Fuck this Fucking Guy

[Edgy MD]

I imagine that General Milley saw accepting his appointment not as an opportunity but as a duty. He was expected to be appointed head of U.S. European Command, but the president supposedly shifted at the eleventh hour, convinced by an advisor that Milley should be his advisor general because he fit President Trump's desire for a general out of central casting, telling the president that the general's nickname was "Mad Dog," which was a lie.

Milley had been preparing for the European post, but believed deeply in the civilian authority over the military, and told the president he would serve where asked. He saw his job as containment, and made an agreement with other military advisors to never be out of the country at the same time, lest the president undertake a politically oriented military action.

My main argument was with all the those who resigned in response to January 6, when they were needed the most.

[MFS62]

I would have shared a foxhole with Gen. Miley any time. There are probably many stories of how he kept us out of war that will only be known to future generations(or if they are declassified).
Great Generals win battles. Greater Generals know when not to fight them.
Later

[Benjamin Grimm]

Trump’s Bloody Campaign Promises

It’s tempting to ignore the former President’s expressions of rage, but the stakes for American democracy demand that attention be paid.

[nymr83]

That's not even a sentence, and that graph goes back to the beginning of 2022.

If you don't think we have any obligation to turn people from him — that we can do nothing until people abandon him on their own — then we get what we deserve.

What does support even mean? I'd suspect the 26% approval rating is something like the cap on the people who actually LIKE Trump, though that number likely still includes a fair number who like many of the policies any Republican government will put forward while still despising him personally. The 40-something percent number is more of a head to head thing - that's the ceiling on how many votes he will get against Joe Biden or whatever - the number of people willing to hold their nose and pull the lever as it were because they are hard core Republicans or simply because they are Biden as a stuffed walking corpse at this point who may or may not know where he is at any given moment.

I

[nymr83]

And I completely disagree with criticism of Milley - the worst thing for the adult in the room to do is to leave the room adult-less.

[Edgy MD]

I agree with you that action is necessary to move the needle. What actions would you suggest?

I made my suggestion. Building off-ramps. Or exit ramps. You rejected that.

[MFS62]

I agree with you that action is necessary to move the needle. What actions would you suggest?

I made my suggestion. Building off-ramps. Or exit ramps. You rejected that.

No. I didn't reject that. I won't reject any approach that can have a positive influence. That is an excellent objective. But what kind of off ramps? Political? Spiritual? Emotional? Something else? What specific steps would you take?

I can't read your linked article beyond the headline because of a paywall.
Later

[Edgy MD]

Sadly, I don't believe that the people who voted for him before will take the off ramp, even if offered.

I'm trying to honor what you write by taking it at face value.

[MFS62]

Sadly, I don't believe that the people who voted for him before will take the off ramp, even if offered.

I'm trying to honor what you write by taking it at face value.

Sorry to sound totally negative. But his supporters have stayed with him through two Judges, one telling us he was a rapist and the other telling us he is a crook, 91 indictments and statements insulting those who served and those who remember them. It would have to be a tremendous off ramp to get them to waver.
I have little confidence in a metaphorical "off ramp". Once you describe it in more detail I can decide if I think it will be effective enough and attractive for his supporters to take.
I'm willing to change my mind. What are the specifics? Who will be offering it?
Later

[Edgy MD]

You're welcome to sound any way you want. Life is short and frustrating. But you rejecting something and then saying you didn't reject it is very frustrating for me.

As for the essay, it's against the forum policy to copy and paste vast excerpts of an article in a post. I'll see if I can get an alternate story on the same topic.

Here's that essay's author.

[MFS62]

I can chose to not believe something, without rejecting it. Or I can change my mind when I get more facts.

So, she described an objective. But to me it is like addressing world hunger.
HOW do you go about doing what she said?
I ask again. What are the action steps you would take?
Here are some I would attempt (the first three that come to mind):
- Make the teaching of social studies (including American History) mandatory in all K-12 schools.
- Make banning books on the local BOE level illegal.
- Next time they are up for FCC renewal, challenge the licenses of FOX and OAN.
They might not be doable, but they are an approach.
What would you do?

Later

[Edgy MD]

I can chose to not believe something, without rejecting it.

/head_explodes/

[MFS62]

I can chose to not believe something, without rejecting it.

/head_explodes/

Example; The theory that humans are descended from alien DNA.
I don't believe it. But I don't totally reject it and may be convinced at some later time with more scientific information.
Now, rather than parsing my sentences, please answer my question. What specific action steps do you propose?
I've used two years worth of data to support my position. You use things like improve spirit.
We are at an impasse.
Later

[Edgy MD]

I'm sorry. Do you doubt that the president had a 36% approval rating when he left office?

Because "I've used two years worth of data to support my position. You use things like improve spirit. " is utter horseshit.

[MFS62]

I'm sorry. Do you doubt that the president had a 36% approval rating when he left office?

Because "I've used two years worth of data to support my position. You use things like improve spirit. " is utter horseshit.

It appears that represents all voters so it might be accurate for when he left office. I'll trust the source is accurate.
We're using two different things and different points in time.
I was talking about the consistent percent of his support among GOP members only over a longer period of time.
And those are the people we have to reach. This discussion started about how we are going to change their minds.
We agree something has to be done. There's too much acrimony in America.
I've given three things I would like to try.
What do you suggest?
Later

[Edgy MD]

I'm not answering the same question a third time.

This circle jerk is insane.

[whippoorwill]

I can’t read the article either; a brief synopsis would be nice.

[Fman99]

I'm not answering the same question a third time.

This circle jerk is insane.

Some folks take all the fun out of a circle jerk don't they

[Edgy MD]

I can’t read the article either; a brief synopsis would be nice.

I tried to write a synopsis, when I wrote:

I don't know what the answer is. I've been reading a lot about "off-ramping" — that we need to offer supporters of lies an off-ramp to return to decent society. They found belonging in the group promulgating the lies, and if they don't see a safe route back into decent society, they will resist exiting, or perhaps exit, feel actively alienated from the people they had opposed, and drift back toward the liars, missing the support and group safety they found there.

I'll add that profit — or mere financial survival — will make folks drift back toward the community of the lie.

But it's more nuanced. It's about finding inflection points, and moments of breakdown, and inviting people whirling in the trauma of such moments out of the cycle of high conflict. There are contemporary examples and historical examples and Biblical examples to glean from, and they almost always fail, but enough opportunities turn improbabilities into probabilities. And if we're going to be daunted by numbers like "40%," what are we to tell history when it was made by folks who worked against 99% odds?

Here's some excerpting from Ms. Ripley's essay.

So far, based on the videos he’s posted to Twitter, it looks as though [Tucker] Carlson will return to combat mode. And so will Fox News. The high-conflict machine will, with 99 percent certainty, crank back to full power by midsummer.

But what about that 1 percent scenario? What if someone Carlson trusts and respects were to invite him to question the costs of this conflict — and do something altogether different? Can we imagine a world in which Carlson used his extraordinary influence to help de-escalate America’s current political schism, for the sake of his family and his country?

It almost certainly wouldn’t work, for all the reasons you already know. But based on the history of high conflict worldwide, from ugly divorces to civil wars, it’s still worth trying. Because it’s just about the only thing that ever does work. “In my view, 1 percent chances are worth taking,” says William Ury, who has spent 45 years helping to negotiate peace in Colombia, Afghanistan, Venezuela, South Africa and other conflict zones. “You add up enough random chances, and you get probabilities.”

In Northern Ireland, the bigoted preacher Ian Paisley incited riots, condoned violence and helped radicalize a generation of loyalists. He once shouted at Pope John Paul II, “I denounce you as the Antichrist!” Then, after decades of spewing contempt and stoking fear, he experienced his own kind of shock — a serious heart condition that almost killed him. A few years later, the 1 percent scenario actually happened: Paisley announced he would work alongside his sworn enemies in Sinn Fein, the same people he had once called “liars,” “cowards” and “murderers.” On the eve of being sworn in as first minister of the power-sharing government, he proclaimed a new dawn: “People have come out of a dark tunnel,” he said, “and they can see there is a path out there for us.”

[MFS62]

I sincerely thank you for providing that. As I mentioned, I could not get past the paywall to read the inked article. Now I have a much clearer idea of what you meant by providing an off ramp.


Later