|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 16 2016 02:54 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony of course is that Medicaid WAS supposed to be an integral part of the ACA (basically public option for the poor, with a fairly high bar for poor), but some Republican governors decided to take a stand on some sort of nebulous principle and completely fucked over the people in their states.
|
|
|
On September 16 2016 03:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 02:54 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 02:41 On_Slaught wrote:On September 16 2016 02:28 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 02:05 Acrofales wrote:On September 16 2016 01:57 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 01:52 Stratos_speAr wrote:On September 16 2016 01:41 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 01:38 Acrofales wrote:On September 16 2016 01:36 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Let's just presume that you're correct about all of the above. What will Joe voter hear? What you just said, or that Trump is going to pay for his kids' daycare? Yup. Trump should promise Joe Voter the moon on a stick, because it really doesn't matter that it is completely 100% impossible. PS: whence the disdain for Joe Voter? My wife and I are paying in the neighborhood of $3,000-3,500 per month for childcare (2 kids in daycare, 1 in kindergarten + after-school care). Trump just told me that he's going to cover it. What could Hillary possibly offer me that trumps what Trump just put on the table? The same thing but to feasibly pay for it? Has she made the offer? And is the offer as good as Trump's from my economic perspective? What Trump is doing is pure conservative heresy (hence Danglar's protests), but Trump's naked pandering to the middle class clearly is going to work. Of course she has made the offer. It has been plastered up on her website for weeks. Here: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/early-childhood-education/It probably doesn't sound as good, because she's not in the business of lying about what the government can afford. And one of a couple of articles comparing Trump and Hillary's plans: http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2016/09/politics-child-care Looks like Trump's plan is more generous. And as a bonus, while I was there (on the Economist's website), I stumbled upon this interesting blog about "post-truth politics": http://www.economist.com/node/21706525It basically states that Trump can lie, because it really doesn't matter anymore in modern politics: the campaign is not about facts, or policy. It's about creating an us vs. them, and as long as something sounds plausible, it can be completely false, but will have the same reinforcing feeling. Especially if "they" try to debunk it by showing how it is false. Of course the truth doesn't matter any more. Nor, by extension, do facts. Only the emotional and subconscious sells matter. Trump has figured this out and is taking these principles to their logical conclusions. And in doing so, he has so badly outmaneuvered the democrat party (he's literally occupying positions left and right of Hillary) that no one really knows what to do about it. And for all of you who are complaining about the cost of Trump's plan and how he's going to pay for it, let me ask you this: how often does the "how are we going to pay for it" objection work when it comes to elections? So which is it. Is he going to make your life better by lowering costs or is everything a lie to get elected? Can't have it both ways. I don't see why the two are necessarily mutually exclusive. Here's what I'm saying phrased slightly differently. Trump is running on the theory that "republican virtue" is dead. A majority of people aren't interested in doing what's good for the country anymore; they are interested in what's good for them. The Democrat constituency is built upon this type of pandering (and I'm not just talking about raw handouts, I'm also talking about things like liberal illegal immigration policy). Trump is merely bringing the republican party current with the times by introducing massive pandering to the Republican platform. What makes this particularly effective for Trump is that it enables him to break off voter blocks that would otherwise vote Democrat by using pandering to create wedge issues (NAFTA anyone?). The sad reality is that most voters want to vote for Santa Claus. To the extent that republican virtue still exists, you're most likely to find it among conservatives, but Trump's calculus is that most of those people are going to vote for him anyway for other reasons. Pandering is how Trump is creating his majority. Ran against the establishment selling out the American people, just to side with the establishment trotting out liberal policy because the conservatives are stuck voting against the big time progressive radical. Yeah, it's good political calculus. It just sickens me to the stomach how bad the best case scenario is going to be. And I still don't know if he can convince enough people that he's going to give out more free goodies than the party who's been doing it for ages.
Nah, Trump is still a massive middle finger to the establishment. He's a populist, not an elitist.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall).
Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win.
|
On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win.
Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
|
On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want.
Take a look back at Athenian democracy if you want to know why that isn't a particularly good idea. That's like arguing for the " nuclear physics of the people"
One redeeming feature of conservatives is their natural scepticism when it comes to the intellectual capacity of the electorate. Apparently that's been thrown out of the window as well
|
On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want.
If we learned anything from the founding fathers, it was don’t listen to the mob on FP issues. But it appears that went out the window with separation of church and state.
|
On September 16 2016 03:18 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Take a look back at Athenian democracy if you want to know why that isn't a particularly good idea. That's like arguing for the " nuclear physics of the people"One redeeming feature of conservatives is their natural scepticism when it comes to the intellectual capacity of the electorate. Apparently that's been thrown out of the window as well
Again, I'm not expressing any value judgments as to whether any of this is good. I'm just describing what's happening.
|
On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want.
Funny, because from the same poll that honesty stat comes from I see 39% trust Trump on FP and 57% trust Clinton on FP
https://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2379
|
On September 16 2016 03:23 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Funny, because from the same poll that honesty stat comes from I see 39% trust Trump on FP and 57% trust Clinton on FP https://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2379
Just wait for the debates.
|
On September 16 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:18 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Take a look back at Athenian democracy if you want to know why that isn't a particularly good idea. That's like arguing for the " nuclear physics of the people"One redeeming feature of conservatives is their natural scepticism when it comes to the intellectual capacity of the electorate. Apparently that's been thrown out of the window as well Again, I'm not expressing any value judgments as to whether any of this is good. I'm just describing what's happening.
Yes but at some point you just have to concur that Trump has absolutely nothing to do with conservatism any more. The whole isolationist and protectionist wall thing isn't conservative either.
|
On September 16 2016 03:28 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:23 Dan HH wrote:On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Funny, because from the same poll that honesty stat comes from I see 39% trust Trump on FP and 57% trust Clinton on FP https://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2379 Just wait for the debates.
So you are not describing what is happening but predicting what will happen based on wishful thinking
|
On September 16 2016 03:28 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:18 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Take a look back at Athenian democracy if you want to know why that isn't a particularly good idea. That's like arguing for the " nuclear physics of the people"One redeeming feature of conservatives is their natural scepticism when it comes to the intellectual capacity of the electorate. Apparently that's been thrown out of the window as well Again, I'm not expressing any value judgments as to whether any of this is good. I'm just describing what's happening. Yes but at some point you just have to concur that Trump has absolutely nothing to do with conservatism any more. The whole isolationist and protectionist wall thing isn't conservative either.
When have I ever said that he's a conservative?
|
On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:
Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want.
There are a lot of things where the government could do well to listen more to the people. Foreign policy is one of the things I'd rather politicians decide behind closed doors.
Hell, if governments listened to their people on foreign policy we'd already be at war with China, given some rising popular sentiments in China toward war with the US. Fortunately, their government isn't *that* stupid.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Hillary's FP popularity comes from people buying into her assertion that she is highly experienced.
Most of her experience is seen in the sheer quantity of FP blunders that she has helped to create.
|
On September 16 2016 03:30 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:28 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:18 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Take a look back at Athenian democracy if you want to know why that isn't a particularly good idea. That's like arguing for the " nuclear physics of the people"One redeeming feature of conservatives is their natural scepticism when it comes to the intellectual capacity of the electorate. Apparently that's been thrown out of the window as well Again, I'm not expressing any value judgments as to whether any of this is good. I'm just describing what's happening. Yes but at some point you just have to concur that Trump has absolutely nothing to do with conservatism any more. The whole isolationist and protectionist wall thing isn't conservative either. When have I ever said that he's a conservative?
well you just said a page ago that he's "going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall)." I don't think conservatives actually want that.
I'm not sure where you stand anyway. Are you identifying as a conservative, are you supporting Trump? I truly never know, you are the Trump of this thread
|
On September 16 2016 03:30 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:28 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:18 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Take a look back at Athenian democracy if you want to know why that isn't a particularly good idea. That's like arguing for the " nuclear physics of the people"One redeeming feature of conservatives is their natural scepticism when it comes to the intellectual capacity of the electorate. Apparently that's been thrown out of the window as well Again, I'm not expressing any value judgments as to whether any of this is good. I'm just describing what's happening. Yes but at some point you just have to concur that Trump has absolutely nothing to do with conservatism any more. The whole isolationist and protectionist wall thing isn't conservative either. When have I ever said that he's a conservative?
It is really hard to tell since your stance and level of commitment to Trump’s policies are so mercurial. As far as I can tell your argument is that Hilary losing is good for conservatism and Trump can only do so much damage in 4 years. It won’t forward the small government goals that are the center of your political views, but you are willing to risk Trump because it won’t set them back to far.
Unless we have another 9/11 level disaster on our hands. At that point, all bets are off.
|
On September 16 2016 03:34 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:30 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:28 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:18 Nyxisto wrote:On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On September 16 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 16 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Watching Trump spout positions antithetical to Republican mainstream positions and watching both his supporters and party officials is a very amusing pastime. Trump's heresies against conservatism are largely excusable given that he's going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall). Rumor from the grapevine is that Trump's FP is one of his most severe conflicts with "the establishment." At the very least he really struck a nerve with his anti-NATO rhetoric, and that's not hard to see if you look at how desperate a lot of the military/intelligence officials are for Hillary to win. Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. Take a look back at Athenian democracy if you want to know why that isn't a particularly good idea. That's like arguing for the " nuclear physics of the people"One redeeming feature of conservatives is their natural scepticism when it comes to the intellectual capacity of the electorate. Apparently that's been thrown out of the window as well Again, I'm not expressing any value judgments as to whether any of this is good. I'm just describing what's happening. Yes but at some point you just have to concur that Trump has absolutely nothing to do with conservatism any more. The whole isolationist and protectionist wall thing isn't conservative either. When have I ever said that he's a conservative? well you just said a page ago that he's "going to give conservatives the big ticket items that they want (ie the Wall)." I don't think conservatives actually want that. I'm not sure where you stand anyway. Are you identifying as a conservative, are you supporting Trump? I truly never know, you are the Trump of this thread
I don't think an actual conservative would wnat the wall; because they know it's a waste of cash big gov't spending program.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 16 2016 03:31 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2016 03:15 xDaunt wrote:
Absolutely. However, what I think the know-it-alls are about to learn is that Trump has figured out and is pursuing the foreign policy that the people want. There are a lot of things where the government could do well to listen more to the people. Foreign policy is one of the things I'd rather politicians decide behind closed doors. Hell, if governments listened to their people on foreign policy we'd already be at war with China, given some rising popular sentiments in China toward war with the US. Fortunately, their government isn't *that* stupid.
While FP involves a great deal of non-common expertise which should be cross-administration and influenced strongly by experts, it should still reflect the general will of the people. Otherwise we get the olden days when kings started war for petty land grabs while the people had to pay for it, a pattern that is not so unlike certain less well-liked FP adventures in recent years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
