Realist, not conformist analysis of the latest financial, business and political news

Robert Reich Is Really Very Funny At Times

Only a small little observation here:

My friends, this is a dark hour. Intolerance, cruelty, racism, misogyny, xenophobia, and environmental destruction have been let loose across the land.

Trump controls the Republican Party, the Republican Party controls the House and Senate, and Trump may soon control the Supreme Court.

Sure, we get it, Reich doesn’t like Trump nor Republicans.

But here’s the thing. Only 27 percent of Americans are Republican, according to the Gallop Poll.

OK.

Moreover, the vast majority of Americans disapprove of Trump. He lost the popular vote in 2016 by 2.8 million. Since then, his approval ratings haven’t exceeded 45 percent.

The GOP itself is no longer a political party, anyway. It is now little more than Donald Trump, Fox News, a handful of billionaire funders, and rightwing Christians who oppose a woman’s right to choose, gay marriage, and the Constitution’s separation of church and state.

As you say Robert.

In addition to everything I’ve noted above, Republicans also now control both chambers in 32 states (33 if you count Nebraska) and 33 governorships.

So, Republicans are in charge in a majority of States, also have the House, Senate and Presidency, yet they’re not even a plurality of the voters and anyway, everyone hates Trump. That’s actually pretty good for a few billionaires and rabid Christian ideologues, isn’t it?

Or, you know, Reich is just joshing with us and really, he agrees with those basic democratic ideals, the people get to vote for who rules them and how. Even if that choice isn’t to Robert’s taste….

Well, maybe that’s what he believes

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Total
0
Shares
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
6 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pat
Pat
2 years ago

Intolerance, cruely, racism etc.
Aren’t black lives matter and Antifa democratic supporting organisations? Like the KKK was.
Is he perhaps disappointed that the Republicans haven’t destroyed them yet?

Spike
2 years ago

“Only a small little observation” — Surely a clandestine dig at the altitude-challenged former Secretary of Labor! “[Trump] lost the popular vote in 2016 by 2.8 million.” Is there any member of the Moonbat Left who can conduct any policy debate without mentioning that Hillary would be our President, if it weren’t that those damned Rules were obeyed? What Happened? Again, the reason I don’t identify as a Republican is not Trump but my state’s wobbly anti-Trumpers, who with a majority in each legislative house and government council, have accomplished nothing except Medicaid expansion and getting really tough about Prohibition.… Read more »

jgh
jgh
2 years ago

If there had been different rules in play, Trump and Hillary would have campaigned differently, there would have been a different result, and most likely Trump would still have won. And most likely, Hillary would be complaining the the rules were wrong.

Quentin Vole
Quentin Vole
2 years ago
Reply to  jgh

Indeed, jgh. And, although Hillary got 3 million more votes than Donald, 4 million votes went to a Libertarian candidate.

Countries that directly elect a head of state either use a transferable vote system or have a runoff (unless a single candidate gets over 50% of the first round vote, see France). To do otherwise is to risk having the result decided by which third party candidates decide to run (although that can already affect US presidential outcomes, even with the electoral college).

Spike
2 years ago
Reply to  jgh

QV, though third-party candidates can be spoilers in individual states, none in the modern era has gotten a single Electoral Vote. The only Electoral Vote for a Libertarian was a Nixon elector who broke his trust. The Electoral College runs the risk of a candidate getting elected with a minority of the vote (such as Bill Clinton, twice), and this has recurred throughout our history, without controversy until Al Gore and his lawyers came onto the scene and delayed the result for a full month. If you cannot win, you de-legitimize the winner, as the Deep State is still doing… Read more »

Quentin Vole
Quentin Vole
2 years ago
Reply to  Spike

Good point, but you don’t have to win a vote as a third party candidate to influence the outcome of an election – just take enough votes disproportionately from one or the other main candidates and you can change the result.

Wallace (1968) won 46 electoral college votes and Nixon was seriously worried before the election that he might let Humphrey in. Nader’s 100,000 votes possibly swung Florida to Bush in 2000, keeping Al Gore out of the White House.

Can you help support Continental Telegraph?

If you can spare a few pounds you can donate to our fundraising campaign below. All donations are greatly appreciated and go towards our server, security and software costs. 25,000 people per day read our sites and every penny goes towards our fight against the Establishment. We don't take a wage and do what we do because we enjoy it and hope our readers enjoy it too.


Donate
6
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x