David Frum, formerly a Republican speechwriter but now a Never Trumper, writes in the Atlantic that Ron DeSantis has figured out how to woo the Republican base but not how to win a national election.
DeSantis spoke out on the Tucker Carlson show against support for Ukraine because the conflict is nothing more than “a territorial dispute” that does not concern us.
Never mind that the US, NATO, and the UN have a vital stake in protecting a rules-based international order where one sovereign nation does not invade another in order to extinguish its national identity.
Never mind, as Frum wrote, that DeSantis “was on record, in 2014 and 2015, urging the Obama administration to send both “defensive and offensive” weapons to Ukraine after the Russian annexation of Crimea.”
DeSantis is courting the base by imposing a nearly-complete ban on abortion, limiting it to the first six weeks of pregnancy, before women know they are pregnant. But a majority of voters in Florida oppose the ban: “That bill is opposed by 57 percent of those surveyed even inside Florida. Another poll found that 75 percent of Floridians oppose the ban. It also showed that 77 percent oppose permitless concealed carry, which DeSantis supports, and that 61 percent disapprove of his call to ban the teaching of critical race theory as well as diversity, equity, and inclusion policies on college campuses.”
How will DeSantis’s hard-right views play outside Florida?
More dangerous than the unpopular positions DeSantis holds are the popular positions he does not hold. What is DeSantis’s view on health care? He doesn’t seem to have one. President Joe Biden has delivered cheap insulin to U.S. users. Good idea or not? Silence from DeSantis. There’s no DeSantis jobs policy; he hardly speaks about inflation. Homelessness? The environment? Nothing. Even on crime, DeSantis must avoid specifics, because specifics might remind his audience that Florida’s homicide numbers are worse than New York’s or California’s.
Frum believes that DeSantis could win the GOP nomination but has no realistic path to winning the presidency.
I hope he is right. DeSantis has no respect for the very idea of a two-party system. He wants a one-party state, led by an all-powerful autocrat. As he bragged in Nevada, no member of the Democratic Party won any statewide races. His preference is to have no opposition, no criticism, no free press. He is dangerous. He has a fascist instinct.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
One of the reasons I feel the need to sound the alarm about DeSantis is that the mainstream press often presents DeSantis as a smarter, less extreme version of Trump. This is false. While both of them are horrible, DeSantis may be less of an attention seeker than Trump, but he is more dangerous and in many ways and less reasonable than him.
Your last paragraph is a good summary on how DeSantis operates. He finds democracy an inconvenience. He doesn’t want to hear from voters. He wants to dominate them and anyone else in his path. Frum may be correct, and I hope he is. However, since lots of voters depend on the nightly news for information, lots of them could easily get the wrong impression of DeSantis. He is not a kinder, gentler version of Trump. I cannot imagine DeSantis having wide appeal nationally, but I also cannot believe that a recent poll revealed that about a third of the country still believes that the 2020 election was stolen. We should be very wary of DeSantis and continue to sound the alarm.
LikeLike
RT,
I will continue to read Florida papers and report on DeSantis. I believe he is turning into a full blown fascist. He influences other governors. They follow his lead. If he goes this far, they follow.
LikeLike
He also has the backing of a lot of right wing billionaire cash that will spend money to try to normalize DeSantis as a loving, decent family man. He may love his family, but he has nothing but distain for any opposition. He is intolerant, and he wants to divide us. He’d rather foment a culture war to distract from who he really is. His vision for this country is wholly negative and anti-democratic.
LikeLike
I said the same thing about Reagan. Here was a guy who was on record saying that Social Security was Communist, and that California should sell off its redwood trees. And about George Bush, Jr. Here was a guy who had driven several businesses into bankruptcy, had been an alcoholic and cocaine user and party boy, had been AWOL from the limited service that Daddy arranged for him. And about Trump–an utter idiot and mobster run by handlers in Moscow.
Wrong every time.
Whatever the actual sources, this certainly applies:
https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4407
LikeLike
The oligarchs certainly threw themselves behind Ron Ron. But perhaps he has overplayed his also tiny hand in order to secure the Troglodyte Party nomination. We shall see.
And then there is the possibility of Trump running as a third-party candidate. The Know Nothing Party v. 2.0?
LikeLike
The Young Turks seem to think so:
LikeLike
If the Trump is polling so well, I wonder why so many Trump backed candidates lost in midterm elections. If the Democrats convict Trump before the primary, DeSantis will likely be the candidate. If this happens we also won’t get to see the face off between DeSantis and Trump which, I hope, would cause them both to self-destruct. Biden is not polling that strong, and The Fed is not helping by raising interest rates, and the corporate profiteers are not helping either since a lots of people are still struggling to pay for groceries. There are so many variables at play.
LikeLike
Nothing you write is wrong. What I believe is wrong is that too many use the rules we play under as a justification of why it will all work out.
As for losing candidates, spread them out with zealots who are unmistakably members of the cult, and they dilute their power and lose locally. Fairly closely. Replace them with DeWine/Young/Mace types and they win big and we wouldn’t be having this discussion. But here’s the thing, coalesce them nationally and combine with a complacent or gullible opposition, they win and have a supposedly “moderate”, quasi-Never-Idioter Congress. History has proven over and over again, however, that they quickly coalesce around fealty. And, as I have written over and over again, they don’t need a majority or even to win. They only have to grind the gears of government, use that as a justification for why government doesn’t work, poison social and political discourse, and live to fight in the next elections — which they finally hope will be the last ones.
LikeLike
David Frum should have been laughed off the world stage the day he wrote the Bush speech calling Iraq, Iran and North Korea (three countries that are entirely un-allied) an “axis of evil”, thereby helping to pave the way for the illegal, unprovoked Iraq war which resulted in the deaths of at least a million people (and counting, as the effects continue).
Is he right about DeSantis? Maybe, but who cares? No one should have listened to a word more out of his mouth (or his pen), but, like all the other Bush administration members who said “Orange Man Bad”, he has fallen upward and like a bad case of herpes (or Paul Vallas), he keeps coming back.
LikeLike
three countries that are entirely un-allied
Haaaaaaaaa! OMG. THAT is hilarious. Please. HAAAAAA. OMG. Make it stop. It’s up there with “Russia has not intention of invading Ukraine.”
LikeLike
cx: no intention
LikeLike
LOL, in what possible way were those three countries allied? I mean, you know Iran and Iraq actually had a war, right? As for Iran and North Korea: https://thediplomat.com/2017/04/the-myth-of-a-special-north-korea-iran-relationship/
LikeLike
I did not say that they were allied to one another, did I?
LikeLike
No, no, silly me, you didn’t. You just laughed at me for saying they were un-allied.
LikeLike
In political science, “un-allied” or “non-allied” typically means “not allied to any particular international bloc” rather than “not allied to one another.” But you are right about this. Frum vastly and horrifically overstepped here and helped create with this piece of propaganda a monolithic enemy, and that helped to provide false justification for murderous wars conducted by the moron Bush Jr.
LikeLike
Frum served Bush 2, who led us into a disastrous war.
But that doesn’t mean to me that Frum should be banned from public life forever.
I believe in redemption.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I also enjoy reading and occasionally posting the insights of Never Trumpers.
LikeLike
I believe in redemption for people who have earned it. What has Frum done to earn it? Where has he ever repudiated his role in the Iraq War? He, along with the rest of the Bush administration is responsible for the deaths of at least a million human beings and the suffering of untold millions more. Why should he be allowed to return to public life? Is saying Orange Man Bad a get out of jail free card?
LikeLike
You should not read anything Frum writes since he has not earned your trust.
I will post anything I choose, without asking your permission.
LikeLike
Never said you had to ask my permission. Just pointing of the grotesqueness of relying on the unrepentant architects of one of America’s illegal, unprovoked and barbarous wars.
LikeLike
I will post whatever I want. You are under no obligation to read it.
LikeLike
No, but the free expression of ideas says I should have the ability to comment and criticize.
LikeLike
Say whatever you want. As you have.
LikeLike
Sorry, when you wrote “un-allied,” I thought you meant “not allied to anyone,” as in “non-aligned.”
LikeLike
Yawn. RED Orange Man. Get it right.
LikeLike
Perhaps one day you will come over to the “Orange Man Good” camp with Dienne.
LikeLike
Dienne is not pro-Trump. She is opposed to any Democratic candidate except Bernie Sanders. I understand, a bit, but as we argued in 2016 and again in 2020, the choice in November was between Hillary and Trump and then Biden and Trump. Bernie was not on the ballot. There is a type of leftist that believes getting worse eventually leads to something better. I have never been in that camp. Getting worse means getting worse.
LikeLike
Well, thank you for that much, Diane. But that’s not exactly my thinking. The problem is things keep getting worse whether Democrats or Republicans are in office, so it doesn’t make any sense to vote for either one. The only chance that voting will make any difference at all is if both parties know that enough people are fed up with them and won’t vote for them unless they start giving us what we need. Since that doesn’t appear to be working the next steps will be uglier, including things like general strikes and the kinds of protesting that’s happening in France right now. Both parties are owned by the same corporate oligarchs. Voting for “lesser evil” is still evil, and not always lesser.
LikeLike
Dienne,
We disagreed in 2016 because you said exactly the same thing.
It doesn’t matter who wins, because “things keep getting worse whether Democrats or Republicans are in office, so it doesn’t make any sense to vote for either one.”
I couldn’t disagree more.
If Hillary had been elected, she would have put three liberals on the Supreme Court. Abortion would still be protected in every state. The environmental laws would have been protected and strengthened, instead of knocked down by the SCOTUS. The Supreme Court would not insist as it now does that everyone has a right to carry a concealed weapon.
Women are dying now because of Alito’s reversal of Roe.
Now, state after state is passing laws to strike down any gun control.
A SCOTUS appointed by Hillary would very likely rejected any state that wanted to use public funds for religious tuition.
Yes, it most certainly made a difference in 2016.
We now have a SCOTUS with five hard-right Justices and one (Roberts) who will usually vote with the five.
That Trump Court will be with us for many years to come.
The leader of SCOTUS today is Clarence Thomas. Sometimes it’s Alito. They have been itching to roll back every decision that protects the rights of women, Blacks, voters, and every other group that is not on top. They are hostile to voting rights and love corporate power.
2016 has damaged our society for years to come.
LikeLike
Make that the “Orange Man Better than Biden” camp. Which is located somewhere out in Lala Land.
LikeLike
That’s right, Bob, you’re with us or you’re with the terrorists!
LikeLike
This person does not believe in democracy anymore, which should be clear in her rabid defense of Putin and her normalizing Trump’s worst actions.
I don’t believe for a minute she would have voted for Bernie Sanders in a general election. Remember she has implied that Bernie is just as evil as the Dems for not allowing Putin to invade Ukraine to fight Nazis like she thinks is Putin’s right. Bernie was a convenient talking point, just like charter supporters cite “children trapped in failing schools”. They serve a purpose and can be thrown under the bus in a minute to serve the “higher agenda”.
Even as we speak, more and more vulnerable Americans are being disenfranchised by a Republican party which hates democracy. That seems to be okay for our resident Dem-hater who cares a lot more about Putin than about democracy.
LikeLike
NYCPSP,
I think your language about Dienne is over the top in its hostility. Please stop.
Diane
LikeLike
Diane,
I will stop, but I want to state for the record that in these truly perilous times for democracy, your normalization of dienne77 is being complicit. You clearly disagree with me about how dangerous she and those like her — if they are real people and if there numbers are growing as those who are respected like you normalize them — are to democracy. I think GregB does also recognize the danger, but perhaps I am wrong. I tried to post some balance, but I respect your wish for me to go.
LikeLike
NYCPSP,
I don’t want you to go. I value your participation and comments.
What I do wish is that you would cut back on the angry responses to Dienne and FLERP. I understand why you disagree with them. I have often disagreed with them myself. I have disagreed with Dienne about Ukraine, Putin, and the importance of voting blue in 2016 and 2020.
Disagreement is swell.
But please rein in your outrage. Maybe just brief comments would be more effective.
I normalize no one.
Diane
LikeLike
Different points of view are dangerous to democracy? How odd. I thought that’s what democracy is. Silly me.
LikeLike
Different points of view are an integral element in democracy.
However, lies, fake news, and propaganda should never be elevated to the equal status of “a different point of view.”
Two facts:
1. Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.
2. Putin invaded Ukraine.
LikeLike
At the time of the Iraq War, that first statement was portrayed as and widely believed to be propaganda. Until it was proven to be fact. The same people who convinced people that statement no. 1 was propaganda are now telling you the statement number 2 is fact (in spite of substantial evidence to the contrary). Are you 100% sure they’re telling the truth this time?
LikeLike
I never know what is 100% true.
But in this case, I am 100% certain that Putin invaded Ukraine.
Is there any visual evidence that Ukraine invaded Russia first?
Did we not see with our own eyes the huge invasion of tanks, trucks and soldiers heading for Kyiv on Feb 24 after Putin told the world he would never invade?
We did not see “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq. We assumed that Colin Powell would not lie when he said there were.
But the world saw the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Maybe you didn’t.
LikeLike
I’ve already listed the numerous, documented provocations Russia faced, none of which the U.S. would have tolerated without invading.
LikeLike
None of the “provocations” you described (the same ones described by Putin) justify a brutal invasion of a neighboring sovereign state. Not one. Tens of thousands of lives have been lost on both sides. Thousands of Ukrainian children were kidnapped and given to Russian families. Ukrainian schools, universities, homes, museums, factories, power stations, have been destroyed. All because Putin believes—and said and wrote—that Ukraine has no right to exist.
Because I believe, like the International Criminal Court, that Putin is a war criminal, I will not post comments that attempt to justify this totally unjust war.
LikeLike
Provocation and justification are two different things. Chris Rock objectively provoked Will Smith by making fun of his wife’s medical condition. Whether or not that justified Smith hitting Rock is a matter of debate.
LikeLike
I agree. Provocation and justification are different.
Putin felt that the very existence of Ukraine was a provocation, even though Ukraine and the other Soviet satellites gained their freedom when the USSR collapsed. Russia signed the Budapest Memorandum in 1994, acknowledging Ukraine’s sovereignty and agreeing not to threaten it in exchange for Ukraine giving up its large stockpile of nuclear weapons.
The U.S., UK, and Russia signed the agreement, assuring the security of Ukraine and other former Soviet satellites.
But Putin did not sign it! He was not in charge! Why should he be bound by an agreement that did not include him?
Putin’s claimed justification for his unprovoked invasion was that he was going to de-Nazify Ukraine. When will he do the same to Russia? To the Wagner mercenaries?
LikeLike
“Putin felt that the very existence of Ukraine was a provocation…”
No, Diane, that’s like saying that Will Smith felt like the very existence of Chris Rock was a provocation.
Actual events transpired that are documented that could reasonably be considered provocations, not simply Ukraine’s existence. I have documented them numerous times with numerous different western, mainstream and independent sources. You denying those events is the same as right wingers who deny the reality of Black history.
LikeLike
Putin published an article several months before his invasion of Ukraine. He declared that Ukraine was a part of Russia, was always a part of Russia, and had no right to exist except as a part of Russia. He spoke of the deep and lasting bonds between Russia and Ukraine. (However, as I read his speech, I thought one could use the same arguments to conclude that Russia belongs to Ukraine.)
The article he wrote:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
“On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians.”
Clearly, he dearly loves the Ukrainian people. He loves them so much that he will use his vast armaments to destroy their lives and their culture and their existence as a nation. If they do not share his great affection for them, he will obliterate them.
As you read his view of history, Ukraine is the first, but not the last nation that he intends to absorb into his orbit.
One curious note in Putin’s speech: Historians have documented Stalin’s brutal theft of Ukrainian grain in the 1930s, which caused the deaths of millions of Ukrainians by starvation. They raised the grain, the Russians confiscated it, and the Ukrainians starved to death.
This is how Putin portrays this nightmare for the Ukrainian people: “The common tragedy of collectivization and famine of the early 1930s was portrayed as the genocide of the Ukrainian people.”
Ukrainians refer to these events as the Holodomor, in which 3.5-5 million people starved to death. And they refer to these events as a genocide, since 10% of the population died. But Putin is quite sure that the west put them up to it. It seems to him that Ukrainians cane be trusted to make decisions (since their leaders are pro-west Nazis) and don’t know their own history.
LikeLike
I reserve my outrage for comments that, in my opinion, need to be met with outrage instead of normalized. There are 2 kinds. The first is the “concern trolling” of flerp! who frequently posts to hijack discussions when the subject is something dangerous a right wing Republican like DeSantis does. And the second are people who defend Putin’s actions with blatant lies or post pure right wing propaganda about how the Dems are just as bad as the Republicans, when we all know that isn’t true.
Joel posts snarky comments to and about me all the time and I don’t get outraged and I don’t whine for you to rescue me from people who are too mean. I respect many people who comment on here who have different views than my own and defend those views honorably using truth and facts. They aren’t disingenuous because their intent is not to deceive. They aren’t hijacking a discussion that criticizes something they don’t want to admit they support.
I only get outraged at people who pose a danger to democracy. Either because of their disingenuous “concern trolling” (to hijack a discussion) or because their posts simply amplify dishonest right wing talking points justifying the abandonment of democracy.
I respect your right to not to have me here. But I don’t think I can in good conscience just remain silent when I see the kind of posts that exemplify every reason that our democracy is failing. When people who have no respect for truthful conversation are being enabled and accommodated and presented as having legitimate views that can be “debated” instead of being called out, it’s dangerous. At least that is my opinion. But if you are asking me to remain silent when I see the posts that exemplify what has become so dangerous in our public discourse, I can’t promise that.
LikeLike
The irony of this talk about “normalizing” is that it is taking place on a post about David Frum who did so much to normalize the Bush administration’s illegal and barbarous invasion of Iraq, which was my original point.
LikeLike
The post is about DeSantis and whether his brand of thought control will succeed on a national level. It was you who chose to make it about whether David Frum should be “normalized.” And I responded that I will post anyone who writes anything that I find interesting. I don’t believe in banning writers because of what they did 20 years ago .
LikeLike
DeSantis may only be able to win by landslides the red states that have pull out of ERIC, “the only reliable, secure way for states” to avoid widespread voter fraud.
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/06/1161374479/electronic-registration-information-center-eric-florida-missouri-west-virginia
“The Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, is a multi-state partnership that experts across the political spectrum say is the only reliable, secure way for states to share voter registration data with each other”
LikeLike
Anyone who didn’t see the following coming, isn’t prescient.
Background info.- one in 6 US hospitals are Catholic. Research showed the Catholic rate of indigent care is no greater than other private hospitals. Public hospitals shoulder the burden of US poverty.
A public hospital in Florida is under attack. The methods employed against the hospital are from the same playbook as the campaign against public schools- (1) false stories that create outrage and (2) right wing takeover of boards.
Raw Story reports that Michael Flynn (said the US should have one religion) is amplifying the noise against the public hospital in an assist to the hard right conspiracists.
At any point, the leaders of a well-organized, politicized religious sect could say, “stop the lying against public servants.” But, presumably, the perspective of the hospitals of right wing organizations would be that public hospitals are a competitor for tax dollars. Assuming that paying patients can be diverted to religious hospitals and the poor can be denied service, it’s a win for business and for libertarian despots connected to right wing religion.
LikeLike
The right is attacking all things public. They want to monetize everything so people can go into tiered levels of service. The solvent will get their needs met while the poor can scramble for the crumbs under GOP rule.
The French are refusing to accept Macron’s neoliberal plan to raise the retirement age to receive a public pension. Hopefully, we don’t have to battle in the streets, but people in this country cannot afford to sleepwalk and take everything with blind acceptance.
LikeLike
Agree- It appears the French have an advantage, theocracy doesn’t have a foothold.
LikeLike
It’s ironic, isn’t it, that the U.S. is so priest- and preacher-ridden, while the nations of Europe, with their established religions (now or in very recent times) are so secular.
LikeLike
Ironic but explainable- the right wing kept incomes low, legislated away worker rights and made sure that national healthcare didn’t happen. The result is desperate people living lives that are a crap shoot and who turn to religion.
LikeLike
The question, Linda, is why workers don’t see who is responsible for their low wages and vote accordingly
LikeLike
People praying to their invisible friend in the sky to cure the cancer they got from quite real unregulated chemical plants, for example.
LikeLike
I have no opinion on how De Santis will fare because I can’t predict the future. But it amazes me to see people hoping Trump—the “existential threat to democracy” (and I think that characterization is accurate)—is the Republican nominee in 2024. Fool me once, be careful what you wish for, and other cliches come to mind.
LikeLike
FLERP!
I don’t want either of them to be the GOP nominee.
I want a sane centrist, if there is one in the GOP.
Charlie Baker of Mass., or Larry Hogan of Md. or even Asa Hutchinson of Ark.
although I would not vote for any of them.
The Republicans need a huge defeat to persuade them to avoid extremists, QAnon, etc
LikeLike
Trump lost the popular vote TWICE, but these morons might well make him their nominee again. A lot of rich Repugnican oligarchs must be very unhappy about this. Eh, Rupert?
LikeLike
FLERP!,
Why would it “amaze” you to see avid Trump lovers hoping Trump win when Trump supporters are not the people who care that Trump is a threat to democracy?
Who else – besides perhaps our resident Trump/Putin defender – hopes that Trump is the Republican nominee? And our resident Putin/Trump defender does not seem to believe either one of them is an existential threat to democracy.
Who are you talking when you refer to people hoping Trump is the Republican nominee in 2024? Because I don’t see many who care about democracy. They care about Trump.
LikeLike
To be clear, I think either Trump or DeSantis would be a disaster for our nation. They are two sides of the same coin.
LikeLike
Diane,
Your post was perfectly clear and I am absolutely positive that everyone here knows that you believe that both DeSantis AND Trump would be a disaster. You have never said you preferred Trump and no one thought you did.
FLERP!’s comment was a textbook example of “concern trolling”. FLERP! does that a lot .
“But it amazes me to see people hoping Trump—the “existential threat to democracy” (and I think that characterization is accurate)—is the Republican nominee in 2024.”
Concern trolling is “the action or practice of disingenuously expressing concern about an issue in order to undermine or derail genuine discussion.”
Diane, your post was about DeSantis and flerp! won’t criticize DeSantis. But flerp! regularly posts little concern trolling comments that indirectly defend DeSantis. Like flerp!’s extreme concern for the miniscule number of trans teens getting top surgery with their parents’ consent, which “concerns” flerp! greatly, unlike the 200,000+ teens getting various elective cosmetic surgeries for their emotional well-being.
And FLERP! is also concerned about people who hope Trump is the Republican nominee, and the IMPLICATION is that it is people here on this blog. Of course that’s a ridiculous thing to be concerned about for flerp! since no one on this blog has said that they prefer Trump to DeSantis. Like a good concern troll, flerp! just used innuendo that made you, Diane, feel obligated to clarify something that no one thought. flerp! made a gratuitous post to change the subject.
flerp! can defend himself by clarifying his post.
Who exactly are these “people” hoping Trump is the Republican nominee in 2024 that amaze flerp! so much?
flerp! is too disingenuous to say, because concern trolling works better if it can imply something negative about the people here criticizing DeSantis, which is the discussion flerp! wants to derail.
This kind of stuff is part of the reason our democracy is failing. The disingenousness and dishonesty that has become so acceptable in our discourse, when in the past people would be ashamed to sound like such con men.
Cue flerp! posting a snarky remark because I have called him out.
flerp!, who exactly are these “people” you are referring to that prefer Trump to DeSantis? If you mean rabid Trump supporters, why does it “amaze” you that they love Trump so much? Have you not been paying attention the last 7 years?
LikeLike
I’ve seen others say they would prefer Trump to DeSantis–Bob S., for one. https://dianeravitch.net/2022/11/22/ruth-ben-ghiat-desantis-is-no-better-than-trump/
If you had to choose between Trump or DeSantis winning the Republican nomination, who would it be? “Neither” is not an option in this hypothetical. If the answer is DeSantis, my concern is unwarranted, at least with respect to you.
LikeLike
And here’s a poll showing that there are many others who feel the same way. It’s not randomly sampled, to be sure, so it isn’t representative of all democrats. But there is definitely a view among many democrats that it would be better if Trump is the nominee than DeSantis. I can only assume that’s because they believe Trump is less likely to win a general election. But it seems an insane wish to me.
LikeLike
The aforementioned poll.
LikeLike
FLERP!,
I happen to think it is an insane wish for YOU to prefer DeSantis to Trump. You never explain why you think DeSantis is a far better choice than Trump. Because you think what DeSantis is doing in Florida is a MODEL for what would be good in the US? You want us to join you in your certainty that Trump is dangerous and DeSantis is not just as dangerous?
I hope everyone notes how disingenuous flerp! is. This post was about how DANGEROUS DeSantis is.
flerp! doesn’t believe DeSantis is dangerous but flerp! is far too disingenuous to say that. So flerp! tries to hijack the discussion by citing something irrelevant from 4 months ago.
Watch how easy it is to prove:
flerp!, is DeSantis an existential threat to democracy too, or do you believe that ONLY Trump is an existential threat to democracy and DeSantis is not a threat and it’s okay with you if DeSantis becomes president?
I would not bother to respond to flerp!’s post if flerp! just admitted he doesn’t think DeSantis is a danger and DIRECTLY defended DeSantis as a person with integrity would.
Instead, we get this kind of “who, me?” comment from flerp! where flerp! condemns Bob S for saying that Trump is less dangerous than DeSantis but Bob S ALSO makes it clear that BOTH Trump and DeSantis are dangerous.
I am so certain that flerp! does NOT believe that DeSantis is a danger to democracy that I state it for the record here as an absolute truth.
flerp! does not want to admit it, but flerp! does NOT believe that DeSantis is a threat to democracy.
flerp! is welcome to show that I am mistaken. If flerp! believes that BOTH DeSantis and Trump are dangerous, then flerp! can correct me. I have no problem admitting I am wrong, and I will be delighted to hear that flerp! agrees with Diane Ravitch that BOTH men are dangerous.
I feel pretty confident I am right because I have never seen flerp! make any comment about DeSantis being dangerous. And I have seen a lot of comments like this one, trying to change the subject when the subject of how dangerous DeSantis is comes up.
Ball’s in your court, flerp! Is DeSantis ALSO a danger to democracy? Either he is or he isn’t. You don’t want to answer that question – even though doing so will allow you to prove I am mistaken (if I am mistaken).
Your silence will speak for itself.
LikeLike
The exercise of reading and responding to your asinine comments is a good reminder why I’m glad I don’t spend as much time here as I used to. My lord, how many times did you type “Flerp” on this page?
As any sentient person would have deduced, I think DeSantis is not remotely close to the danger to democracy that Trump is. Not anywhere near the same neighborhood. So yes, I absolutely would much prefer Ron DeSantis to be the Republican nominee than Trump, who should not be allowed anywhere near the White House ever again.
I’ll leave you to type my user name some more.
LikeLike
flerp!
Yes, we already know that you think Trump is more dangerous than Biden and DeSantis and Nancy Pelosi, and Kamala Harris. And as I pointed out, it is clear that is the discussion YOU want to have instead of discussing the subject of Diane Ravitch’s post, which is that DeSantis is dangerous, period. flerp! is the only person obsessed with making comparisons instead of simply discussing how dangerous DeSantis is.
A close reading of the above reply to me will reveal that you STILL haven’t said whether you think DeSantis is dangerous at all. Instead you keep hijacking the subject of whether DeSantis is dangerous to try to say that DeSantis is “less dangerous” because you – quite obviously – don’t want to admit that you don’t think DeSantis is dangerous AT ALL.
I stand by my certainty that you believe DeSantis is NOT dangerous to democracy, but don’t have the integrity to just admit it. I gave you a chance to prove me wrong, and you refused.
Maybe some people here will be fooled, flerp! I doubt Diane Ravitch will be.
flerp, you don’t agree with Diane Ravitch that DeSantis is dangerous to democracy and you don’t have the integrity to just admit it.
LikeLike
FLERP! says:
“I absolutely would much prefer Ron DeSantis to be the Republican nominee than Trump, who should not be allowed anywhere near the White House ever again.”
But DeSantis SHOULD be allowed in the White House???!!!
I am glad that I didn’t have to retract my statement that flerp! believes DeSantis poses no threat to democracy.
LikeLike
Desantis is dangerous and I don’t think exiled Republicans or the national press get it.
LikeLike
It occurs to me that DeSatan is just pumping up his brand with his populist vitriol and anti-constitutional laws, but that this will not win in a nationwide election for the reasons stated in the article and more. In the bigger picture, his severe extremism serves to make “normal” other less draconian policies while at the same time building up the number of trumpaholics who will demand his brand of cruelty be a part of the Replutocrat platform. This serves as a long term pressure system to keep extremist pressure to right maintained. Whether he knows this or not or is colluding with other fringe right shadow players in some way or not is irrelevant.
LikeLike
In the bigger picture, his severe extremism serves to make “normal” other less draconian policies while at the same time building up the number of trumpaholics who will demand his brand of cruelty be a part of the Replutocrat platform.
YUP.
LikeLike