I concede that the confederate flag one seems targeted at GOP voters who oppose racism. Or at least, ones with strong opinions about who the bad guys were in WWII and the Civil War (the how-to-use-websites bit at the end suggests that one is aimed at Republicans of a certain age).
I’m not sure who the second one is aimed at, but if I’m sensing the pattern right, it’s probably for pious churchgoing WASPs who also look down on evangelicals.
That’s not fair to Schmidt, who has been a tireless advocate against Trump for last 4 years. He’s on MSNBC constantly. You can be a Republican and not be evil or incompetent or vile. It happens.
And not just day 1 of his presidency or his candidacy, but his entire adult life…
And what about Independents, many of whom cast a vote disavowing Clinton in 2016? After all, the 2016 election was the Dem’s to lose, Electoral College or no. Search the Lincoln Project on youtube and you will find more ads that address both Trump’s racism and his authoritarian tendencies. Rather than dismissing and/or demeaning Schmidt and Co., those on the left should be asking how is it that apostate Republicans turn out to be the most articulate, most focused, and most determined Trump critics, even to the point of acting, for the time being at least, as a shadow Biden campaign.
Come on, character assassination is ok so long as the good guys do it!
Heresy! Not here if you know what’s good for you 
I hope this hits the spot for some soldiers and fanilies thereof, but “Troops’” pattern of support seems to fit the model of police unions more than rational individuals.
Policing would be safer, cheaper, more humane, and and all-around better job if it were defunded, reformed and rebuilt as a community support that is lightly armed and seldom needed. ferreting out psychos in the rabks and the power-hungry who use it for their own financial, political and apocalyptic gain would benefit all.
The military is similar. They would be safer not engaging in unnecessary and imperialist wars. They would be better off not being part of a pork-belly ponzi-scheme of corporate welfare. But like police, the loud voices are those that value being “respected” (read: feared, worhipped and never told they or their colleagues have ever done anything wrong or unwise, even in hindsight) and “supported” (read: funding constantly increased, meaning it has to be used)
Long-term thinking and integration into the priorities of civilian life just don’t seem to be on the list.
Show me where there’s daylight between GOP policies/politicians and Trump.
Trump is merely the effect of 2 decades of GOP actions to mobilize the rightwing using racial and misogynistic resentment to bolster their electoral pisition.
Schmidt might as well be complaining of a head ache after weeks of binge drinking.
Or, as the saying goes:
Except with Schmidt, it’s “‘I never thought leopards would eat MY face’ sobs political operative who enabled, supported, and made lots of money building up the Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party.”
Well, one example that comes to mind is that the GOP is traditionally not in favor of lavishing praise and support upon geopolitical rivals immediately after learning that those rivals put bounties on the lives of American troops.
Which is pretty much the whole point of the ad.
It’s really sad knowing that if Trump wins again, these Lincoln Project people will fold right back into the party and toe the line.
All two maybe three of them.
No you can’t. And it’s pretty damn hard to be a Democrat and not evil or incompetent or vile either. If the Democrats don’t get their shit together, the Democrats in 20 years tops will be like the Republicans are now.
It’s character assassination now to point out that the Republican is a Republican, and is part of the party that created the right wing Frankenstein that is Donald Trump, and generally agrees with Trump but more subtly and glibly, and would actually be in favor of Trump if Trump could be controlled?
Sarah Palin is a Republican, yes? The entire Tea Party that’s been sucking Putin’s balls since 2008 is also Republican.
What you probably mean is there’s daylight between Trump and 90s Republicans who just didn’t say the quiet parts out loud, in public, usually.
No, what I mean is that Trump is doing a lot of shit that Republicans wouldn’t be supporting if it wasn’t their cult leader doing it.
Palin was obviously clueless on all things Russia, but neither McCain nor Romney ran on “let’s be more supportive of and deferential to Putin, even as he interferes in our elections and pays to have our troops killed by the Taliban.” That’s a position Trump brought to the party all by himself.
Oh I dunno. I’d have to check, but I feel like I have seen occasional criticism of Turmp from non-Republican sources.
Don’t get me wrong, if there is a constituency who haven’t ruled out voting Republican, but could also be persuaded to vote for Biden, then I’m all in favor of whatever messaging it takes to make that happen.
But I don’t have much time for the “no true Scotsman” line of argument from anti-Turmp Republicans, who would have us believe the real GOP stands for something completely different. That’s just demonstrably false. What they stand for is a matter of record, not a personal belief. Even if he became the leader of their party through some kind of magic spell, and is somehow holding them all hostage, that hardly makes the case that there’s a “Republican” way to oppose him.
I believe these folx are trying to get Biden elected, and that’s good; but I also think they’re trying to set up a Biden victory as a political vehicle for the GOP to rehabilitate itself without taking responsibility for Turmp, and that is the very pinnacle of Mount Nope.
But it is their cult leader doing it and they are supporting it. And they would still support it if it were a different cult leader.
She is a Republican, yes? Regardless of how “clueless” she may or may not be, there is precedent from within the Republican Party.
And speaking of clueless, remember how everyone said Trump was a joke candidate and he’d never really get anywhere and even though he’s the nominee Hillary has a 99% chance of winning and even though he’s the president now he will never do anything he promised even though he’s surrounded himself by actual literal white nationalists?
No it isn’t. Trump didn’t invent that. He’s too much of a moron to have come to that conclusion himself. It is the natural result of the Republicans’ attitude towards Putin over the past 12 years. Arguably, for the twentywhatever years he’s been in power it’s been sliding towards this, but very gradually.
It’s also the position the Democrats will take in a few years.
If you polled Republican voters and elected officials prior to the 2016 Election and asked
“How would you feel about Russian interference in the U.S. election process?”
or
“How would you feel about Putin putting bounties on the lives of American troops?”
then you’d have found pretty much universal opposition to those ideas.
If we’re going to hand Trump his ass on election day this November we need to remind every voter that the values he represents run counter to both Democratic AND Republican ideals.
I just skipped into 1:00 since the talking heads usually just BS for that long.
So he’s talking about body bags. Of US soldiers. Killed by various groups in the middle east. And we have a president who is not willing to do anything because the oligarchs own his loans. Which he won’t disclose and they have a vested interest in getting the US out of that area so they can move in… And he’s in a position to appoint people to the judiciary branch who will ensure that it never gets disclosed. And if the jack-hole from KY gets re-elected it may never be disclosed.
'Merica.
That’s why you don’t ask those questions in those exact words. You ask about whether it is right to accept foreign assistance in combating voter fraud, or whether a US president should support a strong foreign ally of the US even if their nation had been implicated in a scandal. Because that’s how they perceived Russian interference back then. They saw Democratic voter fraud behind every bush and shadow and viewed Julian Assange as one of the good guys. And today they think of Putin as a strong leader, and as a close ally to the US, and they tend to soft peddle the bounty thing because alternative facts and fake news and what not.
Not counter to Republican ideals, and counter to Democratic ideals to a point. Definitely counter to American ideals and the values of the electorate though.
The way I see it, if the goal is to convince Republican voters to abandon Trump then you’ll have a lot more luck with the message
The US has a rich history of supporting regimes that have used assasinaton as a political tool within & beyond their borders. It is well within reason to assume that agents and/or intermediaries have been paid to ensure mission completion. For example, Orlando Letelier was assasinated in Wash DC by Chilean agents working for Pinochet. The CIA was intimately involved, providing intelligence and cash. Bounty much? Nixon/Ford?
It’s character assassination to say
When that is the furthest thing from the truth, also known as a lie.
We have to be careful not becoming the very thing which we seek to destroy. Partisanship and political deadlock has a way of doing that to people; even good people with the best intentions. Thus the whole road to hell aphorism…
If you can’t discern the giant gulf between John McCain say, and Trump then there would be no point in doing your homework for you. This from a person who did not support McCain’s political views nor want to see him as President (but would gladly take him over Trump any day of the week, as would you or any other sane adult, thereby proving my point).
