RapidcreekCNN hosts told they're "complicit" in Trump re-election in live interview
Published July 1st.
Presidential historian Allan Lichtman took aim at CNN's News Central hosts Monday morning for being "complicit" in Donald Trump's political rise amid the presumptive Republican nominee's bid for a second term.
Lichtman, appearing with hosts John Berman and Sara Sidner, shifted gears during his comments about recent polls between Trump and Democratic incumbent Joe Biden.
He believes Trump's remarks during last week's debate should have grabbed more headlines than Biden's much-discussed struggles.
"I love you guys in the media, but I have to say, you are complicit in Donald Trump lying and conning his way to the presidency. All of the attention has been on Biden's faltering debate, but Donald Trump's debate was vastly worse," Lichtman said. "It was based entirely on lies. More than 30 significant lies.
"He threatened our democracy by saying he wouldn't accept the results of a fair election. That he would seek retribution. Why wasn't that the headlines? Why wasn't that the greatest concern from the debate, rather than all of the focus on Joe Biden."
In his rebuke of the media's coverage of Trump, he continued:
"There's an old saying, it's not just the evil people who wreak havoc on the world, it's the good people who don't do enough to stop them. And the media right now is complicit in Donald Trump gaslighting his way to the presidency and threatening our democracy," Lichtman added.
SanctusI feel so fucking vindicated right now that a presidential historian is saying the same exact thing I’ve been saying. Trump’s “performance” was horrifying and nobody said a word. Its infuriating.
You must only care about the horse race aspect of election then.
There are people who don’t see “beat the other guy no matter what” as the aim of our great political project.
The aim of our great political project is “Lets work together to create a world worth living in, a world of broadly shared prosperity, a world with the infrastructure that is the envy of the world, a world where housing is a human right, and so are healthcare (including in the rural areas), retirement, food, education and transportation. Let’s work together to explore space and to discover new science. A world that’s unpolluted. A world where being poor is not a slow motion death sentence. A world where everyone is in a position to build some savings instead of living paycheck to paycheck. A world of internet connectivity as a human right, including in the most rural area. A world of net neutrality. A world of limited copyrights and limited patents. A world void of monopolies as a matter of principle. A world of personal bodily autonomy. A world where privacy is protected for most people but where the superrich have transparency requirements because they can greatly affect our wellbeing with a stroke of a pen. A world with a wealth ceiling and no billionaires.”
And your solution is…?
I am copying my reply from elsewhere in this thread so you can see it too:
I am against Trump as much as you.
But if we feel we must vote D “or else” how and why would the Democrats feel the need to offer meaningful reforms to their voters?
If I am a Democrat politician and I depend on billionaire good will $$$, I know I don’t even need to promise much to my voters, I just need to be less tyrannical and less insane than my friends across the isle. Then my goal is to work the system enough to get reelected, and after a few election cycles revolving door myself into a $300k a year “do nothing” job that one of my billionaire backers will have lined up for me assuming I don’t displease him.
The logic of this is inescapable. It means our only hope is for the Republicans to somehow become much more progressive so that the Dems actually need to work to compete.
The only way for a progressive voter to escape this conundrum is to signal to the Democrats that the Dems do NOT have our votes on lock. And the only way to signal that is to vote our conscience no matter what, even if it’s scary.
If we had ranked choice voting, I might agree with you.
We don't, so I don't.
If the Republican party maintains control in Congress - which for all practical purposes means "having 34% of the seats in a given chamber," which they will use to block anything decent from happening - and wins the Presidency, we will have all three branches controlled by lunatics who aim to end the great political project you've waxed so poetically about.
"Meaningful reforms" - like student loan forgiveness, that the Republicans keep throwing roadblocks in front of? Like getting rid of non-competes, that Republicans have put a hold on? I don't know what "meaningful reforms" you're referring to, but you're definitely not going to see them when the brownshirts are patrolling restrooms.
People like you talk as though "not voting Democrat" happens in a vaccuum. For the presidency, we're FPTP and EC (the latter unless and until the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is in full effect). If you live in New York, California, Illinois - fine, throw down your protest vote for whoever you want. Those states are going to the Democrat no matter what. Pretty much everywhere else, a vote for anyone but the Democratic candidate for President makes it easier for the Republicans to win - because it narrows the margin by which they have to beat the Democrat, and nobody who is not either the Democrat or Republican candidate has a snowball's chance in hell of actually winning the Presidency.
Do I want a more progressive party to vote for? Sure. But at this stage, there is no hope for anything like progressivism ever again if a Republican is the next President. If you hold the Democratic party to a high progressive standard now, and withhold your vote on that ideal, you're supplying the gasoline and matches to those who fully intend to burn everything to the ground.
For the Presidency (and the Senate, to be fair), the standard I want to see met is "don't burn everything down."
Switching tracks: all of this is so very much the trolley problem. Right now, the trolley is going to run us all over and then fall off a cliff, unless enough of us pull on the switch that diverts the trolley onto a different course where some people might still get run over, but at least there's a track that we can all work on making sure is clear.