I think that winning (and retaining political advantage over time) is probably a prerequisite for enacting any punishments, much less correcting other issues.
Uhhhh... sure...? Are you implying that "the other side" will never again hold power? Because that's a very silly view, if so.
I'm quite sure the single most popular platform someone could run on today is simply "aggressively prosecute every single crime committed by the MAGA apparatus."
Increasing gas prices seems very well correlated with people not voting for the incumbent party, and I can't imagine these people not feeling they're being punished by the price, so ...
... yeah I'd say punishing the people can make them vote for us, or at least not vote for not-us, which is basically equivalent.
I don't accept the idea that e.g. Greg Bovino should be allowed to have brownshirts murder people in my city as long as enough voters support him. I reject the legitimacy of any political system that can't or won't punish him for his crimes.
I do have a lot of faith in democracy, so I'm optimistic that most people can be persuaded to accept his punishment if the argument is presented well. I'm sure some number of people who called for him to murder people will pretend they were never on his side, and that'll frustrate me to no end, but such is life.
There’s a difference between wanting to punish the officials responsible, and wanting to punish the people who elected them. In the context of the broader discussion it sounded like you were advocating for the latter, which isn’t a winning strategy. But even if you only mean the officials, punishment is a bad centerpiece of a campaign; it’s something that one should do quietly after you have already won.
(The exception is right wing politicians, who seem to be allowed to win elections while openly calling for punishment of their opponents. Call it a quirk of the US electorate, or a flaw in human nature, who knows. It is what it is.)
Do you think justice should only be dealt out when you think it'll generate a positive outcome for you personally on the other side?
Seems to me that people who have committed crimes should be punished for those crimes. Call it "LAW AND ORDER!!!!" or something
I think that winning (and retaining political advantage over time) is probably a prerequisite for enacting any punishments, much less correcting other issues.
Uhhhh... sure...? Are you implying that "the other side" will never again hold power? Because that's a very silly view, if so.
I'm quite sure the single most popular platform someone could run on today is simply "aggressively prosecute every single crime committed by the MAGA apparatus."
8 replies →
Increasing gas prices seems very well correlated with people not voting for the incumbent party, and I can't imagine these people not feeling they're being punished by the price, so ...
... yeah I'd say punishing the people can make them vote for us, or at least not vote for not-us, which is basically equivalent.
I don't accept the idea that e.g. Greg Bovino should be allowed to have brownshirts murder people in my city as long as enough voters support him. I reject the legitimacy of any political system that can't or won't punish him for his crimes.
I do have a lot of faith in democracy, so I'm optimistic that most people can be persuaded to accept his punishment if the argument is presented well. I'm sure some number of people who called for him to murder people will pretend they were never on his side, and that'll frustrate me to no end, but such is life.
There’s a difference between wanting to punish the officials responsible, and wanting to punish the people who elected them. In the context of the broader discussion it sounded like you were advocating for the latter, which isn’t a winning strategy. But even if you only mean the officials, punishment is a bad centerpiece of a campaign; it’s something that one should do quietly after you have already won.
(The exception is right wing politicians, who seem to be allowed to win elections while openly calling for punishment of their opponents. Call it a quirk of the US electorate, or a flaw in human nature, who knows. It is what it is.)