-->
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 14, 2019, 07:05:31 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
News: Bellagio 10452
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  The Smiley Smile Message Board
|-+  Non Smiley Smile Stuff
| |-+  The Sandbox
| | |-+  Campaign 2016
Pages: 1 ... 66 67 68 69 70 [71] 72 73 74 75 76 ... 81   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Campaign 2016  (Read 217148 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
KDS
Guest
« Reply #1750 on: November 10, 2016, 06:44:06 AM »

Many posts back, Emily also touched on one of the basic human (and American) tendencies that I think probably explains a lot about this election.

Simply put, people don't like to admit negative things about themselves. The more educated and academic one tends to be, the more likely they are to be able to honestly assess themselves and their foibles and faults. In my opinion obviously.

But people don't want to admit they're racist, or whatever the negative descriptor may be. So we get these paradoxes where much of the country (including at least some moderate conservatives) will acknowledge serious continued problems with racism, misogyny, hate, and so on in this country. But a lot of those same people, including for instance Trump voters, would likely answer when asked that *they* aren't racist though!

It's the sort of thing where we'll never really know why people voted the way they did, because many aren't honest with themselves (and certainly then not others, and certainly not pollsters) about their negative proclivities. And we can't ever really peg this on an individual person. But it's impossible to buy (sorry, Dan Rather) that Hillary Clinton being a woman had little or nothing to do with many of the people who voted against her. Same with Obama. If you were/are a "birther", my guess is you're most likely racist to some degree. Maybe you're one of those "I have black friends!" racists or something.

So the impasse comes when we have this broad conclusions that really can't be ignored, but then we're faced with painting individual people with these attributes. Sure, it's *possible* you voted for Trump and against Clinton while having not one misogynistic feeling or tendency or attribute. But it's very, very unlikely. But I don't think it would make someone in this category feel much better if say "you're more likely than not misogynistic."

You and Emily can try to paint whatever picture makes you guys feel better.  
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #1751 on: November 10, 2016, 06:54:24 AM »

I havenít been posting much here or anywhere. But as I did yesterday at the PS Forum, Iíll do what is probably my last post on this topic. Itíll look familiar if you read what I said there, though may not be exactly in line with what I wrote there because another day has passed and my thoughts and feelings keep changing.
 
After much consideration, I did end up voting Clinton Ö and I felt terrible about it. Iíve never felt worse, actually, voting for anyone. I wonít exaggerate (what I consider) her flaws, but neither will I minimize them. A President Clinton would have perpetuated and sometimes exacerbated plenty of things I dislike about our government and political processes. However, as I have repeated ad nauseum for well over a year, I do think Trump was the worst major-party candidate of my lifetime, by far. Not only do I disagree with his apparent policy positions, I donít think he has any actual policy positionsóand if he does, he has been hiding them, which is worse because it just shows even more dishonesty. (If he isnít REALLY going to build that wall, if he isnít REALLY going to ban Muslim or Middle Eastern immigration, heís a flat-out liar.) I donít think heís intelligent. And I donít think heís a good human being. And I donít think heís going to appoint decent people to his cabinet.
 
But now heís the president elect. Protesting in the streets may help people feel better, but I think it will make them feel worse. It prolongs the anger, frustration, and it widens the divide. Itís too late: the votes have been tallied and a large minority of people have spoken in such a way that the electoral college has, for better or worse, given us a future President Trump. Post-election name-calling, finger-pointing, and theatrical hyperbole wonít change that.
 
Neither do I find helpful a sore winner. It does no good to gloat, or to salt the wounds of people who are truly and honestly disappointed, depressed, or scared except to the pathetic ego of the braggart.
 
It does no good to find examples of the worst behavior in your opponents except to push them further away and deepen the tribal instincts that I believe are the worst of us.
 
People often trot tropes like ďnow is the time to unite as Americans.Ē Thatís corny and impossible, but there is an optimistic ideal in it worth pursuing. Iím not young or naive enough to believe swaths of people who were offended by or opposed to the president-to-be will either feel compelled to or welcomed by some suddenly inclusive Trump movement or one-party government. But I do understand that we have elections, and they have consequences. There will be more of them, and hopefully people will pay attention and respond appropriately in the future. Perhaps the newly energized voters will sustain their attention and interest, watch for real results, and fine tune their decision-making in the futureómaybe even succumbing to my way of thinking on more issues. That is the democratic ideal: to win the civil argument.
 
In the interim, weíll see what a Republican federal government led by a President Trump can do, and how it impacts us all. Itís not altogether clear how they can or canít work together, given their existing factions even minus a president of their party. On Day One we heard both that this victory represents a mandate (Speaker Ryan) and that it doesnít (Majority Leader McConnell). The reality is that Americans by no means gifted any large majority to this presumptive president, but there is no argument that they did cede control to that partyóa party that has shown no inclination to pass much positive legislation, but only to obstruct and rescind recently. This is their opportunity. (They will probably overreach because parties usually do. They will probably be reprimanded in the midterms because parties usually are.)
 
If they pass dramatic, sweeping legislation, I hope it is successful and benefits as many Americans as possible. (I donít think it will.) I hope the Democrats do not imitate the GOP and become the party of obstruction. I hope they find things that seem to have bipartisan supportóinfrastructure investment, for exampleóand pass them, rather than finding excuses to reject everything out of hand based on the parentheticals appearing after the names of the sponsors.
 
In a couple of months Donald Trump is going to be my president. It doesnít matter that I didnít vote for him, because Iím an American citizen and he won the election. I donít like it, but I donít think it will be as bad as I fear. Neither do I think it will be as good as I hope. It usually isnít either of those two things, anyway. (Iíve never voted for someone I truly liked, anyway, only people I disliked less.)
 
The sun will continue to rise and fall. Music will continue to flow from instruments and speakers. Kisses will continue to land from my girlfriendís lips. Hopefully real, day-to-day life will be as good going forward as it has been in the past. I appreciate it quite a bit and plan to spend more of my attention on it (and less on this digital part, where there are too many problems with the sewage systems). As for politics, Iíll keep trying to refine my own thinking, understanding other peopleís, and making the best arguments I can make. Hopefully I can do it respectfully and humbly, though Iím sure Iíll stumble on that. I always do. So I ask in advance that you forgive me. Iíll try to return the favor.
 
There. Iím done with Campaign 2016. Be nice, everybody.
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1752 on: November 10, 2016, 06:58:05 AM »

There's a difference with the scandals.

Trump absorbed each and every one while Hillary ran the clock and stalled for time. Up until the Access Hollywood tapes came out, Trump had done many press conferences to explain his side, minimize damage and attempt to make it work for him. Hillary did not,
She went at least 269 days (I think) between press conferences and during time she was under FBI investigation. She was seen as secretive and unable to deal with hard questions.

Any of Trump's scandals would have sunken a regular polition right? Only one that really did damage in my eyes was the sexual assault claims, but by that time his supporters had found out the extent of the Clinton camps dirty tricks, such as paying people to be violent at Trump rallies. Trump found his footing, double down on Bill Clintons past and powered through.

You're not really measuring the scandals so much as pointing out how the candidates mitigated the fallout from various scandals. It's basically a "Trump fooled people into ignoring his scandals more than Clinton did". I think that *is* true to some degree, but I think it had far more to do with Trump using voter ignorance and anti-intellectualism in his favor. And more than anything else, the most simultaneously ingenious and insidious campaign style/approach in eons and perhaps ever (certainly in the "modern" era), which was to flood everyone with so many insults, offensive remarks, questionable actions, and morally bankrupt attitude that the effect of any one scandal or negative thing was completely blunted.

Any one of Trump's million scandals would have typically sunk a candidate in the past. But he didn't get out of it be craftily maneuvering through each of them. He (still craftily, in a way) flooded the market so to speak with so much awfulness and poison that everything he did, including the high profile particularly awful cases ("grab her by the p*ssy", making fun of the disabled reporter, calling people "fat losers", etc.), was blunted.

All of these things got him elected, no question. If you want to argue that this should be admired purely and solely due to the positive outcome, then that's a legit argument. But, and I say this not to minimize what he did but rather to highlight its effectiveness, Trump was essentially like that guy at the card table playing poker with a bunch of friends, and being that one guy (I'm sure some will know what I'm talking about) who clearly doesn't care one iota about actually playing, so he just goes "all in" on every hand because it makes no difference to him whether he plays all night and wins or loses on the first hand and watches TV while everyone else keeps playing.

When you don't care at all, it makes things exceedingly easy, and on occasion, you're going to end up on top as a result.

Trump basically used the approach of the "Peter" character for "Office Space", with the main difference being that rather than simply "not caring" anymore, he added on additional approaches including inciting violence, playing on fears and racism and xenophobia and misogyny, and so on.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #1753 on: November 10, 2016, 07:01:22 AM »

Many posts back, Emily also touched on one of the basic human (and American) tendencies that I think probably explains a lot about this election.

Simply put, people don't like to admit negative things about themselves. The more educated and academic one tends to be, the more likely they are to be able to honestly assess themselves and their foibles and faults. In my opinion obviously.

But people don't want to admit they're racist, or whatever the negative descriptor may be. So we get these paradoxes where much of the country (including at least some moderate conservatives) will acknowledge serious continued problems with racism, misogyny, hate, and so on in this country. But a lot of those same people, including for instance Trump voters, would likely answer when asked that *they* aren't racist though!

It's the sort of thing where we'll never really know why people voted the way they did, because many aren't honest with themselves (and certainly then not others, and certainly not pollsters) about their negative proclivities. And we can't ever really peg this on an individual person. But it's impossible to buy (sorry, Dan Rather) that Hillary Clinton being a woman had little or nothing to do with many of the people who voted against her. Same with Obama. If you were/are a "birther", my guess is you're most likely racist to some degree. Maybe you're one of those "I have black friends!" racists or something.

So the impasse comes when we have these broad conclusions that really can't be ignored, but then we're faced with painting individual people with these attributes. Sure, it's *possible* you voted for Trump and against Clinton while having not one misogynistic feeling or tendency or attribute. But it's very, very unlikely. But I don't think it would make someone in this category feel much better if say "you're more likely than not misogynistic."

I don't need to do soul searching. I'm not a women hater, and the suggestion that I am is ridiculous.I didn't even vote because I'm not American, but I saw the writing on the wall a very long time ago. Clinton had a bomb of a campaign that couldn't be propped up with money, media or celebrity. Her loss is on her shoulders.
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1754 on: November 10, 2016, 07:07:28 AM »

Many posts back, Emily also touched on one of the basic human (and American) tendencies that I think probably explains a lot about this election.

Simply put, people don't like to admit negative things about themselves. The more educated and academic one tends to be, the more likely they are to be able to honestly assess themselves and their foibles and faults. In my opinion obviously.

But people don't want to admit they're racist, or whatever the negative descriptor may be. So we get these paradoxes where much of the country (including at least some moderate conservatives) will acknowledge serious continued problems with racism, misogyny, hate, and so on in this country. But a lot of those same people, including for instance Trump voters, would likely answer when asked that *they* aren't racist though!

It's the sort of thing where we'll never really know why people voted the way they did, because many aren't honest with themselves (and certainly then not others, and certainly not pollsters) about their negative proclivities. And we can't ever really peg this on an individual person. But it's impossible to buy (sorry, Dan Rather) that Hillary Clinton being a woman had little or nothing to do with many of the people who voted against her. Same with Obama. If you were/are a "birther", my guess is you're most likely racist to some degree. Maybe you're one of those "I have black friends!" racists or something.

So the impasse comes when we have these broad conclusions that really can't be ignored, but then we're faced with painting individual people with these attributes. Sure, it's *possible* you voted for Trump and against Clinton while having not one misogynistic feeling or tendency or attribute. But it's very, very unlikely. But I don't think it would make someone in this category feel much better if say "you're more likely than not misogynistic."

I don't need to do soul searching. I'm not a women hater, and the suggestion that I am is ridiculous.I didn't even vote because I'm not American, but I saw the writing on the wall a very long time ago. Clinton had a bomb of a campaign that couldn't be propped up with money, media or celebrity. Her loss is on her shoulders.

The whole "people won't admit negative things about themselves" phenomenon is true regardless of one's voting status. Beyond that, I can't assume anything with certainty about a specific person. All I can do is be highly skeptical based on the evidence at hand and very basic human tendencies.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
thorgil
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 416


GREAT post, Rab!


View Profile
« Reply #1755 on: November 10, 2016, 07:09:14 AM »

(First of all, before someone calls me "reactionary" again, remember when I made an appeal here to actually vote, and vote Clinton instead of third-party candidates?)  

Sigh, I see the "left" still don't get it. They don't get why Trump won, exactly like they don't get why Brexit won. Racism and sexism may play a role, but not important enough to grant any victory. No, they won because in so many places there is no more a real middle class. It's been destroyed. As Marx would have put it, there is a just a big proletariat now.
People, in their lifetime, have seen all their hopes destroyed. And candidates such as Clinton, or the darn European Union, offer only to keep on with the destroying. What they say basically, is: "Just lie down and die quietly".
Brexit, and Trump, offer change. May well kill us sooner. But there is hope ony in change, now.
Personally, I consider Brexit as legitimate hope because I'm sure that the UK, if really does it, after some initial problems will be much better in a matter of some years. (I'd be sure of that for ANY country who mustered the courage to leave the bureaucratic hell that "Europe" has become.)
Sadly, I don't consider Trump a legitimate hope instead, unless miracles happen. But hope, the desperate hope of the forgotten, is the reason for his victory. Probably it's an ignorant hope, in this case, but is it right to expect much learning from a working class impoverished to the brink of misery? I guess not.

Ah, and of course in my opinion the right (or left?) embodiment of hope would have been Sanders. The Democrats took care of that.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2016, 07:15:36 AM by thorgil » Logged

DIT, DIT, DIT, HEROES AND VILLAINS...
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10895


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1756 on: November 10, 2016, 07:09:45 AM »

Quote
the opponent's supporters are calling for her to be hung, shot by a firing squad, "lock her up", "Trump that bitch"

Funnily enough, Twitter is full of Hillary supporters calling for the assassination of the new President.
Which is awful.
But I certainly should have been more clear, given people's penchant to draw an equivalence between Trump himself egging on violence at his rallies and a few Clinton supporters being violent at his rallies: the Trump supporters who said she should be hung and executed by a firing squad were elected republicans whom Trump included at his rallies even after they'd said such things. "Lock her up" was a chant at his rallies that he explicitly echoed a few times. "Trump that bitch" was. It just something some ransoms person said, but the motto on the best selling shirt at his rallies. It was also chanted at his rallies.

It was not just a Twitter swarm, which is a disgusting cultural phenomenon, but an integral part of the opponents campaign.
And, btw, he is not the new president.

Remember that time people in the Clinton campaign admitted on camera to paying homeless people to stir up trouble at Trump rallies?

At least SOMEONE paid them as opposed to ignoring then like what usually happens.  
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"Iíd rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Puddingô ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #1757 on: November 10, 2016, 07:11:07 AM »

There's a difference with the scandals.

Trump absorbed each and every one while Hillary ran the clock and stalled for time. Up until the Access Hollywood tapes came out, Trump had done many press conferences to explain his side, minimize damage and attempt to make it work for him. Hillary did not,
She went at least 269 days (I think) between press conferences and during time she was under FBI investigation. She was seen as secretive and unable to deal with hard questions.

Any of Trump's scandals would have sunken a regular polition right? Only one that really did damage in my eyes was the sexual assault claims, but by that time his supporters had found out the extent of the Clinton camps dirty tricks, such as paying people to be violent at Trump rallies. Trump found his footing, double down on Bill Clintons past and powered through.

You're not really measuring the scandals so much as pointing out how the candidates mitigated the fallout from various scandals. It's basically a "Trump fooled people into ignoring his scandals more than Clinton did". I think that *is* true to some degree, but I think it had far more to do with Trump using voter ignorance and anti-intellectualism in his favor. And more than anything else, the most simultaneously ingenious and insidious campaign style/approach in eons and perhaps ever (certainly in the "modern" era), which was to flood everyone with so many insults, offensive remarks, questionable actions, and morally bankrupt attitude that the effect of any one scandal or negative thing was completely blunted.

Any one of Trump's million scandals would have typically sunk a candidate in the past. But he didn't get out of it be craftily maneuvering through each of them. He (still craftily, in a way) flooded the market so to speak with so much awfulness and poison that everything he did, including the high profile particularly awful cases ("grab her by the p*ssy", making fun of the disabled reporter, calling people "fat losers", etc.), was blunted.

All of these things got him elected, no question. If you want to argue that this should be admired purely and solely due to the positive outcome, then that's a legit argument. But, and I say this not to minimize what he did but rather to highlight its effectiveness, Trump was essentially like that guy at the card table playing poker with a bunch of friends, and being that one guy (I'm sure some will know what I'm talking about) who clearly doesn't care one iota about actually playing, so he just goes "all in" on every hand because it makes no difference to him whether he plays all night and wins or loses on the first hand and watches TV while everyone else keeps playing.

When you don't care at all, it makes things exceedingly easy, and on occasion, you're going to end up on top as a result.

Trump basically used the approach of the "Peter" character for "Office Space", with the main difference being that rather than simply "not caring" anymore, he added on additional approaches including inciting violence, playing on fears and racism and xenophobia and misogyny, and so on.

He didn't 'fool' his supporters, he dehypnotized them to the media circus. All those 'Gotcha!s' amounted to nothing. Is him calling a Rosie O'Donnell a fat pig really a scandal? He wants to run the country, not become  Pope. With regards to the disabled reporter, you'll find that he used  that exaggerated hand expression whenever he mocks anyone and he's done it before that.

Do any of his scandals have the same weight as being under FBI investigation?
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1758 on: November 10, 2016, 07:14:29 AM »

(First of all, before someone calls me "reactionary" again, remember when I made an appeal here to vote Clinton instead of third-party candidates?)  

Sigh, I see the "left" still don't get it. They don't get why Trump won, exactly like they don't get why Brexit won. Racism and sexism may play a role, but not important enough to grant any victory. No, they won because in so many places there is no more a real middle class. It's been destroyed. As Marx would have put it, there is a just a big proletariat now.
People, in their lifetime, have seen all their hopes destroyed. And candidates such as Clinton, or the darn European Union, offer only to keep on with the destroying. What they say basically, is: "Just lie down and die quietly".
Brexit, and Trump, offer change. May well kill us sooner. But there is hope ony in change, now.
Personally, I consider Brexit as legitimate hope because I'm sure that the UK, if really does it, after some initial problems will be much better in a matter of some years. (I'd be sure of that for ANY country who mustered the courage to leave the bureaucratic hell that "Europe" has become.)
Sadly, I don't consider Trump a legitimate hope instead, unless miracles happen. But hope, the desperate hope of the forgotten, is the reason for his victory. Probably it's an ignorant hope, in this case, but is it right to expect much learning from a working class impoverished to the brink of misery? I guess not.

Ah, and of course in my opinion the right (or left?) embodiment of hope would have been Sanders. The Democrats took care of that.

I don't see any pundits or commentators of liberals claiming that "change" wasn't a part of the equation.

I dunno, maybe some think this was 100% about Clinton being a woman. I don't think it was. That was a HUGE part of it certainly, and perhaps the most discouraging and demoralizing aspect of it. But yeah, there were certainly people who are ignorant and lazy as to how to actually attain change, so they just picked the other party. But it's a bit like deciding you need to go on a diet, and having the choice between Half-calorie soda or arsenic. Arsenic is change too, and it will certainly offer a change to your health.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10895


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1759 on: November 10, 2016, 07:16:52 AM »

I havenít been posting much here or anywhere. But as I did yesterday at the PS Forum, Iíll do what is probably my last post on this topic. Itíll look familiar if you read what I said there, though may not be exactly in line with what I wrote there because another day has passed and my thoughts and feelings keep changing.
 
After much consideration, I did end up voting Clinton Ö and I felt terrible about it. Iíve never felt worse, actually, voting for anyone. I wonít exaggerate (what I consider) her flaws, but neither will I minimize them. A President Clinton would have perpetuated and sometimes exacerbated plenty of things I dislike about our government and political processes. However, as I have repeated ad nauseum for well over a year, I do think Trump was the worst major-party candidate of my lifetime, by far. Not only do I disagree with his apparent policy positions, I donít think he has any actual policy positionsóand if he does, he has been hiding them, which is worse because it just shows even more dishonesty. (If he isnít REALLY going to build that wall, if he isnít REALLY going to ban Muslim or Middle Eastern immigration, heís a flat-out liar.) I donít think heís intelligent. And I donít think heís a good human being. And I donít think heís going to appoint decent people to his cabinet.
 
But now heís the president elect. Protesting in the streets may help people feel better, but I think it will make them feel worse. It prolongs the anger, frustration, and it widens the divide. Itís too late: the votes have been tallied and a large minority of people have spoken in such a way that the electoral college has, for better or worse, given us a future President Trump. Post-election name-calling, finger-pointing, and theatrical hyperbole wonít change that.
 
Neither do I find helpful a sore winner. It does no good to gloat, or to salt the wounds of people who are truly and honestly disappointed, depressed, or scared except to the pathetic ego of the braggart.
 
It does no good to find examples of the worst behavior in your opponents except to push them further away and deepen the tribal instincts that I believe are the worst of us.
 
People often trot tropes like ďnow is the time to unite as Americans.Ē Thatís corny and impossible, but there is an optimistic ideal in it worth pursuing. Iím not young or naive enough to believe swaths of people who were offended by or opposed to the president-to-be will either feel compelled to or welcomed by some suddenly inclusive Trump movement or one-party government. But I do understand that we have elections, and they have consequences. There will be more of them, and hopefully people will pay attention and respond appropriately in the future. Perhaps the newly energized voters will sustain their attention and interest, watch for real results, and fine tune their decision-making in the futureómaybe even succumbing to my way of thinking on more issues. That is the democratic ideal: to win the civil argument.
 
In the interim, weíll see what a Republican federal government led by a President Trump can do, and how it impacts us all. Itís not altogether clear how they can or canít work together, given their existing factions even minus a president of their party. On Day One we heard both that this victory represents a mandate (Speaker Ryan) and that it doesnít (Majority Leader McConnell). The reality is that Americans by no means gifted any large majority to this presumptive president, but there is no argument that they did cede control to that partyóa party that has shown no inclination to pass much positive legislation, but only to obstruct and rescind recently. This is their opportunity. (They will probably overreach because parties usually do. They will probably be reprimanded in the midterms because parties usually are.)
 
If they pass dramatic, sweeping legislation, I hope it is successful and benefits as many Americans as possible. (I donít think it will.) I hope the Democrats do not imitate the GOP and become the party of obstruction. I hope they find things that seem to have bipartisan supportóinfrastructure investment, for exampleóand pass them, rather than finding excuses to reject everything out of hand based on the parentheticals appearing after the names of the sponsors.
 
In a couple of months Donald Trump is going to be my president. It doesnít matter that I didnít vote for him, because Iím an American citizen and he won the election. I donít like it, but I donít think it will be as bad as I fear. Neither do I think it will be as good as I hope. It usually isnít either of those two things, anyway. (Iíve never voted for someone I truly liked, anyway, only people I disliked less.)
 
The sun will continue to rise and fall. Music will continue to flow from instruments and speakers. Kisses will continue to land from my girlfriendís lips. Hopefully real, day-to-day life will be as good going forward as it has been in the past. I appreciate it quite a bit and plan to spend more of my attention on it (and less on this digital part, where there are too many problems with the sewage systems). As for politics, Iíll keep trying to refine my own thinking, understanding other peopleís, and making the best arguments I can make. Hopefully I can do it respectfully and humbly, though Iím sure Iíll stumble on that. I always do. So I ask in advance that you forgive me. Iíll try to return the favor.
 
There. Iím done with Campaign 2016. Be nice, everybody.

Well said.
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"Iíd rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Puddingô ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #1760 on: November 10, 2016, 07:18:19 AM »

Many posts back, Emily also touched on one of the basic human (and American) tendencies that I think probably explains a lot about this election.

Simply put, people don't like to admit negative things about themselves. The more educated and academic one tends to be, the more likely they are to be able to honestly assess themselves and their foibles and faults. In my opinion obviously.

But people don't want to admit they're racist, or whatever the negative descriptor may be. So we get these paradoxes where much of the country (including at least some moderate conservatives) will acknowledge serious continued problems with racism, misogyny, hate, and so on in this country. But a lot of those same people, including for instance Trump voters, would likely answer when asked that *they* aren't racist though!

It's the sort of thing where we'll never really know why people voted the way they did, because many aren't honest with themselves (and certainly then not others, and certainly not pollsters) about their negative proclivities. And we can't ever really peg this on an individual person. But it's impossible to buy (sorry, Dan Rather) that Hillary Clinton being a woman had little or nothing to do with many of the people who voted against her. Same with Obama. If you were/are a "birther", my guess is you're most likely racist to some degree. Maybe you're one of those "I have black friends!" racists or something.

So the impasse comes when we have these broad conclusions that really can't be ignored, but then we're faced with painting individual people with these attributes. Sure, it's *possible* you voted for Trump and against Clinton while having not one misogynistic feeling or tendency or attribute. But it's very, very unlikely. But I don't think it would make someone in this category feel much better if say "you're more likely than not misogynistic."

I don't need to do soul searching. I'm not a women hater, and the suggestion that I am is ridiculous.I didn't even vote because I'm not American, but I saw the writing on the wall a very long time ago. Clinton had a bomb of a campaign that couldn't be propped up with money, media or celebrity. Her loss is on her shoulders.

The whole "people won't admit negative things about themselves" phenomenon is true regardless of one's voting status. Beyond that, I can't assume anything with certainty about a specific person. All I can do is be highly skeptical based on the evidence at hand and very basic human tendencies.

I think you might be a self hating man that hates America, and nothing you say will convince me otherwise. All I can do is be sceptical.

See what a dumb point that is?

Also, good post captain
Logged
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10895


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1761 on: November 10, 2016, 07:18:55 AM »

(First of all, before someone calls me "reactionary" again, remember when I made an appeal here to actually vote, and vote Clinton instead of third-party candidates?)  

Sigh, I see the "left" still don't get it. They don't get why Trump won, exactly like they don't get why Brexit won. Racism and sexism may play a role, but not important enough to grant any victory. No, they won because in so many places there is no more a real middle class. It's been destroyed. As Marx would have put it, there is a just a big proletariat now.
People, in their lifetime, have seen all their hopes destroyed. And candidates such as Clinton, or the darn European Union, offer only to keep on with the destroying. What they say basically, is: "Just lie down and die quietly".
Brexit, and Trump, offer change. May well kill us sooner. But there is hope ony in change, now.
Personally, I consider Brexit as legitimate hope because I'm sure that the UK, if really does it, after some initial problems will be much better in a matter of some years. (I'd be sure of that for ANY country who mustered the courage to leave the bureaucratic hell that "Europe" has become.)
Sadly, I don't consider Trump a legitimate hope instead, unless miracles happen. But hope, the desperate hope of the forgotten, is the reason for his victory. Probably it's an ignorant hope, in this case, but is it right to expect much learning from a working class impoverished to the brink of misery? I guess not.

Ah, and of course in my opinion the right (or left?) embodiment of hope would have been Sanders. The Democrats took care of that.


I think the far left like myself get it for the most part. The moderate left to  centrists don't with some exceptions.  
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"Iíd rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Puddingô ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1762 on: November 10, 2016, 07:19:03 AM »

He didn't 'fool' his supporters, he dehypnotized them to the media circus. All those 'Gotcha!s' amounted to nothing. Is him calling a Rosie O'Donnell a fat pig really a scandal? He wants to run the country, not become  Pope. With regards to the disabled reporter, you'll find that he used  that exaggerated hand expression whenever he mocks anyone and he's done it before that.

Do any of his scandals have the same weight as being under FBI investigation?

You see "dehypnotizing", I see stoking the flames of ignorance.

Yes, calling anyone a "fat pig" was an issue because it spoke to temperament. If you call Rosie O'Donnell or a pageant queen a fat pig, you're just morally awful. If you call a foreign leader an asshole or something, you might start a war (or some other conflict or ongoing political/military issue even if it isn't called "a war"). If you call some leaders an asshole, it may also have economic consequences. If Trump says "f**k you" to China enough times, they could just sink us economically relatively quickly. THAT'S a big issue that Trump supporters ignored and continue to ignore.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1763 on: November 10, 2016, 07:21:17 AM »

Many posts back, Emily also touched on one of the basic human (and American) tendencies that I think probably explains a lot about this election.

Simply put, people don't like to admit negative things about themselves. The more educated and academic one tends to be, the more likely they are to be able to honestly assess themselves and their foibles and faults. In my opinion obviously.

But people don't want to admit they're racist, or whatever the negative descriptor may be. So we get these paradoxes where much of the country (including at least some moderate conservatives) will acknowledge serious continued problems with racism, misogyny, hate, and so on in this country. But a lot of those same people, including for instance Trump voters, would likely answer when asked that *they* aren't racist though!

It's the sort of thing where we'll never really know why people voted the way they did, because many aren't honest with themselves (and certainly then not others, and certainly not pollsters) about their negative proclivities. And we can't ever really peg this on an individual person. But it's impossible to buy (sorry, Dan Rather) that Hillary Clinton being a woman had little or nothing to do with many of the people who voted against her. Same with Obama. If you were/are a "birther", my guess is you're most likely racist to some degree. Maybe you're one of those "I have black friends!" racists or something.

So the impasse comes when we have these broad conclusions that really can't be ignored, but then we're faced with painting individual people with these attributes. Sure, it's *possible* you voted for Trump and against Clinton while having not one misogynistic feeling or tendency or attribute. But it's very, very unlikely. But I don't think it would make someone in this category feel much better if say "you're more likely than not misogynistic."

I don't need to do soul searching. I'm not a women hater, and the suggestion that I am is ridiculous.I didn't even vote because I'm not American, but I saw the writing on the wall a very long time ago. Clinton had a bomb of a campaign that couldn't be propped up with money, media or celebrity. Her loss is on her shoulders.

The whole "people won't admit negative things about themselves" phenomenon is true regardless of one's voting status. Beyond that, I can't assume anything with certainty about a specific person. All I can do is be highly skeptical based on the evidence at hand and very basic human tendencies.

I think you might be a self hating man that hates America, and nothing you say will convince me otherwise. All I can do is be sceptical.

See what a dumb point that is?

Also, good post captain

The two situations aren't analogous at all, so you can draw any insulting analogy you want I suppose. There wasn't a "Do you hate America" question on the ballot, and if I had voted for a candidate whose main platform involved continually saying "I hate America!", I would say an accusation that I hated America would be more than justified.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1764 on: November 10, 2016, 07:22:58 AM »

At least SOMEONE paid them as opposed to ignoring then like what usually happens.  

VERY good and important point. What may end up happening to the homeless and those who are *truly* in the worst of the worst positions in America is particularly disheartening. They barely get any help now, and Trump won't help them.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #1765 on: November 10, 2016, 07:25:01 AM »

Many posts back, Emily also touched on one of the basic human (and American) tendencies that I think probably explains a lot about this election.

Simply put, people don't like to admit negative things about themselves. The more educated and academic one tends to be, the more likely they are to be able to honestly assess themselves and their foibles and faults. In my opinion obviously.

But people don't want to admit they're racist, or whatever the negative descriptor may be. So we get these paradoxes where much of the country (including at least some moderate conservatives) will acknowledge serious continued problems with racism, misogyny, hate, and so on in this country. But a lot of those same people, including for instance Trump voters, would likely answer when asked that *they* aren't racist though!

It's the sort of thing where we'll never really know why people voted the way they did, because many aren't honest with themselves (and certainly then not others, and certainly not pollsters) about their negative proclivities. And we can't ever really peg this on an individual person. But it's impossible to buy (sorry, Dan Rather) that Hillary Clinton being a woman had little or nothing to do with many of the people who voted against her. Same with Obama. If you were/are a "birther", my guess is you're most likely racist to some degree. Maybe you're one of those "I have black friends!" racists or something.

So the impasse comes when we have these broad conclusions that really can't be ignored, but then we're faced with painting individual people with these attributes. Sure, it's *possible* you voted for Trump and against Clinton while having not one misogynistic feeling or tendency or attribute. But it's very, very unlikely. But I don't think it would make someone in this category feel much better if say "you're more likely than not misogynistic."

I don't need to do soul searching. I'm not a women hater, and the suggestion that I am is ridiculous.I didn't even vote because I'm not American, but I saw the writing on the wall a very long time ago. Clinton had a bomb of a campaign that couldn't be propped up with money, media or celebrity. Her loss is on her shoulders.

The whole "people won't admit negative things about themselves" phenomenon is true regardless of one's voting status. Beyond that, I can't assume anything with certainty about a specific person. All I can do is be highly skeptical based on the evidence at hand and very basic human tendencies.

I think you might be a self hating man that hates America, and nothing you say will convince me otherwise. All I can do is be sceptical.

See what a dumb point that is?

Also, good post captain

The two situations aren't analogous at all, so you can draw any insulting analogy you want I suppose. There wasn't a "Do you hate America" question on the ballot, and if I had voted for a candidate whose main platform involved continually saying "I hate America!", I would say an accusation that I hated America would be more than justified.

Nah, I disagree. You don't want to admit you have a problem, it's ok. I hear it's a phenomenon.

Do you think it's insulting when I say that?
Logged
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10895


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1766 on: November 10, 2016, 07:27:54 AM »

The way you said it was quite a bit condescending.
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"Iíd rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Puddingô ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1767 on: November 10, 2016, 07:31:14 AM »

Nah, I disagree. You don't want to admit you have a problem, it's ok. I hear it's a phenomenon.

Do you think it's insulting when I say that?

I've been on the internet for over 20 years. It's pretty much impossible for me to be offended.

The analogy you're drawing is simply off. I get it, you're trying to sling a perceived insult back. But as I said, if I had supported a candidate whose platform was built on literally saying "I hate America", then the analogy would have some validity.

What you're doing is something closer to "I know you are, but what am I."
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #1768 on: November 10, 2016, 07:33:42 AM »

The way you said it was quite a bit condescending.

This whole conversation I've been talked down, called a woman hater, sexist. I didn't cast the first stone, i didn't call millions of Americans stupid and when Trump won, I didn't come here to rub anyone's nose in it.

To be accused of hating women because I didn't support a female candidate, and there's nothing I can say to make them think otherwise because 'I'm lying to myself'? I don't mind pushing back

Logged
thorgil
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 416


GREAT post, Rab!


View Profile
« Reply #1769 on: November 10, 2016, 07:37:24 AM »

(First of all, before someone calls me "reactionary" again, remember when I made an appeal here to actually vote, and vote Clinton instead of third-party candidates?)  

Sigh, I see the "left" still don't get it. They don't get why Trump won, exactly like they don't get why Brexit won. Racism and sexism may play a role, but not important enough to grant any victory. No, they won because in so many places there is no more a real middle class. It's been destroyed. As Marx would have put it, there is a just a big proletariat now.
People, in their lifetime, have seen all their hopes destroyed. And candidates such as Clinton, or the darn European Union, offer only to keep on with the destroying. What they say basically, is: "Just lie down and die quietly".
Brexit, and Trump, offer change. May well kill us sooner. But there is hope ony in change, now.
Personally, I consider Brexit as legitimate hope because I'm sure that the UK, if really does it, after some initial problems will be much better in a matter of some years. (I'd be sure of that for ANY country who mustered the courage to leave the bureaucratic hell that "Europe" has become.)
Sadly, I don't consider Trump a legitimate hope instead, unless miracles happen. But hope, the desperate hope of the forgotten, is the reason for his victory. Probably it's an ignorant hope, in this case, but is it right to expect much learning from a working class impoverished to the brink of misery? I guess not.

Ah, and of course in my opinion the right (or left?) embodiment of hope would have been Sanders. The Democrats took care of that.


I think the far left like myself get it for the most part. The moderate left to  centrists don't with some exceptions.  
I agree.
Logged

DIT, DIT, DIT, HEROES AND VILLAINS...
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1770 on: November 10, 2016, 07:39:05 AM »

The way you said it was quite a bit condescending.

This whole conversation I've been talked down, called a woman hater, sexist. I didn't cast the first stone, i didn't call millions of Americans stupid and when Trump won, I didn't come here to rub anyone's nose in it.

To be accused of hating women because I didn't support a female candidate, and there's nothing I can say to make them think otherwise because 'I'm lying to myself'? I don't mind pushing back



I think misogyny accusations (whether justified or not) have as much if not more do with what Trump has done and said as it does with Hillary simply being female.

Misogyny accusations probably have more to do with "grab her by the p*ssy" than it does Hillary being female.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10895


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1771 on: November 10, 2016, 07:40:50 AM »

I got a better idea.. now that what's done is dine, let's comment on this...

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-in-his-first-100-days

Comment and critique because this is what we have to deal with now for better or worse.
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"Iíd rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Puddingô ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #1772 on: November 10, 2016, 07:46:25 AM »

The way you said it was quite a bit condescending.

This whole conversation I've been talked down, called a woman hater, sexist. I didn't cast the first stone, i didn't call millions of Americans stupid and when Trump won, I didn't come here to rub anyone's nose in it.

To be accused of hating women because I didn't support a female candidate, and there's nothing I can say to make them think otherwise because 'I'm lying to myself'? I don't mind pushing back



I think misogyny accusations (whether justified or not) have as much if not more do with what Trump has done and said as it does with Hillary simply being female.

Misogyny accusations probably have more to do with "grab her by the p*ssy" than it does Hillary being female.

Accusing a stranger on the Internet of hating women because they supported a politician candidate is the silliest thing I've heard in a long time. Never mind the near 60 million people that voted for him, I guess they got a lot of soul searching to do.

Did you hear the next part of the clip when he says 'they let you do it?' Do you ask your girlfriend before you kiss her if that's ok?
« Last Edit: November 10, 2016, 07:47:04 AM by SinisterSmile » Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8544



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1773 on: November 10, 2016, 08:04:30 AM »

Did you hear the next part of the clip when he says 'they let you do it?' Do you ask your girlfriend before you kiss her if that's ok?

Um.... I don't think you're helping yourself or your argument with that sort of reasoning. If you want to equate the mutual act of kissing between two people in a relationship with a "celebrity" forcing his hand onto the vagina of a women he barely knows or doesn't know at all, because he knows she'll "let" him do it because he's a celebrity, then feel free I guess. But as I said, you're not doing yourself any favors.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2016, 08:07:33 AM by HeyJude » Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #1774 on: November 10, 2016, 08:15:52 AM »

Did you hear the next part of the clip when he says 'they let you do it?' Do you ask your girlfriend before you kiss her if that's ok?

Um.... I don't think you're helping yourself or your argument with that sort of reasoning. If you want to equate the mutual act of kissing between two people in a relationship with a "celebrity" forcing his hand onto the vagina of a women he barely knows or doesn't know at all, because he knows she'll "let" him do it because he's a celebrity, then feel free I guess. But as I said, you're not doing yourself any favors.

You're filling in all the dark blanks yourself. How many guys do you know ask explicit permission before kissing? It's not "forcing", you made that part up.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 66 67 68 69 70 [71] 72 73 74 75 76 ... 81   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.992 seconds with 21 queries.