Damn right I’m being rude to people still not willing to vote for Hillary. Partly cause they’re dumb if they’re still believing the 25 years’ worth of lies that have been told about her, but mostly because HOLY SHIT HAVE YOU SEEN WHO’S ON THE OTHER SIDE?!

This is not a regular Republican she’s running against. This is not a case of “Oh, damn, the GOP is in control of the White House again; let’s try to get it back in 2020.” This is not some milquetoast, run-of-the-mill Republican. This is a selfish, impulsive, xenophobic, racist fascist with no political experience and no desire to figure out what a job such as President would actually entail.

We’re not just talking about someone we disagree with ideologically. We’re talking about someone who is such a threat to this country, and the people in it, that prominent members of his own party are shitting themselves at the prospect of “victory.”

By being “principled” or “voting with your conscience,” all you’re doing is supporting him. So congrats on that. Assholes.

At one point in her speech, Hillary Clinton promised to create paths to citizenship for undocumented people. She even paid lip service to fighting systemic racism and reforming the criminal justice system.

“[Let’s] put ourselves in the shoes of young black and Latino men and women who face the effects of systemic racism,” Clinton said, “and are made to feel like their lives are disposable. … We will reform our criminal justice system from end-to-end, and rebuild trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve.”

Her rhetoric was some of the most encouraging people of color could hear from a politician in 2016, considering the circumstances. Whether her presidency brings them to fruition, staring, as it is, down the barrel of a hostile and obstructionist Republican-run Congress, is yet to be seen. History has taught people of color they should tread cautiously with their expectations of the Democratic Party — to hold their applause, no matter how pretty the music sounds.

— Zak Cheney Rice, the DNC was a pageant of diversity, but can people of color really trust the Democrat?

follow @the-movemnt

anonymous asked:

Do you think the reports are true that Kasich turned down the offer to be Trump's VP?

My understanding is that the Trump campaign – particularly some of the leading aides and Trump’s kids – were pressing hard for Kasich to be Trump’s running mate. They understood the importance of Ohio, and the potential that Ohio could have to Trump’s campaign, but Kasich refused to consider it. Governor Kasich is a mild-mannered person, but he was clearly put off by Trump throughout the process, almost to the point of not acknowledging him in some of the debates. I think Kasich saw more than most of his fellow GOP rivals that attacking Trump was just as useless as cozying up to Trump, and did his best to neutralize Trump by pretending that Trump wasn’t on the level of the serious candidates. In a way, he was right, but that didn’t work, either. 

But Kasich recognized that he still had a job to go home to, and his gubernatorial term isn’t finished until 2019. Of all the 2016 GOP candidates for President, Kasich arguably set himself up better for 2020 than anyone else, especially after how Cruz’s non-endorsement of Trump was received in Cleveland. Kasich didn’t pull a Rubio and support Trump in the wake of the primary, and he skipped the GOP convention itself (while attending and hosting parties and events outside of the convention hall) despite the fact that it was held in the state where he is the incumbent Governor. I think the Trump campaign absolutely was hoping to get Kasich to join the ticket and Kasich flat-out refused. There was talk that Kasich was being offered the opportunity to be the “most powerful Vice President in history”, and that the Republican National Committee was working to try to heal any wounds between the two sides and bring them together because they also recognized that Kasich was perhaps the perfect running mate for Trump. People will criticize Kasich (and Cruz) for not following through on that “pledge” to support the eventual GOP nominee, but I have respect for both of them for standing up for what they believe in and refusing to support someone who is so wrong for the country. 

So this is a popular topic today so I’m gonna chime in just in case you haven’t seen it on your dash. IF YOU DO NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON - YOU ARE VOTING FOR DONALD TRUMP!! IF YOU DO NOT VOTE - YOU ARE VOTING FOR DONALD TRUMP!! “But, Cole, why? Hillary Clinton is terrible, so is Donald Trump, why can’t I vote for a 3rd candidate?” Because here’s the deal: Independent candidates and Democratic candidates usually wrong along parallel platforms, so one way or another, majority will be ok. Republicans, however, run on a totally different platform that isn’t even on the same grid as the democratic and independent and they WILL vote for the person who is fighting for their exclusive, archaic, negative “traditional” values. So what does that mean? It means that a third candidate DOESN’T SPLIT THE REPUBLICAN VOTE! It splits the democratic and when, in this particular election, if you split the democratic vote into a 3rd party, you’re slashing our numbers, making Republicans the dominant party. ANY OTHER ELECTION, you can vote for a 3rd party! Voting for Tom Hoefling in 2012 would have been alright because Mitt Romney wasn’t absolutely insane. Voting for Ross Perot would have been OKish in 2008 because John McCain wasn’t 100% awful. But voting 3rd party in 2016? You could not make a bigger mistake. Donald Trump is an absolute MONSTER and we, as Americans, can NOT allow that man to become president! He’s been endorsed by white supremacists, his party has purposed the most anti-LGBT+ platform IN HISTORY, and he has not purposed, BUT PROMISED, a ban on immigrants and called for a tagging system to identify Muslims! But you’d rather sit around and talk about some god emails and vote for a 3rd party?? You don’t have to like Hillary Clinton, you don’t. I’m not telling you. I’m telling you that if, right now, you don’t stand with her, this country will fucking DISINTEGRATE before our eyes and we won’t be able to stop it. 

The Politics of Grief and Thoughts on the DNC:

The idea that the only acceptable Muslim American is the exceptional Muslim American is fundamentally repugnant. There seems to me a growing logic that suggest the only palatable Muslim is the one that eschews violence only to embrace American jingoism and become even an active participant of state-sanctioned violence aboard. What is equally repugnant is that this idea—which rest upon the presupposition that Muslims are presumably violent unless they perform, almost ad infinitum, speech-acts of their disavowal of (non-state)violence—is a common episteme or line of thought not only among Republicans, but runs tacitly throughout the discourse(s) of the Democratic party, liberal NGOs and other institutions (e.g., the ACLU in honor of Khizr Khan’s speech last night are giving out free pocket constitutions), and though of a different morphology, some leftist circles. This logic seems to not only truncate critique and dissent, but to subvert critique and dissent, and attempts to annihilate it from within.

The exploitation of grief, as in the case of Mrs. and Mr. Khan (we also saw this post-Charleston attack and the ‘Mothers of the Movement’ is an recognizable embodiment), has a degree of performativity to it. Where power implants itself and the very real and visceral grief of the subject(s) is mobilized to reify, serve the function of, and articulate publicly a discourse of power that ultimately maintains its legitimacy. Whether its the rhetorical strategy sanctioned by power of critiquing the practices of policing only within a framework of a politics of respectability (also: ‘join us and change from within’) or an ontological bifurcation of the Muslim subject into the patriotic non-violent Muslim (ideally willingly violent only within the parameters set and sanctioned by the State) vis-à-vis the unavowing Other, with its host of orientalist assumptions.

I find the growing normalcy of this logic, particularly among the left, utterly repulsive and its internalization among black communities and immigrant communities of color dehumanizing and harmful. Its painful seeing genuine grief colonized by power and used as a political tool not only to create an epistemology of the other (i.e., how is it that we come to know the other?), but to create cleavages within those identities by juxtaposing palatable citizens against intolerable subjects of dissent. 

Upset about Bernie?

Apparently he is already organizing for 2018 to primary establishment democrats and run progressives against republicans at every level from state to federal. I saw an interview with a democratic consultant today who essentially said ‘we’re coming for you’.

It’s great in its own right, but even more important when you take into account the next census is in 2020 and republicans will try to gerrymander more… We’re going to stop them.

If I were to run [for president], I’d run as a republican. They’re the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they’d still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific.
—  Donald Trump, People Magazine 1998

The BernieBots who are honestly willing to help Donald Trump by not voting for the Democratic nominee are probably the same people who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and then stayed home in the 2010 midterms because OMG how dare Obama not wave a magic wand and fix everything RIGHT FUCKING NOW?! So damn fixated on the perfect that they can’t see all of this is a fucking PROCESS, and that not participating is essentially letting the other side win (which, if we were up against any run-of-the-mill Republican, then maybe that would be okay… but no, we are up against an ACTUAL FASCIST, so your selfishness has consequences for the rest of us).
THE SECOND COMING OF HITLER IS UPON US: Donald Trump Accepts The GOP Nomination With A Dark Vision Of America
It's official.
By Rosie Gray

CLEVELAND — Donald Trump’s takeover of the Republican Party became official on Thursday night as Trump accepted his party’s nomination in a speech that codified his break with Republican orthodoxy.

In his remarks, Trump emphasized all the main themes of his campaign: an aggressive, restrictive approach to immigration and trade; less foreign intervention, particularly in the Middle East; and an embrace of authority and return to “law and order.”

Those remarks — and Trump’s campaign — cuts against many of the policies Republicans have run on in recent decades, like free trade and an active U.S. military presence abroad. Trump won the primary by running on these issues while other candidates hewed to well-worn “establishment” or “conservative” paradigms, and identifying a coalition of Republican primary voters whose hard-line views on immigration combined with economic populism had not found an outlet with the other candidates. Trump’s speech on Thursday didn’t contain new ideas for him. But the setting in which it was given signified the Republican party’s full co-option of his agenda.

On Thursday, Trump gave a dark, foreboding assessment of the state of the country after taking the stage under a huge “TRUMP” projection on the screen above him and amid a dramatic musical score.

“Our convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation,” Trump’s speech text reads. “The attacks on our police, and the terrorism in our cities, threaten our very way of life. Any politician who does not grasp this danger is not fit to lead our country.”

“Americans watching this address tonight have seen the recent images of violence in our streets and the chaos in our communities. Many have witnessed this violence personally, some have even been its victims.”

“I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon come to an end,” Trump said. “Beginning on Jan. 20, 2017, safety will be restored.”

Trump’s speech offers a sharp contrast with that of the last Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, who in his speech criticized President Obama for “disappointing” the nation but offered a more uplifting vision.

“Today the time has come for us to put the disappointments of the last four years behind us,” Romney told the convention in August 2012. “To put aside the divisiveness and the recriminations. To forget about what might have been and to look ahead to what can be. Now is the time to restore the Promise of America.”

Trump’s speech, on the other hand, focuses more on the grievances shared by his voters, casting him as the voice of the “forgotten” and giving a fortress-like vision of America.

“Tonight, I want every American whose demands for immigration security have been denied — and every politician who has denied them — to listen very closely to the words I am about to say,” Trump said. “On Jan. 21 of 2017, the day after I take the oath of office, Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced.”

And Trump’s speech de-emphasized issues that have undergirded modern movement conservatism. Abortion, for example, was not mentioned. Neither was marriage.

Trump’s acceptance speech marks the end of a convention that was as fraught as any in recent decades. Thursday — the night of Trump’s speech and the last night of the convention — was the only night in which the arena was fully packed. Many top Republicans did not attend, and many of those did hardly mentioned Trump in their speeches, instead focusing on Hillary Clinton. A video about the Republican wave in the 2014 midterm elections shown before RNC Chairman Reince Priebus’ speech seemed transported from an alternate reality. And Ted Cruz, the runner-up in the primary who refused to fall in line and support Trump after he suspended his campaign, gave a dramatic speech in prime time on Wednesday refusing to endorse Trump and encouraging Republicans to vote their conscience.

Even before the convention gaveled in, anti-Trump delegates were still trying to find a way to stop his nomination, attempting rules changes that would unbind them from him.

But by the time of Trump’s speech on Thursday, the rebellion had faded — rumors of a potential walkout didn’t come to fruition — and the convention crowd received the speech with enthusiasm. There were several chants of “build the wall” and “lock her up!” and even one of “help is on the way” — a reference to Dick Cheney’s 2000 convention speech.

As the balloons and confetti fell over the Quicken Loans Arena after Trump finished, even the music seemed to acknowledge the party’s situation: The Rolling Stones’ “You Can’t Always Get What You Want.”
Trump picks Pence as his running mate
The presumptive Republican nominee will hold a press conference on Saturday to officially debut the Indiana governor as his running mate. By NICK GASS and TYLER PAGER

Donald Trump has picked Indiana Gov. Mike Pence as his running mate, the presumptive Republican nominee announced in a tweet on Friday morning, a move that adds an established, mainstream conservative politician to his unconventional bid for president.

“I am pleased to announce that I have chosen Governor Mike Pence as my Vice Presidential running mate. News conference tomorrow at 11:00 A.M.” Trump said.

Pence, who emerged as a potential vice presidential candidate only in recent weeks, spent a dozen years in the House and has been Indiana’s governor since 2012, fulfilling Trump’s oft-stated wish for a running mate with political and legislative experience.

Less than an hour after Trump made the announcement, Pence offered his first statement about the selection, naturally, on Twitter. “Honored to join @realDonaldTrump and work to make America great again,” Pence wrote.

Read more here
Republican candidate undeterred by anti-Semitic graffiti

Adam Stevens is a Republican candidate running for a seat in the Arizona State House in Legislative District 16. On Friday morning, when he got in the car to head to a meeting with a potential voter, he found a disturbing message on his driveway.

“Open my garage and that’s what I got to see: A giant swastika and ‘go home Jew,’” said Adam Stevens. “It’s so blatant and it’s so disgusting.”