Trump and Harvard

[Gunnar]

Harvard, knowing the best way to combat MAGA is by educating the populous, is offering free courses for things like the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Public Policy, Politics in America, Political Institutions, Public Health, Justice, Leadership, etc. There are currently 134 free courses.

I've watched the lectures by Michael Sandel for the Justice course before (it's one that's been available free for a long time), and I learned quite a bit, and really enjoyed it. There's the added bonus of a student being dressed like Spiderman in one of the lectures, lol. I'm tempted to give the "Quantitative Methods for Biology" a try, but I have zero aptitude for programming and raw data analysis.

I think you meant "populace" rather than "populous" in your first sentence, but other wise I agree with this post. And thank you for posting links to Harvard free courses. I look over some of the titles listed and I expect I'm going to enjoy perusing them!

[Dr Exiled]

Yep. No populism for the left and Trump gets elected. This is why I push against posters only wanting to blame Trump and his worshipers. It's why I fought against the russiagate nonsense and the laptop b.s. Trump may be bad but democrats are bad too and seemingly don't like elections, only coronations. The democrats will screw you just in a slightly different fashion. They have their days at the trough just like the Republicans do and wealth continues its march upward.

How a party chooses a candidate is up to the party. I understand the desire to make the process as democratic as possible, but there is no external mandate to force the party to choose its candidate the way we want it to. The Democratic Party would have been better off having a primary this most recent cycle, but they did have one in 2020 and 2015. When we think of why they did what they did in 2024, we have to take into account the Trump factor. Fear of Trump is probably the main reason why Biden hung in too long and then there was no primary when he bowed out. I am not sure how the Democrats could have beaten Trump in 2024. If Biden had kept his word not to run in 2024 and there had been a regular primary, then perhaps they could have beaten Trump. Too bad that did not happen.

None of this really justifies Trump or really explains the "cutting off your nose to spite your face" decision of voting for him. (The second person pronoun here is not a reference to you, Exile.)

1. Sure, the democrats can appoint whomever but that may be why some were turned off, especially when they were claiming the last election was about "democracy."
2. Fear of Trump should have led to getting a candidate that was more popular than Trump, a candidate that could get people excited. A way to see who that it is, is to have a bunch of primaries that aren't rigged like in 2016 and that actually occur as didn't happen the last go around. But the democrats, the party of superdelegates, ensures no popular candidate will win the democratic nomination. They're the party of control and gender issues that the run of the mill voter isn't going to rally around.
3. About justification for Trump being in office, he is, and looking down on those that voted for him might just be about the lack of a better alternative rather than the mental capacity of the voter. Maybe the fault lies with the democrats. Young men are moving away from them and so are latinos, etc. Maybe looking internally might be helpful.

[Gunnar]

Which was spin, and Harvard did not really do much, and it was not until Trump threatened them with funds being taken away did Harvard take it more serious, but again you probably know that. If you did not know, then you have not been following what has been going on there. There is a group of over 60 faculty and staff members, ironically called "Harvard Faculty and Staff Members for Justice in Palestine."

https://www.harvardfsjp.org/statement

You can even join the group and stand behind these Harvard Faculty members in there antisemitism.....just go to the bottom of the page from the link I gave you and click on the membership link and you to can join, real time, "The Harvard Faculty and Staff Members for Justice in Palestine."

Were you aware that this organization exists? It seems to me if they are serious in truly protecting their campus and name they would take legal action against this group and fire them immediately.

I ask you the same question that canpakes asked you. What was antisemitic about the stated goals of that group? To malign and oppose the aims of that group is every bit as irrationally and cruelly biased as antisemitism itself. Hamas is undeniably evil and ought to be opposed and defeated, but not all Palestinians are Hamas or even Muslim, and treating Palestinians as a group with the same cruelty and genocide to which Jews have been treated in the past is every bit as wrong as when Jews were so treated. Even many Jews, even in Israel, are rightly appalled with the extreme, indiscriminate brutality of the IDF's response to Hamas' vicious attack on Israelis.

Do you not realize that Harvard's current President, Alan Garber, himself, is a Jew? Do you think that either he or Bernie Sanders is an antisemite for denouncing the atrocities that are going on in Gaza? Very few of the tens of thousands of Palestinians slaughtered had anything at all to do with the attacks that motivated Israel's response, let alone the courageous humanitarian aid workers and media personnel reporting on the situation, who have also died. Opposing the Israeli government's seemingly indiscriminate extermination of Palestinians does not equal antisemitism.

[Markk]

Which was spin, and Harvard did not really do much, and it was not until Trump threatened them with funds being taken away did Harvard take it more serious, but again you probably know that. If you did not know, then you have not been following what has been going on there. There is a group of over 60 faculty and staff members, ironically called "Harvard Faculty and Staff Members for Justice in Palestine."

https://www.harvardfsjp.org/statement

You can even join the group and stand behind these Harvard Faculty members in there antisemitism.....just go to the bottom of the page from the link I gave you and click on the membership link and you to can join, real time, "The Harvard Faculty and Staff Members for Justice in Palestine."

Were you aware that this organization exists? It seems to me if they are serious in truly protecting their campus and name they would take legal action against this group and fire them immediately.

I ask you the same question that canpakes asked you. What was antisemitic about the stated goals of that group? To malign and oppose the aims of that group is every bit as irrationally and cruelly biased as antisemitism itself. Hamas is undeniably evil and ought to be opposed and defeated, but not all Palestinians are Hamas or even Muslim, and treating Palestinians as a group with the same cruelty and genocide to which Jews have been treated in the past is every bit as wrong as when Jews were so treated. Even many Jews, even in Israel, are rightly appalled with the extreme, indiscriminate brutality of the IDF's response to Hamas' vicious attack on Israelis.

Do you not realize that Harvard's current President, Alan Garber, himself, is a Jew? Do you think that either he or Bernie Sanders is an antisemite for denouncing the atrocities that are going on in Gaza? Very few of the tens of thousands of Palestinians slaughtered had anything at all to do with the attacks that motivated Israel's response, let alone the courageous humanitarian aid workers and media personnel reporting on the situation, who have also died. Opposing the Israeli government's seemingly indiscriminate extermination of Palestinians does not equal antisemitism.

It is just a front. Do you know what "from the River to the sea" in regard to the conflict and anti Israel protesters. It is a call for the eradication of Israel. Many faculty members that are founding members of the Harvard Faculty and Staff, signed a open letter to the past president of Harvard when she spoke out against that phrase, clearly knowing what it implies. The eradication of Israel is certainly an antisemitic mindset. With a little bit of home work you can find the staff members names, and the names on that open letter. If you can't figure it out, I can certainly provide you with those links.

Allowing protestors to carry signs, or chanting such things, whether allowed by free speech of not, is anti semantic rhetoric, and pure hate towards the nation of Israel.

What does it matter, or not, that Garber is a Jew or not? Do you want to discuss the Jews that worked with and collaborated with the Nazi's during ww2? From what little I know or have read about Garber, he supports the eradication of the state of Israel...i.e. from the River to the Sea, which is just that , from the river to the sea and not just the west bank and Gaza.

Hamas terrorist use the slogan as the eradication of the state Israel, which there is no denial of, and Harvard, and the group in question supports the use of that hate filled slogan on campus, how is that not anti semantic?

[canpakes]

I ask you the same question that canpakes asked you. What was antisemitic about the stated goals of that group? To malign and oppose the aims of that group is every bit as irrationally and cruelly biased as antisemitism itself. Hamas is undeniably evil and ought to be opposed and defeated, but not all Palestinians are Hamas or even Muslim, and treating Palestinians as a group with the same cruelty and genocide to which Jews have been treated in the past is every bit as wrong as when Jews were so treated. Even many Jews, even in Israel, are rightly appalled with the extreme, indiscriminate brutality of the IDF's response to Hamas' vicious attack on Israelis.

Do you not realize that Harvard's current President, Alan Garber, himself, is a Jew? Do you think that either he or Bernie Sanders is an antisemite for denouncing the atrocities that are going on in Gaza? Very few of the tens of thousands of Palestinians slaughtered had anything at all to do with the attacks that motivated Israel's response, let alone the courageous humanitarian aid workers and media personnel reporting on the situation, who have also died. Opposing the Israeli government's seemingly indiscriminate extermination of Palestinians does not equal antisemitism.

It is just a front. Do you know what "from the River to the sea" in regard to the conflict and anti Israel protesters. It is a call for the eradication of Israel. Many faculty members that are founding members of the Harvard Faculty and Staff, signed a open letter to the past president of Harvard when she spoke out against that phrase, clearly knowing what it implies. The eradication of Israel is certainly an antisemitic mindset. With a little bit of home work you can find the staff members names, and the names on that open letter. If you can't figure it out, I can certainly provide you with those links.

Allowing protestors to carry signs, or chanting such things, whether allowed by free speech of not, is anti semantic rhetoric, and pure hate towards the nation of Israel.

What does it matter, or not, that Garber is a Jew or not? Do you want to discuss the Jews that worked with and collaborated with the Nazi's during ww2? From what little I know or have read about Garber, he supports the eradication of the state of Israel...i.e. from the River to the Sea, which is just that , from the river to the sea and not just the west bank and Gaza.

Hamas terrorist use the slogan as the eradication of the state Israel, which there is no denial of, and Harvard, and the group in question supports the use of that hate filled slogan on campus, how is that not anti semantic?

You failed to answer these questions:

“Markk, can you (1) point out the ‘antisemitism’ that is displayed on the page, and then show how (2) Harvard, as an institution on the whole, is promoting antisemitism?”

[Kishkumen]

1. Sure, the democrats can appoint whomever but that may be why some were turned off, especially when they were claiming the last election was about "democracy."
2. Fear of Trump should have led to getting a candidate that was more popular than Trump, a candidate that could get people excited. A way to see who that it is, is to have a bunch of primaries that aren't rigged like in 2016 and that actually occur as didn't happen the last go around. But the democrats, the party of superdelegates, ensures no popular candidate will win the democratic nomination. They're the party of control and gender issues that the run of the mill voter isn't going to rally around.
3. About justification for Trump being in office, he is, and looking down on those that voted for him might just be about the lack of a better alternative rather than the mental capacity of the voter. Maybe the fault lies with the democrats. Young men are moving away from them and so are latinos, etc. Maybe looking internally might be helpful.

Acknowledging the problems with our political system is fine up to a point. I do not like the two-party system, and I wish we had something better. I would love it if the Democrats were more effective than they are. Obviously the Democrats relied too much on their legacy of being the party of Roosevelt and did not respond effectively to the upsurge in populist discontent.

But there is a difference between the self-justifications of Democrats for the failure of their own party to rise to the occasion and independents judging the choices people made when they voted. I am not a Democrat. I am an Independent and have been so since I changed my registration from Republican to Independent in the W years. I don't need to justify what Democrats did. They did what they did. I can blame others for making the disastrous decision of voting for Trump.

There was ample information out there to inform curious voters about the fitness of Trump to hold the US presidency. We can lament the fact that people did not do their research or had bad judgment--we can blame the Democrats for choosing competent but unpopular and uncharismatic candidates--but that does not exonerate people who voted for Trump of their poor judgment in voting for him. Those who continue to support him or defend him are even more culpable. The evidence is out there. A refusal to think through the situation, or an inability to do so, does not get a pass from me.

[Some Schmo]

3. About justification for Trump being in office, he is, and looking down on those that voted for him might just be about the lack of a better alternative rather than the mental capacity of the voter.

Not seeing a better alternative to Trump (damned anyone) speaks to the lack of mental capacity of the voter.

[Doctor Steuss]

Harvard, knowing the best way to combat MAGA is by educating the populous, is offering free courses for things like the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Public Policy, Politics in America, Political Institutions, Public Health, Justice, Leadership, etc. There are currently 134 free courses.

I've watched the lectures by Michael Sandel for the Justice course before (it's one that's been available free for a long time), and I learned quite a bit, and really enjoyed it. There's the added bonus of a student being dressed like Spiderman in one of the lectures, lol. I'm tempted to give the "Quantitative Methods for Biology" a try, but I have zero aptitude for programming and raw data analysis.

I think you meant "populace" rather than "populous" in your first sentence, but other wise I agree with this post. And thank you for posting links to Harvard free courses. I look over some of the titles listed and I expect I'm going to enjoy perusing them!

Rascally homophones will plague me all the way to my death bed... as the last of my hare falls out, ask to be relieved of my gilt, and seek the council of the friends that chews to stand by me.

[Marcus]

I think you meant "populace" rather than "populous" in your first sentence, but other wise I agree with this post. And thank you for posting links to Harvard free courses. I look over some of the titles listed and I expect I'm going to enjoy perusing them!

Rascally homophones will plague me all the way to my death bed... as the last of my hare falls out, ask to be relieved of my gilt, and seek the council of the friends that chews to stand by me.

I think you'll be okay. At least your spellcheck doesn't tell you you're 'anti-semantic' (full of lack of meaning?) like Markk's.

[Some Schmo]

Rascally homophones will plague me all the way to my death bed... as the last of my hare falls out, ask to be relieved of my gilt, and seek the council of the friends that chews to stand by me.

Those were homophonic comments.