Why has politics become even more extreme?

[Malaky]

Oh, there was a vote then? Which reputable, non-biased outlet was it on? Breitbart? Or in your head perhaps?

StopAntisemitism.org, whose work has been endorsed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Middle East Forum, and the Zachor Legal Institute, among other pro-Jewish organizations.

After a round of voting the poll was left with three candidates: Louis Farrakhan, Richard Spencer, Ilhan Omar.

She won.

[Elegiac]

StopAntisemitism.org, whose work has been endorsed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Middle East Forum, and the Zachor Legal Institute, among other pro-Jewish organizations.

After a round of voting the poll was left with three candidates: Louis Farrakhan, Richard Spencer, Ilhan Omar.

She won.

This the same Simon Wiesenthal Center with connections to the Trump organisation?

[Jotaux]

StopAntisemitism.org, whose work has been endorsed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Middle East Forum, and the Zachor Legal Institute, among other pro-Jewish organizations.

After a round of voting the poll was left with three candidates: Louis Farrakhan, Richard Spencer, Ilhan Omar.

She won.

All I could find on her was she was critical of Israel.

[zorkuus]

StopAntisemitism.org, whose work has been endorsed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Middle East Forum, and the Zachor Legal Institute, among other pro-Jewish organizations.

After a round of voting the poll was left with three candidates: Louis Farrakhan, Richard Spencer, Ilhan Omar.

She won.

She won over Richard Spencer? Alrigthy then. Sounds like people just jumping on a bandwagon, while being ill-informed.

[Malaky]

This the same Simon Wiesenthal Center with connections to the Trump organisation?

Careful, you're starting to veer on der-- obsession here.

[Elegiac]

She won over Richard Spencer? Alrigthy then. Sounds like people just jumping on a bandwagon, while being ill-informed.

Especially considering Trump blatantly circulated the dual loyalty shit as opposed to supposedly 'implying' it.

As for being critical of Israel: good for her, Israel is an apartheid state.

- - - Updated - - -

Careful, you're starting to veer on der-- obsession here.

Nah, I just understand why kissing Jesse Jackson's ass doesn't make up for saying the n-word on live TV.

Similarly, just because the SWC claims she's antisemitic does not mean she's an antisemite. It's an appeal to authority fallacy.

[Endus]

StopAntisemitism.org, whose work has been endorsed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Middle East Forum, and the Zachor Legal Institute, among other pro-Jewish organizations.

After a round of voting the poll was left with three candidates: Louis Farrakhan, Richard Spencer, Ilhan Omar.

She won.

And reading into that, it's pretty much down to lying about Ilhan Omar's statements, and construing opposition to Israel as somehow anti-semitic by nature.

Omar said that some representatives in Congress had "dual loyalties", as they were expected to support Israel as well as their own country. There's nothing antisemitic about calling that out, nor was it aimed at Jewish Americans to begin with.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-anti-semitism
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/ilhan-omar-antisemite/

The whole thing is a right-wing hit piece based upon ignoring context and misrepresenting what she actually said.

Plus, the way they rated her the worst of the year? Literally just an online poll. C'mon.

They're not the reputable source you seem to think. "Hey look, these other liars are lying just like me" is not an argument.

[Malaky]

This is where we find out that claim of antisemitism is because people were calling out Israel's government and not actually because people hated jewish people.

Could, but isn't.
She never made any attempt at this distinction while clearly pushing for the common trope of the "manipulating with money jew". It's hardly a secret.

You can make the excuse that "it was only about the government", but that'd be a stretch to excuse the comment, not the comment itself.

[Elegiac]

Could, but isn't.
She never made any attempt at this distinction while clearly pushing for the common trope of the "manipulating with money jew". It's hardly a secret.

Why hasn't the right wing won the award for being consistently unable to restrain themselves from blurting out "George Soros" every other sentence, then?

[Endus]

Could, but isn't.
She never made any attempt at this distinction while clearly pushing for the common trope of the "manipulating with money jew". It's hardly a secret.

And now you're just deliberately lying.



Clearly makes exactly the distinction you're claiming she never did. This is all widely known. It was more than a year ago. Stop misrepresenting the facts.

Particularly as this is all trying to back up your earlier assertion about the "radical left", and apparently, Omar is all you've got. When she isn't even radical, to begin with.

[Malaky]

Why hasn't the right wing won the award for being consistently unable to restrain themselves from blurting out "George Soros" every other sentence, then?

Who's this "the right wing" person you're talking about?

Particularly as this is all trying to back up your earlier assertion about the "radical left", and apparently, Omar is all you've got. When she isn't even radical, to begin with.

Oh, that's just you misrepresenting a post as always.
Never said I was citing her as the only example of the radical left, but as one of the antisemite tendencies within it, tendencies you denied being present and attributed solely to the right.

As for Omar's backpedaling, of course she would after being attacked from all sides for those comments.
The fact that she's admitting those followed the antisemitic tropes proves my point, so thank you for that.

[Spectral]

American politics flatly isn't "extreme". What passes for "extreme left" is a bunch of entirely ordinary policies like government-subsidized healthcare or education and gun control measures that are common across the majority of first-world nations. What passes for "extreme right" is border control or deregulation that are only far right when considered on an incredibly narrow spectrum of possible options. Basically everyone in any serious race in the United States favors a constitutional republic with a mixed economy, moderate taxes, and classically liberal speech laws.

[Kokolums]

Republicans have suffered a major collapse of trust in the system.







This means republicans will be charmed by militia and radical right groups.

As a society, we have 2 choices:

1. ignore the warning signs, continue on our current path, and there will be civil unrest.
2. undergo a massive overhaul of society to charm back republicans into trusting the system before conflict begins. This has a CHANCE of success, but at this point, so much tremendous damage has been done, it may be too late.

Republicans feel everything is under attack. The schools, the courts, media, their political figures. They feel the nation is being invaded and want a wall. Its been a slow burn though. It didn't collapse in one night. Its been multiple decades of change that brought us to this level. I do not believe a person can currently win the GOP nomination unless they overtly say they do not trust the media nor the government. Any republican candidate that does not condemn the system will lose.

Also note the overall trust in government. We gone from around 70% and 80% for each party at the start of the poll series to 28% and 15% today.

[Wyrt]

As a society, we have 2 choices:

1. ignore the warning signs, continue on our current path, and there will be civil unrest.
2. undergo a massive overhaul of society to charm back republicans into trusting the system before conflict begins. This has a CHANCE of success, but at this point, so much tremendous damage has been done, it may be too late.

Republicans feel everything is under attack. The schools, the courts, media, their political figures. They feel the nation is being invaded and want a wall. Its been a slow burn though. It didn't collapse in one night. Its been multiple decades of change that brought us to this level. I do not believe a person can currently win the GOP nomination unless they overtly say they do not trust the media nor the government. Any republican candidate that does not condemn the system will lose.

Also note the overall trust in government. We gone from around 70% and 80% for each party at the start of the poll series to 28% and 15% today.

Yes, yes, we all know your bullshit about how if we don't give Republicans everything they want then they'll get violent and attack people. This is called terrorism. You are defending terrorism.

[Shadowferal]

The GOP has spent decades dumbing down education. Radicalization and polarization..
This is what it looks like.

[NM 156]

The us is pretty extreme in its pro capital anti-labor politics, to the point where even the "left wing" is generally opposed to giving labor more bargaining power. And republicans would have workers earning nothing more than the food it takes to sustain them if it increased profits.

How we came to this point is lost on me. Maybe everyone just stupidly thinks they will break through to the upper classes.

[Kokolums]

Yes, yes, we all know your bullshit about how if we don't give Republicans everything they want then they'll get violent and attack people. This is called terrorism. You are defending terrorism.

I'm not defending terrorism. I'm trying to stop it from happening. We simply cannot continue on our current path without civil unrest breaking out. If anyone here is defending terrorism, its YOU because you are trying to shut down debate, discussion, and bridge building to help sane thoughts prevail.

[Wyrt]

I'm not defending terrorism. I'm trying to stop it from happening. We simply cannot continue on our current path without civil unrest breaking out. If anyone here is defending terrorism, its YOU because you are trying to shut down debate, discussion, and bridge building to help sane thoughts prevail.

"Give us what we want or we will commit violence" is pretty much the definition of terrorism. You are saying to give them what they want, thereby feeding into that insanity leading them to demand more under threat of violence.

You're the one supporting terrorism by saying to give in to the threats.

[Orbitus]

I'm not defending terrorism. I'm trying to stop it from happening. We simply cannot continue on our current path without civil unrest breaking out. If anyone here is defending terrorism, its YOU because you are trying to shut down debate, discussion, and bridge building to help sane thoughts prevail.

Yeah, the Democrats are staying steady, have been for years, while the Trump cult are nosediving into fucking civil war.

[Elegiac]

I'm not defending terrorism. I'm trying to stop it from happening. We simply cannot continue on our current path without civil unrest breaking out. If anyone here is defending terrorism, its YOU because you are trying to shut down debate, discussion, and bridge building to help sane thoughts prevail.

Again, we’re not interested in debating, discussing, or bridge building with terrorists that support a man who thinks the military is full of losers and babies.