What are Republicans doing to Unify the country?

[Red]

It is a forray into fascism in America.

It is. I think if elections were determined by popular vote alone, this specie of fascism would be obliterated, and its proponents taught a lesson regarding what values we will, and will not, tolerate, as our face to the world. Not Trump. Not DeSantis. Not fascism. But, the future is unwritten yet.

But, obviously, Trump leans the wrong way as well, and here’s another of his fascist suggestions. I think I state the obvious in observing that there is really no way he would be able to pass his own test. I mean, what the hey does he know about our constitution?

'Full-blown fascism': Donald Trump envisions a 'civil service test' for 'every federal employee'

Former President Donald Trump issued a new statement on Friday vowing that if he is reelected, he will force public servants to pass a politically-themed loyalty test or face termination.Trump insinuated that the Federal Bureau of Investigation's August 8th, 2022 search warrant execution at his...

www.alternet.org

Trump’s Plans for the Federal Workforce: Weird Tests and Mass Firings

America’s top civics knower also promises to pile on more corporate deregulation—even after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the derailment in East Palestine.

newrepublic.com

 

[Al-O-Meter]

so far it doesn't look like it will be disrupted any time soon.

That gives me hope for America. Bigots want the power of government to force their ideology at the barrel of a gun. DeSantis is against that.

To take one example of how bigots are claiming up is down in Red's linked article:

"The measures also would make it illegal to require public school educators and students to refer to another person with pronouns that do not correspond with their birth gender."

Those wanting to "require" behavior are the bigots. DeSantis is NOT saying you, as a school kid, have to use specific language regarding pronouns. If you want to refer to someone as "he", "she", "zir", "them", or whatever then do that. This freedom of speech is opposed by those who seek to have the government compel pronoun usage under threat of prosecution. DeSantis is against government compulsion and that makes him "fascist".

DeSantis is also against using taxpayer money to teach racial hatred. Teaching history if fine. Teach the worst parts. Teach what a stain slavery is, but teachers cannot use taxpayer money if they want to use promote the idea that a person's skin color makes them bad, or lesser, or culpable. Again, DeSantis is standing in the way of bigots who demand that we teach the idea that a person's skin color makes them bad, or lesser, or culpable.

If teaching racial hatred is your thing, or if you are looking forward to the government prosecuting you for using the wrong language then DeSantis is probably not the guy for you.

 

[LogGrad98]

That gives me hope for America. Bigots want the power of government to force their ideology at the barrel of a gun. DeSantis is against that.

To take one example of how bigots are claiming up is down in Red's linked article:



Those wanting to "require" behavior are the bigots. DeSantis is NOT saying you, as a school kid, have to use specific language regarding pronouns. If you want to refer to someone as "he", "she", "zir", "them", or whatever then do that. This freedom of speech is opposed by those who seek to have the government compel pronoun usage under threat of prosecution. DeSantis is against government compulsion and that makes him "fascist".

DeSantis is also against using taxpayer money to teach racial hatred. Teaching history if fine. Teach the worst parts. Teach what a stain slavery is, but teachers cannot use taxpayer money if they want to use promote the idea that a person's skin color makes them bad, or lesser, or culpable. Again, DeSantis is standing in the way of bigots who demand that we teach the idea that a person's skin color makes them bad, or lesser, or culpable.

If teaching racial hatred is your thing, or if you are looking forward to the government prosecuting you for using the wrong language then DeSantis is probably not the guy for you.

For the record I am in favor of not requiring people to use the preferred personal pronouns. I think we should use them as a courtesy but I am against codifying that.

Everything else you completely misrepresented, like parroting the demonstrably false conservative talking points around CRT. Do better. Or troll harder? Not sure which you are going for, tbpfhwy.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Everything else you completely misrepresented, like parroting the demonstrably false conservative talking points around CRT.

Here is the actual text from the DeSantis-backed legislation:

(4)(a) It shall constitute discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex under this section to subject any student or employee to training or instruction that espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels such student or employee to believe any of the following concepts:
1. Members of one race, color, national origin, or sex are morally superior to members of another race, color, national origin, or sex.
2. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, national origin, or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.
3. A person’s moral character or status as either privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her race, color, national origin, or sex.
4. Members of one race, color, national origin, or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, national origin, or sex.
5. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, national origin, or sex, bears responsibility for, or should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of, actions committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, national origin, or sex.
6. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, national origin, or sex, should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.
7. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex, or national origin, bears personal responsibility for and must feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress because of actions, in which the person played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, national origin, or sex.
8. Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or sexist, or were created by members of a particular race, color, national origin, or sex to oppress members of another race, color, national origin, or sex.
(b) Paragraph (a) may not be construed to prohibit discussion of the concepts listed therein as part of a larger course of training or instruction, provided such training or instruction is given in an objective manner without endorsement of the concepts.

I'm not seeing where I misrepresented anything in the legislation. Which of the points in the above list are you are taking issue with? I can see why bigots wouldn't like the list, but tell me why you see that list and think it makes DeSantis a fascist for wanting these restrictions in place when it comes to spending taxpayer money.

 

[One Brow]

That gives me hope for America. Bigots want the power of government to force their ideology at the barrel of a gun. DeSantis is against that.

DeSantis is using government force to restrict the free speech of professors and the Disney company, while allowing hecklers to restrict the contents of libraries. That's forcing your ideology at the barrel of a gun.

Those wanting to "require" behavior are the bigots.

As usual, a request for simple politeness is too much for you to handle.

This freedom of speech is opposed by those who seek to have the government compel pronoun usage under threat of prosecution.

There is no jurisdiction in the US or Canada where this is prosecutable.

DeSantis is against government compulsion and that makes him "fascist".

His law-making says otherwise.

Teach what a stain slavery is, but teachers cannot use taxpayer money if they want to use promote the idea that a person's skin color makes them bad, or lesser, or culpable.

No one (this should be understood as no political party, major educational policy group, school board, etc.) wants to teach that. As an addendum that applies throughout, the clear intent to prevent accurately teaching about our current social hierarchy and privileges.

Again, DeSantis is standing in the way of bigots who demand that we teach the idea that a person's skin color makes them bad, or lesser, or culpable.

No one is trying to teach that.

Here is the actual text from the DeSantis-backed legislation:

(4)(a) It shall constitute discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex under this section to subject any student or employee to training or instruction that espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels such student or employee to believe any of the following concepts:

I'm not seeing where I misrepresented anything in the legislation. Which of the points in the above list are you are taking issue with? I can see why bigots wouldn't like the list, but tell me why you see that list and think it makes DeSantis a fascist for wanting these restrictions in place when it comes to spending taxpayer money.

1. No one teaches that.
2. No one teaches that.
3. No one teaches that about moral character. OTOH, teaching that about status reflects thousands of social science studies over the past few decades.
4. No one teaches that.
5. No one teaches that.
6. No one teaches that.
7. No one teaches that.
8. This is a mixed bag, as claims of merit, excellence, hard work, fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are used to justify inaction when racial prejudice is being pointed out.

I'm not seeing where I misrepresented anything in the legislation. Which of the points in the above list are you are taking issue with? I can see why bigots wouldn't like the list, but tell me why you see that list and think it makes DeSantis a fascist for wanting these restrictions in place when it comes to spending taxpayer money.

The legislation is an exercise in misdirection. It prevents very few real issues and scaremongers about societal issues, mostly for the sake of relieving the privileged of their self-imposed guilt.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

1. No one teaches that.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

Texas teacher who told Black students his race is 'superior' is no longer employed

The school superintendent described the discussion as "inappropriate, inaccurate, and unacceptable" and said "this type of interaction will not be tolerated in any" of the district's schools.

www.nbcnews.com

2. No one teaches that.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2016/10/19/to-be-white-is-to-be-racist-period-a-high-school-teacher-told-his-class/

3. No one teaches that about moral character. OTOH, teaching that about status reflects thousands of social science studies over the past few decades.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

He Taught a Ta-Nehisi Coates Essay. Then He Was Fired.

Matt Hawn says he was helping his students in Blountville, Tennessee, learn to critically evaluate contemporary debates.

www.theatlantic.com

4. No one teaches that.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

Atlanta mom files complaint alleging daughter's grade school segregated Black students

"You can't treat one group of students based on race differently than other groups," said the attorney for the woman who filed the federal complaint.

www.nbcnews.com

5. No one teaches that.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

Reparations for Slavery

These excerpted statements from Ta-Nehisi Coates and Stephan Thernstrom present arguments for and against paying reparations for slavery.

teachingamericanhistory.org

6. No one teaches that.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

Supreme Court Will Hear Challenge to Affirmative Action at Harvard and U.N.C. (Published 2022)

The court’s new conservative supermajority may be skeptical of admissions programs that take account of race to foster educational diversity.

www.nytimes.com

7. No one teaches that.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

Reparations for Slavery

These excerpted statements from Ta-Nehisi Coates and Stephan Thernstrom present arguments for and against paying reparations for slavery.

teachingamericanhistory.org

8. This is a mixed bag, as claims of merit, excellence, hard work, fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are used to justify inaction when racial prejudice is being pointed out.

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

Supreme Court Will Hear Challenge to Affirmative Action at Harvard and U.N.C. (Published 2022)

The court’s new conservative supermajority may be skeptical of admissions programs that take account of race to foster educational diversity.

www.nytimes.com

 

[AlaskanAssassin]

In my ideal world, the federal government would be small enough to where it would have minimal impact on our day to day lives. There would be no expectation of government to unite people with different world views. The Federal Government's sole job would be to secure our rights enshrined in the constitution. That's it. Everything else would be handled by States, and as such the vast majority of our taxes would be collected and administered at the state level. Instead of asking what the government, or a political party is doing to unite us, we probably should be asking what we individually doing to find common ground and become more united. I certainly don't see a lot of uniting conversation here, quite the opposite.

 

[One Brow]

Yes there are those who want to teach that which is why we have this kind of legislation.

As I said,

No one (this should be understood as no political party, major educational policy group, school board, etc.) wants to teach that.

There will always be individuals who teach stupid stuff.

Texas teacher who told Black students his race is 'superior' is no longer employed

The school superintendent described the discussion as "inappropriate, inaccurate, and unacceptable" and said "this type of interaction will not be tolerated in any" of the district's schools.

www.nbcnews.com

Hawn didn't teach any of the things you claim. Thank you for proving this movement is inherently deceptive.

Most of your examples didn't even apply to the number you linked them under, which is to be expected.

 

[One Brow]

In my ideal world, the federal government would be small enough to where it would have minimal impact on our day to day lives. There would be no expectation of government to unite people with different world views. The Federal Government's sole job would be to secure our rights enshrined in the constitution. That's it.

That was The Articles of Confederation. We turned out to need a stronger central government.

 

[Gameface]

That was The Articles of Confederation. We turned out to need a stronger central government.

We would have been conquered had we not gone federal. We're a giant fat turkey without our federal military.

To me this is the equivalent of every person I ever meet acting like they hate cities and want to live as far out in the country as they can get. Yet what they actually do is move just far enough from the city to get cheaper housing and still be able to go into town for stuff when they need/want it.

There's a reason humans make cities and the vast majority or humans live in or very near cities. Cities are humanity. Cities are life. Cities are the core of human culture. Go to your farm and reject you culture and your heritage if you want to, that's not what people do typically. People gravitate towards population centers where the higher levels of human development and achievement take place.

 

[Red]

Trump often blames others for the ideas, actions, that he himself voices. Something my psychologist dad taught me ages ago: those who complain the loudest about the behavior of others are often, or usually, the ones who commit that very behavior themselves. This could be called the most transparent of Trump’s MO’s. It’s there virtually every time. What he directs anger against is exactly what he does himself.

Similar dynamic in what DeSantis is trying to do. The Right is up in arms over so-called “Woke”. And someone like DeSantis does not like what he perceives to be liberal bias among teachers at public institutions of higher learning. But, here is the thing: DeSantis is not interested in ensuring that conservative voices are heard equally in the classroom. As DeSantis himself has said, I don’t think this is a paraphrase(?): “Florida is where Woke goes to die”.

He speaks of “freedom” in Florida. But what he’s really trying to do is stifle any worldview that does not comport with his own. For this is all about worldview, it’s all about his worldview must triumph over anything perceived as “Woke!, or liberal or progressive, for that matter. This is not about balance in the culture wars. It’s about winning the culture wars. And, therefore, it’s fundamentally about close mindedness, it’s about stifling open minded discussion of ideas, it’s about not allowing liberal or woke ideas to exist on anything resembling an equal footing in Florida. It is fundamentally about the stifling of knowledge, it’s about being an opponent of the development of critical thinking skills in students. Something that is antithetical to a good education. This is about “freedom!”??

DeSantis’s Florida is the opposite of the politics of freedom. It’s about repression. Just as we can turn Trump’s words around and point the finger of hypocrisy right at him, so we should do the same at DeSantis: his cultural war is not about freedom at all. It’s about being as close minded as possible. It’s all about stifling the freedom of thought. It’s all about destroying the aspects of “Woke” culture that he despises. In other words, he wants us to understand: only his side of our culture wars can be allowed to survive. Woke dies in Florida. Freedom of thought withers in Florida, and you can kiss it goodbye in Florida classrooms….

Trump and DeSantis both are not that hard to figure. What they complain about, what they condemn in others, is exactly what they are themselves.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Something my psychologist dad taught me ages ago: those who complain the loudest about the behavior of others are often, or usually, the ones who commit that very behavior themselves.

So those that make post after post after post pointing to others with claims of being close-minded are actually the ones who are close-minded in your psychologist dad's opinion. Interesting.

 

[Red]

So those that make post after post after post pointing to others with claims of being close-minded are actually the ones who are close-minded in your psychologist dad's opinion. Interesting.

No, he never commented about people and their posts on Jazzfanz. Passed away long before the age of Trump. Never took his work home with him, but that was the one lesson he chose to impart to me after several decades as a clinical psychologist: those who complain the loudest about the behavior of others are often the very people committing that very behavior themselves.

Oh, and I know what you’re doing here, and it won’t work. I am as open minded as it gets. I have been saying, for the past several years, that sooner or later the two competing cultures are going to have to talk. I examine my own biases on a continual basis. I’m married to someone who does not understand why I’m so concerned about Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis. And she lets me know it every time the subjects come up. One of my closest friends still thinks Trump is the greatest president ever. She is still my wife, he is still my close friend. And you know what? I take those two situations, a friend who loves Trump, a wife who actually agrees with Trump in some respects, as a life lesson for me!! You hear that? I don’t divorce someone who means the world to me. I don’t tell a friend to screw and never talk to me again. I chose to see it as a lesson: it’s good my wife does not agree with me, if I love here it should not matter. I tell myself, yes this hurts, I hate hearing her openly not understand, for one second, something I see as dangerous, namely, the Big Lie, but this must be a lesson to me, so I will see it as an opportunity to learn, even though it’s not often easy. It brings the culture wars right into my home. There must be a lesson in that.

I’m the one who knows the cultural enemies have to talk!! I am the one who, back in 2016, on this board, suggested we look to science to try and understand the differences between liberals and conservatives, created a thread for that purpose, that maybe a dialog could start between the world views of conservatives and liberals, that we could use that research by psychologists and others to better understand any underlying reasons, both psychological and perhaps even brain structure, to figure out the sources of our differences better.

Those are not the suggestions of a close minded person!!!

I’m the one who does not allow a day go by without wondering how the hell are we going to solve this culture war? Don’t you dare try to use my father’s words against me. It will not work. I am as open minded, and as willing to talk as it gets, pal.

What, do you expect me to say I think otherwise of DeSantis, to somehow prove I'm open minded? I already know two people at public colleges in Florida looking for jobs elsewhere because they value the protections of tenure and they believe in academic freedom for scholars who have dedicated years and much $$$ to earn their degrees, and who will not tolerate crackdowns on freedom of thought, nor should they. I have an opinion, I can back it up, I can defend it, and I have the courage of my convictions.

I have never lost sight that we are all human beings, and it ain’t an easy thing being a human being.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

I am the one who, back in 2016, on this board, suggested we look to science to try and understand the differences between liberals and conservatives ... both psychological and perhaps even brain structure, to figure out the sources of our differences better.

Those are not the suggestions of a close minded person!!!

Yes they are the suggestions of a close minded person. You skipped right over the real question to assume there are differences in "perhaps even brain structure". The very way you phrased it indicates someone who is seeking to validate their already-held biases. The science you are looking for is no different from that in Charles Murray's 'The Bell Curve'. I don't consider fans of that book to be open minded either. I'm not saying you are bad or on par with racists, but I do think you are overestimating how open minded you are.

In reality, we are all people and even most of our beliefs aren't that different. I personally believe the culture wars are as hot as they are because people are desperate to find connection in our increasingly online world and the culture is a thing we can talk about. It used to be I Love Lucy. It used to be Star Wars. It used to be the Super Bowl, but now there are so many choices in all things available to everyone that it has splintered society into pieces that don't have a lot of overlap. The hot button issues of the culture wars are the areas where people can jump in to feel a connection even if that connection's healthiness is debatable.

 

[SteakNEggs]

We don't start thread after thread after thread trashing Democrats like this board does Republicans.

 

[SteakNEggs]

We don't continually make up conspiracies and impeach Biden over what some person heard another person hear over phone calls.

 

[SteakNEggs]

We had one riot compared to over 200+ that led to over 700 police injured.

 

[Red]

The very way you phrased it indicates someone who is seeking to validate their already-held biases.

I’ve always felt that if there were factors that helped us understand why conservatives tend to be conservatives, and liberals tend to be liberal, that that would somehow help us understand that we should examine those factors. Things as seemingly fundamental(though I’m sure not 100% true) as “conservatives are more attune to threats” and “liberals are more comfortable with change”. If their are underlying factors, psychological, or yes, even physical as in brain chemistry/structure, then understanding those underlying factors exist that somehow that would serve to make us kinder toward one another, far less prone to just have feelings of anger and dislike toward the other.

I guess I’m saying a better understanding of our own nature, our human nature, if such an understanding helps us better understand why we differ on certain cultural conflicts, should defuse some of the knee-jerk antipathy, which, between Democrats and Republicans, is likely at its highest level ever in our nation. I thought “know thyself” and whatever will assist in that effort has to help where inflexible positions are concerned.

I honestly believe taking such an approach would have to act as some kind of check on inflexible positions, close mindedness, because it might help us understand we need to examine why we believe what we believe. It does not mean compromise then becomes a snap, but doesn’t it force me to be more open to the other’s positions? I can still remain strong in my position.

I listen to my wife’s arguments when these cultural and political conflict issues arise. And I think I understand why the tremendous growth in the overall rejection of authority, and authoritative sources, in the modern era, has taken place. And for sure that rejection has played into the related growth of conspiracism, mostly on the far Right, but the Left is not immune, witness Robert Kennedy, etc. These fundamental problems are also at the root, also must eventually be dealt with, and that will require understanding a whole host of things that cannot be ignored forever.

So, I thought where I was coming from is that if we simply better understand ourselves, and realize we may be born with certain tendencies, that are not necessarily a product of our personal development, that that would somehow help us loosen our inflexible positions, and simply realize what I have been saying all along: sooner or later the two warring sides are going to need to talk. And compromise eventually.

The people I disagree with on cultural issues are not going to vanish from American society and politics, and the people who think as I do are also not going to vanish from American society and politics. So compromise will have to happen sooner or later, the sooner the better. If understanding our own nature helps, I’m willing to consider all that.

I’m likely never going to alter my belief that creating the Big Lie of 2020 stolen election is an inexcusable action damaging our body politic, but I have nothing but sympathy for those who are so disaffected from American society. Even Trump, though I won’t blame anyone for dismissing this as nonsense and a lie even, on my part, but it’s 100% true: I want to see Trump held accountable, but, fundamentally, based on my personal beliefs and I guess how I was raised, I view him as a fallen soul, someone who does not understand himself, someone who misses the purpose of human existence, someone who deserves sympathy and compassion, because there but for the grace of God go I. I can be in dismay at so much of what he represents, but it’s difficult for me to actually hate him because of the beliefs I do hold, and I need to always examine myself first.

I’m looking for a way out of this national nightmare. But, if that means I’m close minded or just validating my biases, I cannot agree with that opinion, if anything I understated my open mindedness, at least on this board. It just isn’t working that way in my personal life, but I can’t alter how others chose to see me….

 

[The Thriller]

I’ve always felt that if there were factors that helped us understand why conservatives tend to be conservatives, and liberals tend to be liberal, that that would somehow help us understand that we should examine those factors. Things as seemingly fundamental(though I’m sure not 100% true) as “conservatives are more attune to threats” and “liberals are more comfortable with change”. If their are underlying factors, psychological, or yes, even physical as in brain chemistry/structure, then understanding those underlying factors exist that somehow that would serve to make us kinder toward one another, far less prone to just have feelings of anger and dislike toward the other.

I guess I’m saying a better understanding of our own nature, our human nature, if such an understanding helps us better understand why we differ on certain cultural conflicts, should defuse some of the knee-jerk antipathy, which, between Democrats and Republicans, is likely at its highest level ever in our nation. I thought “know thyself” and whatever will assist in that effort has to help where inflexible positions are concerned.

I honestly believe taking such an approach would have to act as some kind of check on inflexible positions, close mindedness, because it might help us understand we need to examine why we believe what we believe. It does not mean compromise then becomes a snap, but doesn’t it force me to be more open to the other’s positions? I can still remain strong in my position.

I listen to my wife’s arguments when these cultural and political conflict issues arise. And I think I understand why the tremendous growth in the overall rejection of authority, and authoritative sources, in the modern era, has taken place. And for sure that rejection has played into the related growth of conspiracism, mostly on the far Right, but the Left is not immune, witness Robert Kennedy, etc. These fundamental problems are also at the root, also must eventually be dealt with, and that will require understanding a whole host of things that cannot be ignored forever.

So, I thought where I was coming from is that if we simply better understand ourselves, and realize we may be born with certain tendencies, that are not necessarily a product of our personal development, that that would somehow help us loosen our inflexible positions, and simply realize what I have been saying all along: sooner or later the two warring sides are going to need to talk. And compromise eventually.

The people I disagree with on cultural issues are not going to vanish from American society and politics, and the people who think as I do are also not going to vanish from American society and politics. So compromise will have to happen sooner or later, the sooner the better. If understanding our own nature helps, I’m willing to consider all that.

I’m likely never going to alter my belief that creating the Big Lie of 2020 stolen election is an inexcusable action damaging our body politic, but I have nothing but sympathy for those who are so disaffected from American society. Even Trump, though I won’t blame anyone for dismissing this as nonsense and a lie, even, on my part, but it’s 100% true: I want to see Trump held accountable, but, fundamentally, based on my personal beliefs and I guess how I was raised, I view him as a fallen soul, someone who does not understand himself, someone who misses the purpose of human existence, someone who deserves sympathy and compassion, because there but for the grace of God go I. I can be in dismay at so much of what he represents, but it’s difficult for me to actually hate him because of the beliefs I do hold, and I need to always examine myself first.

I’m looking for a way out of this national nightmare. But, if that means I’m close minded or just validating my biases, I missed that. It just isn’t working that way in my personal life, but I can’t alter how others chose to see me….

Kennedy has zero supporters while Trump is the leading frontrunner for president. Kennedy is in the same camp as Williamson; a dude with some money who wants some attention. There will always be people seeking attention through politics. However, what matters is what kind of following they generate. Only the GOP has surrendered its party, media, and voters over to a snake oil salesman.

 

[fishonjazz]

Ted Cruz, one of Trump's staunchest MAGA allies, was begging Fox News behind the scenes to show 'demonstrable facts' and evidence before repeating Trump's 2020 election lies

"It can't just be, you know, somebody tweeted this," Cruz told Fox News Maria Bartiromo in 2020, per a recording obtained by MSNBC.

www.yahoo.com

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz warned a Fox News host in 2020 about needing "demonstrable facts" to back up MAGA election fraud claims — indicating that he, too, was concerned the false allegations weren't grounded in evidence.

Yet Cruz later joined several hardline MAGA senators in voting to not certify the 2020 election results without ever seeing any demonstrable facts.

Despite his reservations, in January 2021, Cruz ended up voting not to certify the results of the 2020 election, joining several hardline GOP senators in repeating Trump's election fraud lies.