|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
I blame CNN for giving Trump billions in free campaign ads. No other network elevated him nearly as much in 2015 (or much of 2016). Fox wasn't even really on board with Trump until after he won the primaries, nor were most talk radio hosts. Hillary's moronic pied piper strategy probably didn't actually matter much, as given her campaign's skill at getting her elected, I doubt any aid they offered actually helped anyone.
The GOP also had a bunch of very weak candidates (Rubio was the 'establishment' pick, but he was accurately identified as being robotic and over-rehearsed by Chris Christie). Cruz was too unlikeable in person to be able to get the establishment on his side.
Strategists on both sides have always known that you can go full racist and get a higher percentage of white votes and increase white turnout. The reason they didn't do it before Trump was because they feared the long-term damage to their party, and knew that simple dog-whistles would work almost as well (see Lee Atwater's busing quote, for instance), and that doing that also drove turnout up on the other side.
On August 22 2020 04:16 Gorsameth wrote:
Talk about the Dems starting a war is hilarious when the Republicans started it after Obama's election.
You talk about the Dems needing to compromise when McConnel stands up and says the GOP will do everything in their power to make Obama a 1 term president, because a Black man just became President.
But sure, stand high atop your mountain proclaiming Republicans didn't start the war and that the Dems need to compromise, when the Tea Party spend 6 years ensuring nothing got done in Congress because a Democrat was President.
Trump is a logical continuation of the GOP dog whistling to appeal to racists. Trump was just the first to discover he didn't need to bother with the whistle and could just be openly racist. Sure the media is partly to blame for putting him in the spotlight but the voting base waiting for an openly racist candidate was there because of the GOP's southern strategy, not the media.
You want to stop the war? look into the mirror and give the Democrats a reason to work with you again, not threaten them with an even bigger racist next time.
I believe Danglar's is referring to an actual war, not a figurative one. (Or at least violence - regardless of the result, I predict at least a few deaths after the election results are announced).
I've noticed a large uptick in comments where people say they're willing to march on washington if Trump is re-elected (with guns).
|
On August 22 2020 04:18 Nevuk wrote:I blame CNN for giving Trump billions in free campaign ads. No other network elevated him nearly as much in 2015 (or much of 2016). Fox wasn't even really on board with Trump until after he won the primaries, nor were most talk radio hosts. Hillary's moronic pied piper strategy probably didn't actually matter much, as given her campaign's skill at getting her elected, I doubt any aid they offered actually helped anyone. The GOP also had a bunch of very weak candidates (Rubio was the 'establishment' pick, but he was accurately identified as being robotic and over-rehearsed by Chris Christie). Cruz was too unlikeable in person to be able to get the establishment on his side. Strategists on both sides have always known that you can go full racist and get a higher percentage of white votes and increase white turnout. The reason they didn't do it before Trump was because they feared the long-term damage to their party, and knew that simple dog-whistles would work almost as well (see Lee Atwater's busing quote, for instance), and that doing that also drove turnout up on the other side. Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 04:16 Gorsameth wrote:
Talk about the Dems starting a war is hilarious when the Republicans started it after Obama's election.
You talk about the Dems needing to compromise when McConnel stands up and says the GOP will do everything in their power to make Obama a 1 term president, because a Black man just became President.
But sure, stand high atop your mountain proclaiming Republicans didn't start the war and that the Dems need to compromise, when the Tea Party spend 6 years ensuring nothing got done in Congress because a Democrat was President.
Trump is a logical continuation of the GOP dog whistling to appeal to racists. Trump was just the first to discover he didn't need to bother with the whistle and could just be openly racist. Sure the media is partly to blame for putting him in the spotlight but the voting base waiting for an openly racist candidate was there because of the GOP's southern strategy, not the media.
You want to stop the war? look into the mirror and give the Democrats a reason to work with you again, not threaten them with an even bigger racist next time. I believe Danglar's is referring to an actual war, not a figurative one. (Or at least violence - regardless of the result, I predict at least a few deaths after the election results are announced). I've noticed a large uptick in comments where people say they're willing to march on washington if Trump is re-elected (with guns). As I said previously, what other option do American's have if Trump rigs the election? As he is openly trying to do with the gutting of the USPS during a pandemic which is expected to have lots of mail in votes.
|
Oregon governor says no in class school for at least 200 days. Woooohoooooooo
|
On August 22 2020 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 04:18 Nevuk wrote:I blame CNN for giving Trump billions in free campaign ads. No other network elevated him nearly as much in 2015 (or much of 2016). Fox wasn't even really on board with Trump until after he won the primaries, nor were most talk radio hosts. Hillary's moronic pied piper strategy probably didn't actually matter much, as given her campaign's skill at getting her elected, I doubt any aid they offered actually helped anyone. The GOP also had a bunch of very weak candidates (Rubio was the 'establishment' pick, but he was accurately identified as being robotic and over-rehearsed by Chris Christie). Cruz was too unlikeable in person to be able to get the establishment on his side. Strategists on both sides have always known that you can go full racist and get a higher percentage of white votes and increase white turnout. The reason they didn't do it before Trump was because they feared the long-term damage to their party, and knew that simple dog-whistles would work almost as well (see Lee Atwater's busing quote, for instance), and that doing that also drove turnout up on the other side. On August 22 2020 04:16 Gorsameth wrote:
Talk about the Dems starting a war is hilarious when the Republicans started it after Obama's election.
You talk about the Dems needing to compromise when McConnel stands up and says the GOP will do everything in their power to make Obama a 1 term president, because a Black man just became President.
But sure, stand high atop your mountain proclaiming Republicans didn't start the war and that the Dems need to compromise, when the Tea Party spend 6 years ensuring nothing got done in Congress because a Democrat was President.
Trump is a logical continuation of the GOP dog whistling to appeal to racists. Trump was just the first to discover he didn't need to bother with the whistle and could just be openly racist. Sure the media is partly to blame for putting him in the spotlight but the voting base waiting for an openly racist candidate was there because of the GOP's southern strategy, not the media.
You want to stop the war? look into the mirror and give the Democrats a reason to work with you again, not threaten them with an even bigger racist next time. I believe Danglar's is referring to an actual war, not a figurative one. (Or at least violence - regardless of the result, I predict at least a few deaths after the election results are announced). I've noticed a large uptick in comments where people say they're willing to march on washington if Trump is re-elected (with guns). As I said previously, what other option do American's have if Trump rigs the election? As he is openly trying to do with the gutting of the USPS during a pandemic which is expected to have lots of mail in votes.
My impression is that there won't be a march by Democrats, certainly not an armed one. As far as I've heard, Democrats plan is to just go the Gore route.
|
On August 22 2020 03:51 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2020 19:02 pmh wrote:
How america got to this point?
In the end the internet and social media are to blame. Europe is slowly going into the same direction.
An enormous and very effective propaganda machine that shapes public opinions and perceptions.
It makes people not think for themselves,they play on certain subconscious feelings that many people have and present them with a narrative. 90% of people if not more is vulnerable to this type of influence and its all profesionally done by large organisations.
In the past we had the newspapers,radio and tv but social media and the internet has much more power to shape public opinion. They expose the people to certain narratives almost every second that people are awake.
Right now its still somewhat mixed,as the older generation is less influenced by social media. But the younger generations they have grown up with it and soon they will be the vast majority of people.
This kinda means democracy is at the end of the road. Vieuwpoints that do not fit the interests of the establishment will become more and more marginalized. Its the age of mass indoctrination and influencing,the age of mass "miss" information. And there is no way to stop this process,the whole process protects itself. Its a force of nature. The media pumped up the big reality stars, and played down sensible Republicans like Romney and McCain that compromised and wanted a few conservative victories along with that. They also smattered the normal candidates with accusations about racism and sexism until the population was inured to that kind of attack. Then the DNC decided it was Clinton's turn, and she wasn't well liked. Really, really, really was hated. The same media hype followed the 2015-2016 primary election, where people not named Trump couldn't get press attention (they didn't say as outrageous stuff), and the field was packed with many people wanting to be the solo, non-Trump option. So now, quite honestly, they stuck themselves with Trump by the massive oversight. People that were willing to send a little awakening bomb to a press that had taken a nap since 2008. And for all the accusations of no elections and fascism and great power, he's been stopped by the courts, Congress, his own inept hiring and handling of staff, leaks, corrupt and criminal intelligence agencies, his lack of message discipline on twitter, and dozens of other methods. He can't even sign an executive order stopping another for God's sake. I would expect a little recognition of the reality staring most members of this thread in their face, but some combination of anger and ignorance prevents them from easing up on the gas and reconsidering past positions. Just vote him out in 2020. Hell, if you want to repair the country, let some religious orders of nuns, religious high schools, and religious adoption agencies hold on to a modicum of religious exemptions and freedoms. Look yourself in the mirror and state, "I want war." Go, do it. You've got your reasons, very twisted in my opinion, but it makes attempts to frame it as health care denial, or human rights denial, or something. But you want war, and I'm pretty sure I want to retain what rights I still have left. There will be another Trump if the cultural issues are prosecuted vigorously in the political arena, and it'll probably be a worse version of the current one that actually gets stuff done. I'm very well prepared to lose in 2020, and set up another repudiation of Biden/Harris in the 2022 midterms. Think like the 2010's wave did in Obama and gave us the house for 6 years and the Senate for 8. That's America at this point. I'm rather sorry that I haven't been able to convince people around here that this is how it stands. Maybe you all will shape up after another Trump-like victory in 2024 or 2028 if not 2020. My gut tells me fixing the dysfunction fastest would mean Trump wins 2020 and people move towards acceptance of losing touch with their own country (and a declining amount of people blame Russia or racist country for why they lost). He certainly doesn't deserve to win on his own merits, neither does Biden, but it would probably be the best in the long term, a 2024-2032 reckoning being more harmful in the long run.
If I understand you correctly your stance is that if the american people democratically elect politicians that institute policy that the majority want (since they won the elections) you will take that as a declaration of "war".
That's quite a view.
Maybe you should look yourself in the mirror and say "I don't like democracy".
It's extra funny that with the current demographics "your" party is utterly fucked if gerrymandering is fixed, voter suppression is restricted and voting is promoted (national voting holiday etc).
|
Northern Ireland27394 Posts
On August 22 2020 03:33 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 02:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2020 23:56 JimmiC wrote:On August 21 2020 15:24 Starlightsun wrote:It's so ironic the amount of pearl clutching about the "assault" on religious freedoms to persecute gays and abolish abortion, then crickets when open, outright religious persecution comes from their own party against Muslims. Let's be clear that concern for religion for Republicans means Christianity alone, with side concern for Judaism because of Zionist belief that Jesus will return when the Jews rule all Israel. It bothers me that more isn't said about the amount of crazy fundamentalist Christians (pence, devos, pompeo, Barr) in this administration. Even the amount of "faith" being used as a proper noun in the DNC is concerning to me as a non-christian. On August 21 2020 17:34 EnDeR_ wrote:That is just depressing... From that article, apparently she's fine with using the hashtag '#ProudIslamophobe' and she got an endorsement from Trump because of course she did. I genuinely struggle to understand how America got to this point. It is concerning. I guess the silver lining is we don't any longer have to wonder if it was a dog whistle or not. They are just choosing open racists to lead their party. Pretty hard at this point to pretend they are not. They’re racists, xenophobes... some I assume are good people. And you had people — and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists — because they should be condemned totally. Wait, mustn't read that far haha.
Can’t I have me fun? 
|
Trump's election is not so hard to understand given that he had no political record so it was anyone's guess what to expect. He could have turned out to be a competent politician despite being a bad person and failed businessman. His continued popularity after four years of dumpster fire, culminating in current shit inferno, is what is hard to grasp. I think religious fundamentalism may actually be a bigger factor than racism and xenophobia, but we'll probably only have a clear and comprehensive picture years down the line when the noise of this era is done and can be filtered out.
|
On August 22 2020 04:56 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On August 22 2020 04:18 Nevuk wrote:I blame CNN for giving Trump billions in free campaign ads. No other network elevated him nearly as much in 2015 (or much of 2016). Fox wasn't even really on board with Trump until after he won the primaries, nor were most talk radio hosts. Hillary's moronic pied piper strategy probably didn't actually matter much, as given her campaign's skill at getting her elected, I doubt any aid they offered actually helped anyone. The GOP also had a bunch of very weak candidates (Rubio was the 'establishment' pick, but he was accurately identified as being robotic and over-rehearsed by Chris Christie). Cruz was too unlikeable in person to be able to get the establishment on his side. Strategists on both sides have always known that you can go full racist and get a higher percentage of white votes and increase white turnout. The reason they didn't do it before Trump was because they feared the long-term damage to their party, and knew that simple dog-whistles would work almost as well (see Lee Atwater's busing quote, for instance), and that doing that also drove turnout up on the other side. On August 22 2020 04:16 Gorsameth wrote:
Talk about the Dems starting a war is hilarious when the Republicans started it after Obama's election.
You talk about the Dems needing to compromise when McConnel stands up and says the GOP will do everything in their power to make Obama a 1 term president, because a Black man just became President.
But sure, stand high atop your mountain proclaiming Republicans didn't start the war and that the Dems need to compromise, when the Tea Party spend 6 years ensuring nothing got done in Congress because a Democrat was President.
Trump is a logical continuation of the GOP dog whistling to appeal to racists. Trump was just the first to discover he didn't need to bother with the whistle and could just be openly racist. Sure the media is partly to blame for putting him in the spotlight but the voting base waiting for an openly racist candidate was there because of the GOP's southern strategy, not the media.
You want to stop the war? look into the mirror and give the Democrats a reason to work with you again, not threaten them with an even bigger racist next time. I believe Danglar's is referring to an actual war, not a figurative one. (Or at least violence - regardless of the result, I predict at least a few deaths after the election results are announced). I've noticed a large uptick in comments where people say they're willing to march on washington if Trump is re-elected (with guns). As I said previously, what other option do American's have if Trump rigs the election? As he is openly trying to do with the gutting of the USPS during a pandemic which is expected to have lots of mail in votes. My impression is that there won't be a march by Democrats, certainly not an armed one. As far as I've heard, Democrats plan is to just go the Gore route.
That's leadership's plan. I don't think that's actually going to happen. Democratic leadership consists of some of the most out of touch and insulated people on the planet (true for any party leadership).
Gore v Bush was highly contentious at a time when partisanship was way, way lower and the national mood was significantly better. Both politicians were well-liked by the american people, so much of the apathetic general public felt either choice would work. It was also partially settled via the black tie riots to interrupt vote counts (instigated by Roger Stone).
The country is basically a tinderbox right now.
Conditions are rife for mass riots, being only a couple steps short of revolution-level conditions (note that no where is further than a few paces from those conditions). There's a saying about the most civilized people only being 3 meals away from becoming uncivilized - and by withholding additional covid aid, there's a fairly large population of people that are going to be struggling to eat shortly. Will food kitchens pick up the slack? They'll try, but they have to get funding from somewhere and for how long can they handle the increased demand?
This is on top of there already being a rhetorical shift towards violence by the GOP base and very publicized brutal police tactics targeted specifically towards those not using weapons (if I marched, I would not do it unarmed for the next few months, and it's a sentiment that has been spreading - basically, every thread you go to on reddit you see people asking where the "2A people are", mocking their complete lack of response, and others commenting that they'll bring their own weapons).
If Trump wins the election, he will not be viewed as legitimate by a much larger group than was in 2016. This is purely his own fault for meddling with mail-in voting and the USPS(had he not done that, there would be conspiracies and mutterings but no real proof that he directly interfered in an unprecedented manner - the Ukraine thing, while terrible, was no worse than Nixon or Reagan's tactics to get elected, just done less competently). The USPS is also by far the most popular part of the government, even across party lines.
People have almost certainly already died as a direct result of the meddling, as the USPS ships medications and food (there are pet food shortages for rarer pets everywhere, for instance). Farmers are no longer able to rely on the USPS to ship animals, and dead animals are now arriving where they were alive before (yes, USPS ships live animals, though it's apparently only used to ship things like baby chickens which can live for 24+ hours in transit with no food). Messing with USPS is messing with the food supply chain, and that is the kind of thing that even the least competent dictator tends to avoid doing intentionally.
Once people start being able to attribute deaths directly to an action of his, it's different than the deaths caused due to his inaction (ie Covid, which already hurts him tremendously). It won't turn many diehard supporters against him, but it turns people affected who already disliked him from mere likely voters to enraged : there is a limit to how much people can get pissed off before they do something.
|
Don't really disagree with you, just that Democrats (elected and otherwise) will tell them to calm down and work through the process or admit Democrat's schtick is bullshit.
The people that take to the streets will be the people who finally recognize Democrats for the jobbers they are.
|
On August 22 2020 06:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Don't really disagree with you, just that Democrats (elected and otherwise) will tell them to calm down and work through the process or admit Democrat's schtick is bullshit.
The people that take to the streets will be the people who finally recognize Democrats for the jobbers they are. No. Step 1 should certainly be working through the process. Else you might aswell skip the elections and go strait to anarchy.
|
I think at this point, no matter who wins there will be trouble in some way or other on streets. People are extremely dug in and many are quite close to dehumanizing their political opponents, if they haven't already.
|
On August 22 2020 06:09 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 06:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Don't really disagree with you, just that Democrats (elected and otherwise) will tell them to calm down and work through the process or admit Democrat's schtick is bullshit.
The people that take to the streets will be the people who finally recognize Democrats for the jobbers they are. No. Step 1 should certainly be working through the process. Else you might aswell skip the elections and go strait to anarchy.
Case in point. Work through the process until the consequences of that become intolerable for the people advocating to do it (I don't think Trump winning again/serving a 2nd term would be enough for most Dems, especially if he's technically/legally the winner).
What is happening now is that more people are reaching the point where it is intolerable to continue waiting on a fubar system so they will slowly stop telling others to do so. Some will recognize their role in leading us here, others will maintain their impenetrable wall of denial.
|
On August 22 2020 04:18 Nevuk wrote:I blame CNN for giving Trump billions in free campaign ads. No other network elevated him nearly as much in 2015 (or much of 2016). Fox wasn't even really on board with Trump until after he won the primaries, nor were most talk radio hosts. Hillary's moronic pied piper strategy probably didn't actually matter much, as given her campaign's skill at getting her elected, I doubt any aid they offered actually helped anyone. The GOP also had a bunch of very weak candidates (Rubio was the 'establishment' pick, but he was accurately identified as being robotic and over-rehearsed by Chris Christie). Cruz was too unlikeable in person to be able to get the establishment on his side. Strategists on both sides have always known that you can go full racist and get a higher percentage of white votes and increase white turnout. The reason they didn't do it before Trump was because they feared the long-term damage to their party, and knew that simple dog-whistles would work almost as well (see Lee Atwater's busing quote, for instance), and that doing that also drove turnout up on the other side. Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 04:16 Gorsameth wrote:
Talk about the Dems starting a war is hilarious when the Republicans started it after Obama's election.
You talk about the Dems needing to compromise when McConnel stands up and says the GOP will do everything in their power to make Obama a 1 term president, because a Black man just became President.
But sure, stand high atop your mountain proclaiming Republicans didn't start the war and that the Dems need to compromise, when the Tea Party spend 6 years ensuring nothing got done in Congress because a Democrat was President.
Trump is a logical continuation of the GOP dog whistling to appeal to racists. Trump was just the first to discover he didn't need to bother with the whistle and could just be openly racist. Sure the media is partly to blame for putting him in the spotlight but the voting base waiting for an openly racist candidate was there because of the GOP's southern strategy, not the media.
You want to stop the war? look into the mirror and give the Democrats a reason to work with you again, not threaten them with an even bigger racist next time. I believe Danglar's is referring to an actual war, not a figurative one. (Or at least violence - regardless of the result, I predict at least a few deaths after the election results are announced). I've noticed a large uptick in comments where people say they're willing to march on washington if Trump is re-elected (with guns).
CNN/Jeff Zucker deserve a lot of credit in Trump's election. They gave him so much free press. He was already riding a lot of press he got paid for even earlier. He was the star of a popular reality TV show that gave him an image as a tough guy.
One thing you're forgetting when you declared Rubio the "establishment pick:" What was the money like in the month Trump entered the race, or who were the big establishment bux supporting?
![[image loading]](https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/08/01/National-Politics/Graphics/campaignmoney0801-v4.jpg?uuid=TdzPMDfzEeWre2QW2Xxzwg)
Ring a bell? Remember Is ________ Buying the Nomination $100k per ticket dinners for party regulars. Rubio was not the pick, not the guy being shoved down our throats, not the guy that regular conservatives were eye-rolling and hoping we wouldn't have to suppress our gag reflex once again as we voted.
And you know what they say about the guy that slays the dragon.
I've probably already addressed what I think about the racism question, so it's not worth getting into. Secondly, in context, the war is one fought through courts, legislation, executive orders, and Dear Colleague letters. I don't anticipate bloodshed of a kind beyond the normal Portland/Seattle antifa+related cosplay violence, or the ~25 killed in BLM protests. Politicians tend to be cautious with riling up the mainstream.
|
On August 22 2020 04:58 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 03:51 Danglars wrote:On August 21 2020 19:02 pmh wrote:
How america got to this point?
In the end the internet and social media are to blame. Europe is slowly going into the same direction.
An enormous and very effective propaganda machine that shapes public opinions and perceptions.
It makes people not think for themselves,they play on certain subconscious feelings that many people have and present them with a narrative. 90% of people if not more is vulnerable to this type of influence and its all profesionally done by large organisations.
In the past we had the newspapers,radio and tv but social media and the internet has much more power to shape public opinion. They expose the people to certain narratives almost every second that people are awake.
Right now its still somewhat mixed,as the older generation is less influenced by social media. But the younger generations they have grown up with it and soon they will be the vast majority of people.
This kinda means democracy is at the end of the road. Vieuwpoints that do not fit the interests of the establishment will become more and more marginalized. Its the age of mass indoctrination and influencing,the age of mass "miss" information. And there is no way to stop this process,the whole process protects itself. Its a force of nature. The media pumped up the big reality stars, and played down sensible Republicans like Romney and McCain that compromised and wanted a few conservative victories along with that. They also smattered the normal candidates with accusations about racism and sexism until the population was inured to that kind of attack. Then the DNC decided it was Clinton's turn, and she wasn't well liked. Really, really, really was hated. The same media hype followed the 2015-2016 primary election, where people not named Trump couldn't get press attention (they didn't say as outrageous stuff), and the field was packed with many people wanting to be the solo, non-Trump option. So now, quite honestly, they stuck themselves with Trump by the massive oversight. People that were willing to send a little awakening bomb to a press that had taken a nap since 2008. And for all the accusations of no elections and fascism and great power, he's been stopped by the courts, Congress, his own inept hiring and handling of staff, leaks, corrupt and criminal intelligence agencies, his lack of message discipline on twitter, and dozens of other methods. He can't even sign an executive order stopping another for God's sake. I would expect a little recognition of the reality staring most members of this thread in their face, but some combination of anger and ignorance prevents them from easing up on the gas and reconsidering past positions. Just vote him out in 2020. Hell, if you want to repair the country, let some religious orders of nuns, religious high schools, and religious adoption agencies hold on to a modicum of religious exemptions and freedoms. Look yourself in the mirror and state, "I want war." Go, do it. You've got your reasons, very twisted in my opinion, but it makes attempts to frame it as health care denial, or human rights denial, or something. But you want war, and I'm pretty sure I want to retain what rights I still have left. There will be another Trump if the cultural issues are prosecuted vigorously in the political arena, and it'll probably be a worse version of the current one that actually gets stuff done. I'm very well prepared to lose in 2020, and set up another repudiation of Biden/Harris in the 2022 midterms. Think like the 2010's wave did in Obama and gave us the house for 6 years and the Senate for 8. That's America at this point. I'm rather sorry that I haven't been able to convince people around here that this is how it stands. Maybe you all will shape up after another Trump-like victory in 2024 or 2028 if not 2020. My gut tells me fixing the dysfunction fastest would mean Trump wins 2020 and people move towards acceptance of losing touch with their own country (and a declining amount of people blame Russia or racist country for why they lost). He certainly doesn't deserve to win on his own merits, neither does Biden, but it would probably be the best in the long term, a 2024-2032 reckoning being more harmful in the long run. If I understand you correctly your stance is that if the american people democratically elect politicians that institute policy that the majority want (since they won the elections) you will take that as a declaration of "war". That's quite a view. Maybe you should look yourself in the mirror and say "I don't like democracy". It's extra funny that with the current demographics "your" party is utterly fucked if gerrymandering is fixed, voter suppression is restricted and voting is promoted (national voting holiday etc).
No no, that generalization goes overbroad. Please focus on the specifics that I call out by name to avoid putting your own spin on what I said. You might find some civil rights leaders also raising an eyebrow if preservation of individual rights became simply another matter of majority rule. I believe you have the capacity to clearly state the process by which you arrive at your conclusion, besides just letting a conclusion (oMG hE's aGainsT DeMocracy) serve as its own evidence. (By the way, you have brothers on my side. They say you're fucked democratically, which is why you've been relying on the undemocratic bodies like the bureaucracy and courts to wield power. I think they too miss the target)
|
Northern Ireland27394 Posts
2016 is rather a while ago, why he got elected at that specific time should be separate from why he’s still hugely popular amongst ostensible Republicans now.
Trump 2016 was an outsider, in theory had his deal making savvy, his business competence, would drain the swamp etc etc. Shake things up.
In 2020 this is just demonstrably not the case but yet doesn’t seem to matter one iota.
I tend to agree with your analysis of why he got elected, but that’s 4 years ago now.
|
On August 22 2020 09:12 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 04:18 Nevuk wrote:I blame CNN for giving Trump billions in free campaign ads. No other network elevated him nearly as much in 2015 (or much of 2016). Fox wasn't even really on board with Trump until after he won the primaries, nor were most talk radio hosts. Hillary's moronic pied piper strategy probably didn't actually matter much, as given her campaign's skill at getting her elected, I doubt any aid they offered actually helped anyone. The GOP also had a bunch of very weak candidates (Rubio was the 'establishment' pick, but he was accurately identified as being robotic and over-rehearsed by Chris Christie). Cruz was too unlikeable in person to be able to get the establishment on his side. Strategists on both sides have always known that you can go full racist and get a higher percentage of white votes and increase white turnout. The reason they didn't do it before Trump was because they feared the long-term damage to their party, and knew that simple dog-whistles would work almost as well (see Lee Atwater's busing quote, for instance), and that doing that also drove turnout up on the other side. On August 22 2020 04:16 Gorsameth wrote:
Talk about the Dems starting a war is hilarious when the Republicans started it after Obama's election.
You talk about the Dems needing to compromise when McConnel stands up and says the GOP will do everything in their power to make Obama a 1 term president, because a Black man just became President.
But sure, stand high atop your mountain proclaiming Republicans didn't start the war and that the Dems need to compromise, when the Tea Party spend 6 years ensuring nothing got done in Congress because a Democrat was President.
Trump is a logical continuation of the GOP dog whistling to appeal to racists. Trump was just the first to discover he didn't need to bother with the whistle and could just be openly racist. Sure the media is partly to blame for putting him in the spotlight but the voting base waiting for an openly racist candidate was there because of the GOP's southern strategy, not the media.
You want to stop the war? look into the mirror and give the Democrats a reason to work with you again, not threaten them with an even bigger racist next time. I believe Danglar's is referring to an actual war, not a figurative one. (Or at least violence - regardless of the result, I predict at least a few deaths after the election results are announced). I've noticed a large uptick in comments where people say they're willing to march on washington if Trump is re-elected (with guns). CNN/Jeff Zucker deserve a lot of credit in Trump's election. They gave him so much free press. He was already riding a lot of press he got paid for even earlier. He was the star of a popular reality TV show that gave him an image as a tough guy. One thing you're forgetting when you declared Rubio the "establishment pick:" What was the money like in the month Trump entered the race, or who were the big establishment bux supporting? Ring a bell? Remember Is ________ Buying the Nomination $100k per ticket dinners for party regulars. Rubio was not the pick, not the guy being shoved down our throats, not the guy that regular conservatives were eye-rolling and hoping we wouldn't have to suppress our gag reflex once again as we voted. And you know what they say about the guy that slays the dragon. I've probably already addressed what I think about the racism question, so it's not worth getting into. Secondly, in context, the war is one fought through courts, legislation, executive orders, and Dear Colleague letters. I don't anticipate bloodshed of a kind beyond the normal Portland/Seattle antifa+related cosplay violence, or the ~25 killed in BLM protests. Politicians tend to be cautious with riling up the mainstream.
You know something? I completely forgot about Bush. That's how forgettable he was. I don't blame GOP for rebelling. He had a ton of cash, but he was very far behind on endorsements, so he was nowhere near as establisment loved as W or Romney were. please clap will go down as well, emblematic of his campaign. The Samantha Bee segment on him was hilarious.
|
On August 22 2020 09:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
2016 is rather a while ago, why he got elected at that specific time should be separate from why he’s still hugely popular amongst ostensible Republicans now.
Trump 2016 was an outsider, in theory had his deal making savvy, his business competence, would drain the swamp etc etc. Shake things up.
In 2020 this is just demonstrably not the case but yet doesn’t seem to matter one iota.
I tend to agree with your analysis of why he got elected, but that’s 4 years ago now.
Trump 2020 is an incumbent. That should matter why he's hugely popular amongst ostensible Republicans now.
|
On August 22 2020 09:50 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 09:12 Danglars wrote:On August 22 2020 04:18 Nevuk wrote:I blame CNN for giving Trump billions in free campaign ads. No other network elevated him nearly as much in 2015 (or much of 2016). Fox wasn't even really on board with Trump until after he won the primaries, nor were most talk radio hosts. Hillary's moronic pied piper strategy probably didn't actually matter much, as given her campaign's skill at getting her elected, I doubt any aid they offered actually helped anyone. The GOP also had a bunch of very weak candidates (Rubio was the 'establishment' pick, but he was accurately identified as being robotic and over-rehearsed by Chris Christie). Cruz was too unlikeable in person to be able to get the establishment on his side. Strategists on both sides have always known that you can go full racist and get a higher percentage of white votes and increase white turnout. The reason they didn't do it before Trump was because they feared the long-term damage to their party, and knew that simple dog-whistles would work almost as well (see Lee Atwater's busing quote, for instance), and that doing that also drove turnout up on the other side. On August 22 2020 04:16 Gorsameth wrote:
Talk about the Dems starting a war is hilarious when the Republicans started it after Obama's election.
You talk about the Dems needing to compromise when McConnel stands up and says the GOP will do everything in their power to make Obama a 1 term president, because a Black man just became President.
But sure, stand high atop your mountain proclaiming Republicans didn't start the war and that the Dems need to compromise, when the Tea Party spend 6 years ensuring nothing got done in Congress because a Democrat was President.
Trump is a logical continuation of the GOP dog whistling to appeal to racists. Trump was just the first to discover he didn't need to bother with the whistle and could just be openly racist. Sure the media is partly to blame for putting him in the spotlight but the voting base waiting for an openly racist candidate was there because of the GOP's southern strategy, not the media.
You want to stop the war? look into the mirror and give the Democrats a reason to work with you again, not threaten them with an even bigger racist next time. I believe Danglar's is referring to an actual war, not a figurative one. (Or at least violence - regardless of the result, I predict at least a few deaths after the election results are announced). I've noticed a large uptick in comments where people say they're willing to march on washington if Trump is re-elected (with guns). CNN/Jeff Zucker deserve a lot of credit in Trump's election. They gave him so much free press. He was already riding a lot of press he got paid for even earlier. He was the star of a popular reality TV show that gave him an image as a tough guy. One thing you're forgetting when you declared Rubio the "establishment pick:" What was the money like in the month Trump entered the race, or who were the big establishment bux supporting? Ring a bell? Remember Is ________ Buying the Nomination $100k per ticket dinners for party regulars. Rubio was not the pick, not the guy being shoved down our throats, not the guy that regular conservatives were eye-rolling and hoping we wouldn't have to suppress our gag reflex once again as we voted. And you know what they say about the guy that slays the dragon. I've probably already addressed what I think about the racism question, so it's not worth getting into. Secondly, in context, the war is one fought through courts, legislation, executive orders, and Dear Colleague letters. I don't anticipate bloodshed of a kind beyond the normal Portland/Seattle antifa+related cosplay violence, or the ~25 killed in BLM protests. Politicians tend to be cautious with riling up the mainstream. You know something? I completely forgot about Bush. That's how forgettable he was. I don't blame GOP for rebelling. He had a ton of cash, but he was very far behind on endorsements, so he was nowhere near as establisment loved as W or Romney were. please clap will go down as well, emblematic of his campaign. The Samantha Bee segment on him was hilarious.
Yeah, Republicans don't forget. How could we? He was the epitome of "It's his turn to run now." It's McCain's turn. It's Romney's turn. Trump did the party a national service showing him to be slow, image-obsessed, boring, and just a bad candidate. He only comes out of a fucked-up GOP establishment primary system with megadonors. There's no other way.
I already mentioned the bigger problem, which was mathematically nonviable candidates staying in just to play spoiler for the other-than-Trump-candidates. Bernie is the Democratic nominee if Klobuchar and Buttigieg behaved like Kasich et al in 2020.
I mean look at that cash, and look at the article, and tell me the GOP didn't need an outsider to run in 2016 with a message that the GOP politicians were way far from the GOP base on immigration, trade, judges, regulations, culture war issues. Anyways, would that incumbents had to fight tough primaries such that Obama 2012 was not a sure thing, but I can accept that reality.
|
Northern Ireland27394 Posts
On August 22 2020 10:21 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 09:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
2016 is rather a while ago, why he got elected at that specific time should be separate from why he’s still hugely popular amongst ostensible Republicans now.
Trump 2016 was an outsider, in theory had his deal making savvy, his business competence, would drain the swamp etc etc. Shake things up.
In 2020 this is just demonstrably not the case but yet doesn’t seem to matter one iota.
I tend to agree with your analysis of why he got elected, but that’s 4 years ago now.
Trump 2020 is an incumbent. That should matter why he's hugely popular amongst ostensible Republicans now.
He’s considerably more popular than Bush was amongst Republicans polled from what I have gathered.
Granted that’s long enough ago to be considered a different era entirely with how politics is discussed and consumed. Iirc his numbers amongst Republicans are higher than Obama’s even were amongst Democrats as well though.
It’s a borderline absurd approval rating really, given the lack of basic competence shown by this administration that is really quite something to behold.
|
On August 22 2020 10:40 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2020 10:21 Danglars wrote:On August 22 2020 09:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
2016 is rather a while ago, why he got elected at that specific time should be separate from why he’s still hugely popular amongst ostensible Republicans now.
Trump 2016 was an outsider, in theory had his deal making savvy, his business competence, would drain the swamp etc etc. Shake things up.
In 2020 this is just demonstrably not the case but yet doesn’t seem to matter one iota.
I tend to agree with your analysis of why he got elected, but that’s 4 years ago now.
Trump 2020 is an incumbent. That should matter why he's hugely popular amongst ostensible Republicans now. He’s considerably more popular than Bush was amongst Republicans polled from what I have gathered. Granted that’s long enough ago to be considered a different era entirely with how politics is discussed and consumed. Iirc his numbers amongst Republicans are higher than Obama’s even were amongst Democrats as well though. It’s a borderline absurd approval rating really, given the lack of basic competence shown by this administration that is really quite something to behold.
He's against a backdrop like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner (recent past, still remembered), Kevin McCarthy, and the most recent Republican Presidential Nominees. He would already be 75% for just not capitulating at the drop of a hat (Please don't call me a racist, massuh, I'll do anything). I grant you that if you weren't 1) politically engaged in Republican party politics during the Bush & Obama years and 2) deeply interested in the post-Tea Party Republican wave, then you probably missed it without that saying anything demeaning about your apprehension. He's running ahead of a mostly restrained and geriatric elected political establishment. Ask yourself what stunning achievements the GOP won the last time they have the Presidency, the House, and the Senate.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
