Volitve v ZDA 2020

Samo eno zadevo bi omenil.

Trump ni poseben eksemplar, ki se je samo pojavil. Gre za simptom ameriske propadajoce druzbe, je glas vseh volilcev v "fly over countries" in ne bo sel stran. To dobis z desetletji poneumljanja javnosti. Spet bo zmagal, bi bilo fino, ce ne bi, so se evropski fasisti zaceli kar malo prevec glasno oglasati.

Zakaj misli da bo tisto, kar bo sledilo propadu sistema (navadno vojna), boljše?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/shark-ta...

Corcoran, who sold her real estate company for more than $60 million in 2001, was also critical of President Trump’s decision to assemble a working group of more than 200 CEOs, executives and thought-leaders as part of his Great American Economic Revival plan. The group includes billionaire JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon and Apple CEO Tim Cook.

“It's basically the club he always wanted to be a member of, ‘The real billionaires club’ that he couldn't get in and now he runs the show,” she said. “You don't turn around and ask 200 people and collect all these opinions. It's really a vanity group, I just can't believe he would even waste the time doing it.”

https://twitter.com/laurenduca/status/1...

I was on CNN with Kayleigh McEnany after the 2017 Women’s March. In the elevator after our segment, she smiled as she told me how easy it is to profit from being a pretty woman willing to support Trump on TV.
Now she’s his press secretary. I suppose it was only a matter of time.
I was stunned by our interaction. She spewed anti-choice rhetoric in the Women’s March segment, and then acted as if we’d just gotten brunch together.
Kayleigh McEnany is willing to say absolutely anything to get ahead, and apparently Satan has her on speed dial.

Avtorica je precej znana.

Lauren Duca @ Wikipedia

Indijska TV kritizira trumpov odziv:

Tale fotka iz Ohia precej aktivno kroži po twitterju.

https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/sta...

VaeVictis je 16. apr 2020 ob 21:27 izjavil:

Potem pa v drugem postu, Indija kritizira ZDA.

Šokantno in nikoli še videno!

Modi in Doni sta best buds.

'Howdy Modi’: India’s Prime Minister Threw a Right-Wing Blowout with Trump in Texas


Trump Takes India | The Daily Show


BTW, Trump je bil v Indiji konec februarja letos. Kot da ni imel boljšega dela...

Pac-Man je 16. apr 2020 ob 21:45 izjavil:

Tale fotka iz Ohia precej aktivno kroži po twitterju.
https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/sta...

Let me get my Zombie gun...

In resnica glede COVID-19:

VaeVictis je 17. apr 2020 ob 09:36 izjavil:

Tole je ena možnost, ki je lahko pravilna.

Druga je pa seveda malce drugačna.

Morda si pa evropski podporniki Trumpa nismo želeli imeti warmongerinje in pokvarjene političarke Clinton-ke in si sedaj ne želimo dementnega Bidena ali komunističnega Sandersa.

Na dolgi rok se večino zadev, ki se rodijo v ZDA, pripelje v EU.

In vse oslarije, ki se jih levi demokrati zmislijo, bi enkrat prišle tudi v EU, in to še konkretno potencionirane.

Če bi Sanders zmagal, bi jutri pri nas komunistične stranke bile v povzponu ...

In morda zaradi tega imamo raaje Trumpa in republikance, kot pa Clintonovo v preteklosti ali Bidena danes.

Dodaten plus pa nam je, da Trump govori America first, tudi, če bi naši politiki prvo poskrbeli za slovenske interese in ne vsakič takoj nastavili rit EU ali EU nastavila rit tujim državam, bi mogoče večini šlo bolje v Sloveniji in EU!


ps: Kje je danes slavna Greta, kje so vsi glasni podporniki t.i. liberalnih pravic?

To je točno to kar sem hotel povedat - dobesedno ponavljaš Trumpovo retoriko, ki hoče svojo opozicijo zreducirat na nek komaj relevanten pridevnik in svet prikazat kot črno-bel, da ga je ljudem lažje razumet in prodat.

Pa primerjat katerokoli trenutno politično gibanje v ZDA s komunizmom (ali z nacizmom for that matter) je čista bedarija. To so avtokratske ureditve, ki v današnjem času "50 odtenkov kapitalizma" nimajo več svojega mesta in jih ljudje radi mečejo v obraz tistim s katerimi se ne strinjajo.

Osebno sem tudi mnenja, da bodo ZDA s svojim "warmongeringom" in proxy vojnami nadaljevali ne glede na to, kdo je na oblasti. Se jim pač splača ekonomsko, saj njihov vojaško-industrijski kompleks zaposljuje preveč ljudi in je odgovoren za preveč izvoza, da bi s tem prenehali.

Ameriški establišment in republikanci so bistveno, bistveno bližje fašizmu kot so Sanders ali Levica blizu komunizmu. Kar se dogaja ni premik v levo, nazaj proti sredini ampak še bolj na desno, k desnemu populizmu in skrajnosti.

Intervju s tipom, ki je ustvaril slogan odpravimo ICE (abolish ICE). Ponovi vse, kar tu zagovarjam non-stop.
Levica v ZDA mora igrat dolgo igro, njihov čas še prihaja. Vmes naj sklepajo zavezništva, svoje ideje prevajajo na lokalni nivo in gradijo politično mašinerijo od spodaj navzgor.

Uvod spodaj, intervju na povezavi

Politico: What AOC Gets that Bernie Didn’t
Progressive pot-stirrer Sean McElwee has some thoughts about what went wrong for Sanders supporters, and how they can get what they want (eventually).



The 27-year-old progressive activist Sean McElwee made the POLITICO 50 list of influential thinkers in 2017 for “Abolish ICE,” a pithy slogan that more liberal Democrats adapted into a quixotic campaign to dismantle the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

It didn’t succeed, of course, and President Donald Trump gleefully elevated it into a symbol of out-of-touch Democratic extremism. But it stretched the limits of the immigration debate—and it became a rallying cry for young lefty insurgents like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Latina bartender from the Bronx who embraced it on the way to her out-of-nowhere upset of an establishment Democratic congressman.

McElwee, the founder of the polling and policy group Data for Progress, is one of those young lefty insurgents, a proud limit-stretcher from the AOC-Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party. But he’s a data guy as well as a progress guy, and he has some thoughts about why Sanders lost so handily to Joe Biden, an avatar of the old-school centrist Democratic thinking that McElwee yearns to disrupt.

The American left is at a crossroads, with some leading activists defiantly refusing to support Biden. McElwee thinks that’s a huge strategic mistake, and he doesn’t expect many progressives to make it in November; this week, Sanders and fellow liberal icon Elizabeth Warren endorsed Biden, and AOC also called for a united front against Trump. McElwee may be an ideologue, but he’s a pragmatic big-tent ideologue who believes the left can best advance its agenda from inside the Democratic Party—and can eventually come to control it.

First, though, McElwee believes the left needs to stop making other huge strategic mistakes. He’s a millennial with some surprisingly old-school ideas about politics, and he worries that his fellow young lefties will marginalize their movement if they think they can change the world without realistic compromise, serious policy work, transactional coalition-building and the kind of public opinion research that by one measure made Data for Progress the most accurate pollster of the 2020 primary.

He obviously grasps the allure of a slogan like Abolish ICE, but he also grasps the dangers of purism; he quips that he always advises politicians, like the patients in prescription drug ads, to ask their campaign managers if Abolish ICE is right for their districts. McElwee is big on metrics and policy details, and he wishes the rest of the left was, too.

In this conversation with POLITICO Magazine’s Michael Grunwald, McElwee shared his critical thoughts about the future of the left, its recent defeats at the polls, its reliance on mobilization rather than persuasion, its relationship with Biden and the Democratic Party, and why its politicians need to care about cheese as well as health care. This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Fun times, komentiramo brez da bi prebrali intervju.

Ravno v tem je fora, s trdim delom lahko levica v sledečih letih prevzame demokratsko stranko. Ne bo vsega kar imajo v programu, taka je politika, ampak alternativa je da stojiš ob cesti in se jokaš kako te nihče ne razume. Medtem gre karavana dalje.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/...

GRUNWALD: Establishment sellout Joe Biden is the nominee! Is the left vanquished?

MCELWEE: Oh, I wouldn’t put it that way. The next generation of Democrats is much closer to the Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth-Warren-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez view of the world than the Joe Biden view, and over time they’ll age into higher voting rates. Remember, Sanders became a senator at the height of the neoliberal-Third Way backlash to the New Deal-Great Society era, when it seemed like that centrist consensus had an eternal stranglehold over the party. AOC is entering politics at a very different time where progressives are winning more and more battles. Just a decade ago, 64 Democrats in the House wanted to attach a ban on abortion funding to Obamacare! Today that would never happen. Today we’re fighting about how ambitious the public option should be. Even with Biden as the nominee, the Democratic agenda is more progressive than ever.

But yeah, we lost a battle, and there were severe strategic missteps that people on the left are still underestimating. The media narrative was that Sanders was poised to win, but the early states were disproportionately caucus states and disproportionately white, which papered over some worrying political weaknesses for progressives. If Iowa and Nevada had been primaries, we would have seen those weaknesses earlier.

...

GRUNWALD: People always trash poll-tested, focused-grouped finger-in-the-wind politicians, but you’re suggesting it wouldn’t hurt the left to at least check which way the wind is blowing. Can you give an example of how refusing to do that hurt Sanders?

MCELWEE: Sanders did well with more independent non-traditional Democrats in 2016, and that convinced a lot of progressive leaders that his white working-class voters were supporting a progressive agenda, not just voting against Hillary Clinton. That led to some huge missteps in 2018, when the left was focused on knocking on doors in rural Wisconsin, while the center of the party targeted the so-called professional managerial class in the suburbs and turned a lot of districts from red to blue.

It turns out that non-college whites are pretty conservative, while the much-derided “suburban wine moms” are much more supportive of a progressive agenda. The Republican agenda of tax cuts doesn’t really benefit them anymore, while Republican cuts to services like childcare and public higher education really hurt them. Jesse Ferguson told us in your magazine that the suburbs would be fertile ground, but we said fuck you, and we saw again in 2020 that the left is way behind in engaging with those voters.

...

GRUNWALD: Bernie is arguing that progressives won the ideas primary. Is that even true?

MCELWEE: It’s certainly true that most Democrats believe in very progressive ideas. It’s hard to find a progressive policy that doesn’t have strong support among Democrats. But this primary was about electability, and progressives weren’t able to persuade a majority of Democrats that their ideas are shared by a majority of the country. And that’s partly because Sanders and Warren didn’t emphasize the most popular progressive policies.

I mean, look at the Blue Dog Democrats. They don’t campaign on how Wall Street and pharma should be free to do whatever the fuck they want. They run on giving small business loans to the troops, and protecting people with pre-existing conditions, and then after they win they vote to deregulate Wall Street and protect pharma. We should be talking about the parts of our agenda that are winners with voters, because there are progressive ideas that can fire up the base and persuade general election voters.

...

GRUNWALD: You’re talking about policies that can persuade less progressive voters. But what about the hardcore left? I always saw Bernie as a cool and fun cause for young rebels; supporting Biden obviously isn’t cool or fun. But I saw Cornel West said he’s not going to vote third-party this year because the left needs to join an anti-fascist coalition against Trump – that makes it sound kind of cool and fun! Could that mobilize the left?

...

GRUNWALD: He just endorsed Medicare for 60-year-olds. He’s come out for student loan relief, some of Elizabeth Warren’s bankruptcy reforms. Will the left meet him halfway?

MCELWEE: Sure. Remember, Biden is viewed a bit more favorably with the left than Hillary Clinton was. We can have a long conversation about why, but it’s a fact. And Bernie Sanders has a closer relationship with Biden than he had with Clinton in 2016. Also, Clinton was deep in the weeds on policy, which made it harder for her to make concessions to the left. With Biden you see a real interest in finding areas where there could be unity, and I think there’s more interest from all the wings of the party in having unity in 2020. I remain optimistic about a united front.

GRUNWALD: You may be a wacko radical, but you’re a pretty pragmatic dude.

MCELWEE: My view is that politics is the slow boring of hard boards. Really, that view almost overstates how quickly political change happens. Look, in 2020, mistakes were made, but the basic problem was that the progressive movement wasn’t yet powerful enough to win a Democratic primary. We’ll be back at it in four or eight years. Eventually, we will be powerful enough, and we’ll have the opportunity to pass a lot of laws.

I’d like to see progressives focus on building the infrastructure and policy support for our priorities. I do worry about the lack of dedication to learning the nitty-gritty details of how the process works. I’ve worked on legislation in New York state, and I’ve seen how the simplest thing, like changing voter registration from opt-in to opt-out at the DMV, can require an incredible amount of bureaucratic competence, technical capacity, things like that. Progressives need to dedicate ourselves to learning how those bureaucracies function, or we’re going to be woefully unprepared to implement our agenda.

I also think progressives need to focus on building power down ballot. We always complain that Obama failed to do this, but we seem to forget it the second we start thinking about our own movement: This year, a progressive came within four points of beating [conservative Democratic congressman] Henry Cuellar. Every progressive who’s doing an autopsy of the presidential primary should be doing an autopsy of why we didn’t invest more in that race. There’s been an utter neglect of down-ballot work.

...

GRUNWALD: You’re kind of saying: Trust the process.

MCELWEE: Well, a lot of progressives were upset about the Affordable Care Act. And yeah, we wish there was a public option. But look what happened: The Medicaid expansion has been a big success, while the private exchanges have struggled, and that’s helped make our case that delivering concrete benefits through the public sector works, and it’s undermined the neoliberal policy strategy. My view is that the Democratic Party is moving every day towards a place where young progressives should feel comfortable. AOC is going to be the moral center of the party in a decade, and it’s not just her.

It’s going to take some time. You saw how long it took movement conservatism to take over the Republican Party.

Prvo.

Just a decade ago, 64 Democrats in the House wanted to attach a ban on abortion funding to Obamacare! Today that would never happen. Today we’re fighting about how ambitious the public option should be. Even with Biden as the nominee, the Democratic agenda is more progressive than ever.



https://www.npr.org/sections/health-sho...

The Affordable Care Act very nearly failed to become law back in 2010 because of a dispute among Democrats over how to handle abortion in the bill.
Now a similar argument between Democrats and Republicans is slowing progress on a bill that could help cut soaring premiums and help stabilize the ACA.

...

Republicans in both the House and Senate unanimously refused to support the Affordable Care Act when it passed Congress in 2010. In order to pass the bill over GOP objections, Democrats needed near unanimity among their ranks, abortion remaining the biggest hurdle.

The Democratic caucus at the time had a significant number of members who opposed abortion, particularly those representing more conservative districts and states. In order to facilitate movement, House and Senate leaders agreed that the health bill should be "abortion-neutral," meaning it would neither add to nor subtract from existing abortion restrictions.

...

The bill passed the House in 2009 only after inclusion of an amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), a longtime opponent of abortion.

...

In the upper chamber, a compromise was ultimately reached by abortion-rights supporter Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and a Democratic senator who opposed abortion, Ben Nelson from Nebraska. Nelson was the final holdout on the bill, which needed all 60 Democrats in the Senate to overcome the unanimous GOP opposition. The Boxer-Nelson language was a softening of the Stupak amendment but still allowed states to prohibit plans in the ACA's insurance marketplaces from covering abortion.

In addition, President Barack Obama agreed to issue an executive order intended to ensure no federal funds were used for abortions.

Ne boš verjel kdo podpira upornike v nekaterih zveznih državah:
https://twitter.com/keithmfitz/status/1...

Chomsky pravi, da je never Biden folk nihilističen.

https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/stat...

Asked by @mehdirhasan whether he'll be voting for Biden, Noam Chomsky says "of course, I wouldn't hesitate for a second... I'm not going to vote for the destruction of organized human society."
Chomsky says that whatever hopes progressives have for the future, with "another Trump term, I don't think we get that far." A bluntly pragmatic point.
(He talked at some length about nuclear weapons treaties, among other huge issues at risk this election.)

Pa še tole: na približno 12:00 tega intevjuja senator Lindsay Graham namigne, da "upa, da bojo lahko imeli volitve"...



Toliko o tem.

No, seveda vedno več člankov piše, da je virus ušel iz lab-a. Trump je pač zajebal odziv, zato je treba zdaj preusmerjati pozornost na zunanjega sovražnika, da se skrije lastno nesposobnost.

Internetni velikani so pa klasični kapitalisti in posledično ne moreš trditi, da so levo usmerjeni zgolj zato, ker brišejo teorije zarote.

Ne smemo pozabiti, da ima republikanski vodja večine v Senatu Moscow Mitch zelo hudo povezavo z vrhom CCP:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/02/us/p...

Fritz je 17. apr 2020 ob 21:28 izjavil:

Ne boš verjel kdo podpira upornike v nekaterih zveznih državah:
https://twitter.com/keithmfitz/status/1...

Samo ponavlja kar vidi na Fox News. Ni prvič in ne zadnjič.

https://twitter.com/MattGertz/status/12...
Minutes after a Fox News segment on a protest against social distancing measures outside the Minnesota governor's office, by conservative "Liberate Minnesota" group, Trump tweets "LIBERATE MINNESOTA!"

Left, Fox's America's Newsroom, 11:19 a.m.
Right, Trump, 11:21 a.m.


Čez eno uro:

Trump says Cuomo should spend less time "complaining." Cuomo responds.

Profesor jedrske strategije na mornariškem kolidžu.

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status...

On a more serious and less trolly note, I bring up the nuclear war thing because I think people generally underestimate the effects of nuclear use and we have for decades been too comfortable in talking about it in the abstract. So, that point isn't about Trump. There are people in real jobs in senior positions in government - ask anyone here on Twitter who's worked in DC - who really believe that limited nuclear exchanges are possible. My point is: We can't even social distance. Imagine radioactive debris in the air.

There is an entire nuclear weapons establishment - from strategy to production - that has a vested interest in rationalizing limited-use thinking, and I just don't think most citizens really think about what that means, even for areas that are not directly hit.

The part that *is* about Trump is that we have an outdated conception of instant-retaliation - necessary during the Cold War, and crazy now - that vests all authority in one man with no checks. We didn't think about it because we never faced having an unstable POTUS. During the waning days of the Nixon administration, SECDEF put out the word that any "unusual" orders should get checked with him. This was un-Constitutional and we need something better. Trump's obvious instability has made us have to confront that question of reform, imo.

VaeVictis je 18. apr 2020 ob 11:27 izjavil:

Poldi112 je 18. apr 2020 ob 11:24 izjavil:

No, seveda vedno več člankov piše, da je virus ušel iz lab-a. Trump je pač zajebal odziv, zato je treba zdaj preusmerjati pozornost na zunanjega sovražnika, da se skrije lastno nesposobnost.

Internetni velikani so pa klasični kapitalisti in posledično ne moreš trditi, da so levo usmerjeni zgolj zato, ker brišejo teorije zarote.

To, da je večina internetnih velikanov pro-levo je znano dejstvo.

Sodelujejo tudi z Republikanci, samo težko razlagaš, da jih večina ni pro-levo.

Tole je pa oseba, ki ji Pac-Man ne pripisuje mentalnega padca.



Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
Let me say again: I've been on cable hundreds of times. I've watched thousands of segments over the years. I've literally never seen one person -- until Joe Biden -- who has to read from notes to answer questions from a cable TV host.

And even with that, he often gets lost:

In kaj dela internetve velikane levo usmerjene? Ustvarjanje monopolov? Boj proti regulacijam? Boj proti zasebnosti? Boj za del pogače v vojaško industrijskem kompleksu? Sodelovanje z represivnimi režimi? Izkoriščanje delavcev?

Da bi bil kapitalist levičar bi bil strel v lastno koleno. Zgolj delajo se, da so levi, ker to pali pri izkoriščanih delavcih. No, pa homoseksualne poroke in splav zagovarjajo, da se lahko distancirajo od "čist drugačne" desnice.

VaeVictis je 18. apr 2020 ob 11:16 izjavil:

Internetni velikani, ki so večina pro-levo usmerjeni, celo aktivno brišejo in demoentizirajo vsebine, ki omenjajo Kitajsko.

Aja, ameriški milijarderji so levo usmerjeni. Fuckin commies, them all

Ne vem, a ste eni študirali inverzno politologijo ali je kaj drugega šlo narobe? Ameriški internetni milijarderji so kvečjemu bolj liberalnejši od konservativcev a le dokler ne pridemo do davkov, tam se kar dobro razumejo z republikanci.

Lame izgovori in preusmerjanje pozornosti, nič drugega.

zmaugy je 18. apr 2020 ob 04:39 izjavil:

Fantje, saj zdaj je jasno, da je game over, ane? Dogaja se to, kar sem napisal pred več kot enim mesecem na temi o Kitajskem virusu, kaj se bo zgodilo, če zaradi tega začnejo umirati Američani in Evropejci in kaj bo to pomenilo za Kitajsko.
No, naslednje ameriške volitve bojo zaradi CCP v znamenju vojne napovedi kitajski komunistični partiji, glede na to, da le ta trdno drži vse nitke oblasti na Kitajskem v svojih rokah, bo torej to vojna napoved Kitajski.
Ker so očitki Republikancev do CCP zelo upravičeni in ker bo v ZDA še veliko mrtvih zaradi COVID-19, lahko pričakujemo, da bo kampanja v tej smeri tistim, ki se jo bojo šli, dala zmago na volitvah.

In boy kako so na strani Trumpa pograbili to rešilno bilko:



Najbolj tragično je to, da imajo pri tem popolnoma prav. Kitajci so izvedli Pearl Harbor 21. stoletja in zaradi spleta okoliščin volitev v ZDA, bojo za to plačali zelo visoko ceno. Svet pa čakajo spremembe, ki jih nihče ni pričakoval.

Eno pa je gotovo - če bo Trump zajahal tega konja "vojne napovedi" Kitajski in če ne bo istega konja zajahal tudi Biden, bo zmagovalec teh volitev Trump, rezultat za svet pa zelo nepredvidljiv.

Kateri očitki republikancev so upravičeni?

Primerjava s Pearl Harborjem je pa tudi svetovna. Menda nisi en od tistih veleumov, ki se jim zdi smiselno, da so kitajci vse skupaj zrežirali?

Fritz je 18. apr 2020 ob 14:37 izjavil:

VaeVictis je 18. apr 2020 ob 11:16 izjavil:

Internetni velikani, ki so večina pro-levo usmerjeni, celo aktivno brišejo in demoentizirajo vsebine, ki omenjajo Kitajsko.

Aja, ameriški milijarderji so levo usmerjeni. Fuckin commies, them all

Ne vem, a ste eni študirali inverzno politologijo ali je kaj drugega šlo narobe? Ameriški internetni milijarderji so kvečjemu bolj liberalnejši od konservativcev a le dokler ne pridemo do davkov, tam se kar dobro razumejo z republikanci.

Lame izgovori in preusmerjanje pozornosti, nič drugega.

Da, ne bo preveč biasa v eno ali drugo smer.

Evo tukaj imaš lepo razloženo komu internetni velikani donirajo.

Apple

Alphabet (Google)

Amazon

Facebook

Microsoft

Sedaj pa sam preveri, kdo dobiva več denarja od njih Republikanci ali Demokrati?

Fritz...

Kot prvo se enkrat že odločite, ali so demokrati čedalje bolj levo ali čedalje bolj desno.

Kot drugo se pa odločite ali je Sanders demokrat ali je neodvisen kandidat.

Obe zadevi se da tukaj, od spošovanih podpornikov demokratske stranke, prebrati v tej temi.

Zelo shizofrenično izpadete v teh svojih komentarjih!

Poldi112 je 18. apr 2020 ob 14:58 izjavil:

zmaugy je 18. apr 2020 ob 04:39 izjavil:

Fantje, saj zdaj je jasno, da je game over, ane? Dogaja se to, kar sem napisal pred več kot enim mesecem na temi o Kitajskem virusu, kaj se bo zgodilo, če zaradi tega začnejo umirati Američani in Evropejci in kaj bo to pomenilo za Kitajsko.
No, naslednje ameriške volitve bojo zaradi CCP v znamenju vojne napovedi kitajski komunistični partiji, glede na to, da le ta trdno drži vse nitke oblasti na Kitajskem v svojih rokah, bo torej to vojna napoved Kitajski.
Ker so očitki Republikancev do CCP zelo upravičeni in ker bo v ZDA še veliko mrtvih zaradi COVID-19, lahko pričakujemo, da bo kampanja v tej smeri tistim, ki se jo bojo šli, dala zmago na volitvah.

In boy kako so na strani Trumpa pograbili to rešilno bilko:



Najbolj tragično je to, da imajo pri tem popolnoma prav. Kitajci so izvedli Pearl Harbor 21. stoletja in zaradi spleta okoliščin volitev v ZDA, bojo za to plačali zelo visoko ceno. Svet pa čakajo spremembe, ki jih nihče ni pričakoval.

Eno pa je gotovo - če bo Trump zajahal tega konja "vojne napovedi" Kitajski in če ne bo istega konja zajahal tudi Biden, bo zmagovalec teh volitev Trump, rezultat za svet pa zelo nepredvidljiv.

Kateri očitki republikancev so upravičeni?

Primerjava s Pearl Harborjem je pa tudi svetovna. Menda nisi en od tistih veleumov, ki se jim zdi smiselno, da so kitajci vse skupaj zrežirali?

Nadaljevanje v smeri CCP virusa je tukaj žal off topic.