US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2978

On February 21 2016 12:12 cLutZ wrote:
Cruz will read the landscape over the next few outings. If he gets 3rd consistently he will leave prior to the late March huge delegate States like California and Rubio is second choice for nearly 80% of his voters. Trump loses H2H against everyone left but Carson by 15+ points, so his hope lies in the field being fractured and Cruz/Rubio supporters not losing faith.

On February 21 2016 12:45 trulojucreathrma.com wrote:
Cruz and Rubio will stay in. Trump will win, even though he loses head to head vs everyone.

Nice system.

On February 21 2016 11:17 KwarK wrote:
I read recently that American manufacturing has never been stronger and the problem in terms of employment is that it has been increasingly mechanized which ought to be fantastic news. If we were content with 1950s quality of life then we could just divide that bountiful productivity between the people, most of whom wouldn't have to go to work. The problem is too much success and technology in the face of an economic model that assumes employment is the only way in which a person can contribute for society.

At some point we're going to have to start redistributing wealth from the people who own the machines and paying people to be parents, community organisers and so forth.

On February 21 2016 11:45 Danglars wrote:

You dig the willful blind generalizations out of your hate. He wouldn't even get the muslim poll numbers if his policies and actions weren't so aligned with favorability. Let's get another speech on a terrorist attack focusing on the pre-post-attack backlash and condemning it! So take the ignorance of your own ignorance elsewhere.


I get why you would generalize this to the overall persona, I really do. He's over the top and he's dedicated to anti-PC statements in all forms and subjects. Douglas Adams did a good series on the statement and others in (link) an article and (link) the series. Let me add some short comments on the "immune to criticism" and "civility & reason" parts.

First, GOP supporters have seen much of the criticism of Trump to itself be overblown and unfounded. It started with immigration, how the TV news and columnists marginalized supporters of a border fence as the first step to comprehensive immigration reform. Now Trump emphatically states that view in yuuuge press conferences, relates its impact, covers sanctuary cities, and deservedly wins support. The predictable response of establishment figures in both parties is the exact same establishment mainstream view that got people riled up in the first place—so it's easily swept away. If there had been a vibrant debate on immigration with all positions considered, there would be no Trump or he'd have to try his luck on a new central issue. Disparage your sincerely held view for decades and see if you also don't give the first guy you hear supporting your viewpoint some leeway in criticism.

Now, how about the charge that he's being uncivil and unreasonable. His supporters and the conservative base of the GOP have for some time now regarded Obama's deeply vindictive speeches as about as uncivil as it gets. He takes executive power to new levels, and presumes to lecture the other side about what idiots they are for calling it that. Talk about Muslim violence in the middle east and he'll bring up the crusades, an extreme level of religious conflation. On nearly every policy disagreement he straw-mans the opposition, whether he calls it based on racist or outgroup-based or inherently against American values. I know many readers are coming from an American liberal mindset, so you might agree with Obama on his stances. However, you haven't gone through 7 years of Obama trashing mainstream conservative values that you hold and showing outright contempt for state rights and the rule of law. He's an incredibly partisan politician and is responsible for his behavior towards his political opponents.

I say the GOP base has grown tired of sincerely uncivil and unreasonable comments and actions from the current president and his administration (case can also be brought for the Bush attackers of yesteryear), dressed up in flowery language and condescending fortune-cookie aphorisms (RIP Scalia). The first guy to repeatedly fight back on a big podium with bombast ignites the reserves of indignation. Call it inciting incivility if you want. It's been going on for some time now. To cite a Germany example, just to reaffirm my conceptual basis, you think Merkel's administration would've received the same verbal disparagement had it not covered up the sex attacks that occured on new year's eve? To conclude, the left has fundamentally eroded the civil debate and the appeal to reason for long enough, and only now are receiving back the fruits of their labors.

On February 21 2016 12:03 Nyxisto wrote:

Yes sure you can probably give some blame to the 'establishment' in the US as well as in Europe to not listen to a certain part of their population, marginalizing them and so on and that's obviously where some of the backlash comes from including the stuff Merkel has had to endure, but Obama has never said or done anything that is even remotely comparable to the stuff he faces. Large parts of the Republican voterbase literally seem to believe that he is either a Muslim or not American, and that is 100% grounded in his biography as a black man with Hussein as a second name. If he would be John von Wienerschnitzel descending from German Protestants he wouldn't be facing these accusations. There ought to be some line where this stuff ends and politics begins. Yes Merkel get's a lot of those comments as well, but not from other politicians or candidates, but tone is getting more raw here as well.

There is a certain part of the population that seems to be so intrinsically anti-pluralist and extremist that they can not participate in a democracy and the political system, and the political system as a whole has the job to signal that and not agitate them further.