It’s not that I like them or don’t. Both Your and mine sources are secondary, and have bias. But the thing is, Uccisore, my inclination and leaning is toward what was characterized earlier on, as primary identification with the philosophical argument
nderpinnings within historical contexts, which go directly to the heart of another vpcharacterization of the Republican Party, that is fearful and holding their
ground. I am trying to sustain continuity, whereas
the liberals are charged with the opposite, naturally as pragmatists the moment caught the by surprise. Here lays the inversion, and a few tidbits of actual
news is worth more than some opinionated biased
analysis.
The points made upon the reverse roles of the
parties, starting in the socially charged years, where
the predominant South, went from Republicsn to Democrat, abandoning their affiliation ,and now we are seeing another turn around, a new conversion.
These are significant changes, because they were
drastic and abrupt.
Now switch reels. Trump announced that one of the
first things he will bring into the White House Oval Ofgice is a letter from Nixon, with whom at that time Trump was in close affiliation maybe even friendship with. Nixon wrote Trump a letter, telling him, that he, Trump, one day will become president.
Now here comes an irony. Nixon, also defied convention, literally breaking into the Democratic Party Headquaters, albeit seeing himself as above the law. And at the same time, he predicted the advent of fascism to America. Ironic, because it is through his own actions that he had such an acute insight. Eisenhower made a more general cautious remark by warning of the dangers of the military-industrial complex. So there is a thread here, a continuum, where dots can be connected, as seemingly tenuous as they are.
Now, here comes Trump who has true to prediction did become president, and he also is trying to curb judicial power, by going around process. The unconstitutionally of some of his actions have been pointed to, and yet, has by a sort of fulfillment of destiny, managed to overcome all obstacles so far.
The parallels are more than coincidental, and more significant than what an economist, or Rasmussen has to say. Even the pundits have gibpven up on such forecast, and the trend now is toward the elements of surprise, and ad-hoc political construction.