However I never see proposals from Republicans to improve education, just either cuts or demands to ban books. Do you have examples where they have proposed improvements to education? Without that then I'm afraid Republicans really do always to appear to be anti-education.
I’m not sure if you read their education proposals, but their platform basically boils down to spend less money on public education and instead support charter schools, private schools and home schooling, etc., teach the bible in class, get rid of national educational standards, support abstinence instead of sex Ed, get rid of student counselling for contraception/abortions, get rid of government funded student mental health support, reinterpret Title IX to apply only to women/girls, and privatize the federal student loan program.
None these proposals are very education-forward at all, and are mostly just hot button issues to rile up the base. Each of these policies just decreases educational support and funding. How will any of these policies have any beneficial effect on the quality of education American’s receive?
Don’t even get me started with their stated tax policy. The Republicans’ entire platform on tax reform is to repeal the Johnson amendment, a ban on non-profit political campaign activity that prohibits non-profits (which includes churches) from participating in, or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for political office; and to make the tax code “so simple and easy to understand that the IRS becomes obsolete and can be abolished.”[0] This is a literal quote from the 2016 Republican Platform that you linked. Yeah, let’s just abolish the IRS. That’s a super realistic policy.
Yep, I honestly don’t get how people can seriously read this platform and claim in good faith that these are valid policy positions. The “evidence” they linked to support their claim ended up instead just supporting your original point that they were trying to refute. Agreed. Just completely mad.
Who violently overthrew Congress? Gaslighting doesn't help your argument.
Is the "markeptplace of ideas" like when the Media and the DNC incited mass riots for eight full months before the 2019 election, mass-terrorizing American voters? To what end? To make sure there was a "fair trial" (note: this assured the opposite)? Or to make sure that the preferred candidate was elected? Again, by targeting American voters.
When was Congress overthrown? Which Congresspeople were harmed? Which Grandmas with American flags, now with criminal records, meant to take over the US government?
Yes, there are a lot of people in prison. They have been subject to norm-breaking prosecution under the opposition party's adminstration. Whenever an opposition party decides to arrest and prosecute its competition, they try to deflect from the authoritarian fact and deride those people as crimimnals as much as possible. This is the playbook for every tin-pot dictator since Sumer.
And in this instance, the authoritarians in question rode into office on eight months of nation-shattering street terrorism that their party incited and protected. Of course, the dictators proclaim those riots as perfectly legitimate and that of their competition as criminal. See: Tin Pot Dictator.
There are, in fact, at least two positions on most issues that the English speaking world cares about. But why move the goal post from voter education to a discussion on the subjective badness of the two main parties? That is, if your aim is to make a point under the discussion being had.
problematic about what? the idea of an "educated" voter is very childish
a lot of political topics, particularly foreign policy and economics, are far too complicated for ordinary people to be informed about. if you ever have the time i would recommend reading the book "propaganda" by jacques ellul. or just skimming the chapter titled "the necessity for propaganda." it's pretty relevant to the thread as well