t seem malleable to me at all. He seems – like his party – to be just like Trump in terms of playing all sides: Willing to tell various audiences what they want to hear.
I kind of chuckled at:
“I don’t think Trump has a coherent foreign policy,” Zunes tells me. “The Trump Doctrine can be summed up as ‘What’s in it for me?’ ”
I really like Zunes and I’m not attacking this statement as anything but true, but is our past doctrine of “what’s in it it for me and US business interests and various groups of people embedded in the war machine“ any better? The naked doctrine of Trump is a little easier to get more people to resist anyway.
The article discusses Christian denomination and I don’t think I’ve ever read that in this context. Usually authors just lump evangelical together and then other non-evangelical Christians together and then consider non religious factors (like wealth and education). Are we really that tribal on religion? As an atheist, I’m not really exposed to this much. Are their exit polls on each denomination?
“Most importantly, Zunes says, Biden is more malleable and subject to grassroots pressure.”
This is constantly asserted, almost never supported. I’d love to see examples of Biden being malleable and changing his position due to progressive grassroots pressure. In some way that isn’t purely rhetorical. Writers need to make these arguments more clearly, if they can. Zunes is known for advocating for Israeli withdrawal from Palestine and Syria, and nuclear nonproliferation. How malleable is Biden on those issues?
In my view, leaders like Biden are just as hostile as the leaders of the other party to what progressives want. Leaders like Biden use conciliatory language, misdirection and coopting to achieve the same end.
This is a worthwhile discussion, but Erlich doesn’t make his point. Anyone that angers the foreign policy establishment and has an incoherent foreign policy will arguably bring about the collapse of American empire faster. I have little doubt that Biden would be a more competent imperial actor, but who does that help?.
" Zunes, a critic of Biden’s interventionist foreign policy, says Biden is still better than Trump. Biden voted against the 1991 Gulf War, and opposed the wars in Libya and Yemen."
I’m not sure why Biden’s 1991 position is constantly brought up as why he is better - this was also noted in another recent CD piece. It only serves to underscore Biden’s support for the much more relevant and much more destructive 2003 Gulf War. And unless Biden opposed the Clinton sanctions policy, it doesn’t make him any less a monster.
Yes, Erlich studiously misses this, doesn’t he? A lot of people Red and Blue make sense until they discuss their own candidates.
Once again, and consistently, spoken like an orange minion. In a manner morally indistinguishable from the crooked tactics of Republicans, only slightly more elaborate, ST repeatedly urges your vote confirming dictatorship. That’s ST’s role here, evidently: cementing the dictatorship.
Where ST may err so flatulently that they lose all influence is the point where they pathetically make the case, as here, that Orangeman is a markedly superior choice, somehow. Good job, tool, maybe!
We don’t have much influence here, but ST keep patiently plugging away, doing whatever they can to drag us down. Personally, I don’t get it – what charge they get from writing such steaming crap?
Well, you go ahead and ignore who is actually ending our longest war.
That – denialism and blindness as a symptom of TDS – is certainly your trademark.
How about you tell me where I’m factually wrong? I’ll wait patiently.
While I’m waiting, I’ll fondly take a moment to recall your eagerness – because of your open mind – to paint the Biden’s relationship with Ukraine as scandalous, based on the distortions of none other than John Solomon.
So, as an impeachment was unfolding and I endeavored to set the record straight on the events leading up to it, I had to correct the record put forth by dupes like you. Dupes who wrote glowingly about pro-Trump propaganda being sold by a huckster and grifter – you whined then, too, about being told the truth.
You should be ashamed of yourself. You bought into the narrative put forth by Rudy Giuliani and a pack of liars. You claimed to have an open mind – and turned out to be nothing more than gullible. Denial and blindness aren’t enviable traits – I suggest you work on that.
Still waiting for your treatise on where I’m factually incorrect. Tool.
article all over the place. something like the NFL cardboard cutouts placed in the lower stadium seats for TV. The fake crowd cheers over the loud speakers for the sports bar crowd.
Geez, our nation and society gaining momentum for accepting the false words instead of those from the educated, experienced, ethical people we have. 41% steady for Trump with daily disclosures of corruptions. Heck, even an extra 150,000 virus deaths fall off his back like water off a duck’s back.
We bought into expensive, lowest common denominator education. result is our failure.
Tool of what? I’m not out here plugging Orangeman’s “factually correct” superiority, like some people. Your inchoate scrawls here in the Commons increasingly resemble graffiti which is not only illegible, but also commonplace and just plain ugly – inspiring more pity than outrage, anymore.
So you got nuthin.’ That’s what I figured.
Here’s a suggestion. Stop reading and/or responding to my comments.
Because responding to a person who calls my comments “ugly” AFTER describing them as steaming crap is ludicrous where you’re concerned.
In conclusion, some indisputable facts:
Obama got us involved in two wars, both with disastrous results, he ended none.
Trump got us involved in no wars, and is potentially on the verge of ending one.
You are voting for the same candidate as John Kasich, Bill Kristol, and Rick Snyder.
I won’t be, nor will I be voting for Trump.
Meanwhile, Lisa Savage is running a great campaign for Senate and deserves not just our support - but an article or two on Common Dreams so we can discuss it and find ways to help instead of whining about the lousy choices we have in the Presidential race. Remember that Maine is a ranked choice voting state so there is no spoiler effect by voting for her first. Lisa also has a spot in the Senate debates in Maine and the first one was on Sep 11. Prior to the first debate, she was polled at 6%. Here is what the Bangor Daily News said about her performance in the first debate:
" But Lisa Savage , a former Green running as an independent, laid out clear pitches for progressive ideas including Medicare for All, the universal health care plan championed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , and a Green New Deal to address climate change. Her performance was widely praised next to the volatile Linn and sparring frontrunners." (Sep 14 Bangor Daily News)
Let’s replace Susan Collins with a true progressive
I shot her $20.