Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 12-05-2017, 01:37 PM
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 5,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Even among white baby boomers, the most partisan racial and age generation for Trump, 34% of them voted for Clinton. Another 4% voted third party.

So you put ten white baby boomers in a room, and four did not support Trump. They aren't all horrible people by any means. I know a lot of white people over age 50 who are very good people. I know lots of rural whites who are good people

But sadly, if someone is extremely angry, misinformed, hostile to the rule of law, values partisanship over competence or criminality, etc there is a good chance they are white and over age 50. That has been my experience. I think 2/3 of the tea party were whites over age 50.
Another thing you are forgetting or ignoring is how strong political identity is to many people. Each party has a base that would vote for whomever had the party label.
  #102  
Old 12-05-2017, 01:39 PM
Procrustus Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 9,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Another thing you are forgetting or ignoring is how strong political identity is to many people. Each party has a base that would vote for whomever had the party label.
I would not have voted for Trump, even if he ran as a Democrat. And I consider myself part of the party’s base.

Last edited by Procrustus; 12-05-2017 at 01:39 PM.
  #103  
Old 12-05-2017, 01:41 PM
RandMcnally RandMcnally is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 7,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Just have to say, the username and question combos here kinda cracked me up.
Well, in my defense, do reads screen names? Lol
__________________
"Like turning his/her hands into talons & ripping your scrotum off, then leavinng you to die in the gutter?"-Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor
"You know, if this isn't a risk you're willing to take every once in a while... well, I just don't know how you call that 'living".-Dangerous Nan McGrew
  #104  
Old 12-05-2017, 01:42 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
You realize that conservative, liberal etc. are poorly defined and encompass many people with conflicting views? But to answer your question, I’d reckon most self identified conservatives are pro capitalist and pro trade.
Yes, but do they actually realize that trade is a positive sum game? That when both parties to a negotiation walk away happy, that's the best solution?

Most of the rhetoric on the right indicates that they believe that trade is zero sum, or even negative sum. They complain about automation / immigrants / offshoring is taking their jobs, while ignoring all of the benefits that come from reducing the cost of producing goods and services that we all use.
  #105  
Old 12-05-2017, 01:43 PM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
Have you looked at your typical Trump rally? (Image picked at random) Most are looking under forty; gonna be a while for them to die off.
I'm not saying everyone who disagrees with me politically deserves to die. Just to clarify.

But the older white generation has some deeply dysfunctional people in it. Not all white people over 50 are dysfunctional voters (wildly misinformed, arrogant, OK with treason, dogmatic, zero concern for competence and professionalism, etc), but most dysfunctional voters who fit that bill are white people over age 50.

As I mentioned, 2/3 of the tea party is whites over 50. Another ~20% is whites under age 50 and 11% is non whites.

Even if only 1/3 of them pass on and are replaced by more moderate millennials, that'll make it near impossible for someone like Trump or Moore to win in the future.

Right now we just have to keep the crazy aspects of the gop under control until enough die of old age to stop hurting the country.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 12-05-2017 at 01:43 PM.
  #106  
Old 12-05-2017, 01:44 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I would not have voted for Trump, even if he ran as a Democrat. And I consider myself part of the party’s base.
I had my reservations on all the 17 or so republican candidates, but if any one of them were up, and trump was the dem candidate, I would have voted for the R. There are a few that I wouldn't even have to really hold my nose for, even.
  #107  
Old 12-05-2017, 02:00 PM
Fuji Fuji is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: County Cork
Posts: 1,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandMcnally View Post
Where'd you end up going?
I've been happily here on the Emerald Isle for 12 years now, thanks. Got dual-citizenship through my mother's mother who was born in County Galway.

I'd encourage any of you (Americans) with Irish ancestry who are concerned about the course of events to check into Irish citizenship. Was just a bit of paperwork and a couple hundred bucks to get an Irish passport which is - more importantly - also an EU passport. Never hurts to have extra options!
  #108  
Old 12-05-2017, 02:00 PM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Another thing you are forgetting or ignoring is how strong political identity is to many people. Each party has a base that would vote for whomever had the party label.
I don't think they would. Studies show the right has more authoritarian voters than the democrats in modern society. It may not have been that way 50 year ago but it is now.

If modern Trump ran as a Dem (he was a Dem for a long time) I wouldn't vote for him. I'd vote R or third party.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #109  
Old 12-05-2017, 02:18 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 53,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Another thing you are forgetting or ignoring is how strong political identity is to many people. Each party has a base that would vote for whomever had the party label.
Nothing fucks up this whole process more than this "It doesn't matter how low my party sinks, if I repeat "They do it tooooo!" over and over and over again" mantra. There is no shame, no self-respect, no guilt-just soulless "winning".

Last edited by Czarcasm; 12-05-2017 at 02:18 PM.
  #110  
Old 12-05-2017, 03:06 PM
Buck Godot Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 4,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
I don't have much hope.

I turned 20 in 1968, so I was around as an adult for the upheaval that wracked our country then and in the years after. But I had the sense that enough good people were still in charge that the ship would right itself or at least not crash on the rocks and be lost. Even during Watergate, I never feared for the country. But now I do. Because "the call is coming from inside the house," as it were.

For this reason I think back to the McCarthy era when I'm looking for an example to reassure myself that we can survive Trump. A fascist Demagogue comes to power uses fear and hate to popularize the worst elements America and turn put it into practice. But eventually we overcame and now McCarthyism is generally recognized as a stain on our national character. So too in the decades to come will be Trumpism.

I am less concerned with the rise of the alt right than others on this board. I see this as a last gasp reaction to the steady progress towards equality over the last 60 years. Basically, the battle of the bulge in response to the Normandy invasion represented by Obama's election. We take a few steps back as the rats that were content to sleep in the shadows are now motivated to bare their teeth, but the progress continues inexorably forward.

There are however two potential legacies of Trumpism that will be much harder to ferret out.

First, is the emperors new clothes realization that facts are irrelevant. Previously a propagandist was limited to spinning, exaggerating and reinterpreting the facts that existed. Now Trump has demonstrated that one can make statements totally divorced from reality and suffer no real coast. Now the only limits are the imagination and I don't see how we go back to before this revelation.

Second is the conservative court packing. Six years of Republican obstruction combined with a brief interval of unchecked power and an utter lack of integrity, will mean that for the next 40 years or so over half of the judiciary will be made up of judges who the promotion of conservative ideology as the primary basis of jurisprudence. This combined with a Republican party that has no problem with taking whatever means necessary to ensure that elections are tilted in their favor, will mean that approval by simple majorities of the populace will no longer be sufficient to put Democrats in office.

So while there is always room for hope there are also strong causes for deep concern.
  #111  
Old 12-05-2017, 03:10 PM
Buck Godot Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 4,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Another thing you are forgetting or ignoring is how strong political identity is to many people. Each party has a base that would vote for whomever had the party label.
True but only one party actually had a candidate as toxic as Trump actually win the nomination. As a Democrat, Trump would probably have been lucky to come in 5th behind Jim Webb.
  #112  
Old 12-05-2017, 03:26 PM
Clothahump Clothahump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 14,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Basically, what we have now is Clothahump styled conservatism; It boils down to "fuck you liberals, I will burn down my own country and sell the ashes to the Russians just to make you angry"
That's total bullshit and you know it. Go back and read the post I responded to. That kind of post is almost a liberal signature and I, for one, really don't want people like that in positions of authority.
  #113  
Old 12-05-2017, 03:48 PM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 11,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
...Second is the conservative court packing. Six years of Republican obstruction combined with a brief interval of unchecked power and an utter lack of integrity, will mean that for the next 40 years or so over half of the judiciary will be made up of judges who the promotion of conservative ideology as the primary basis of jurisprudence. This combined with a Republican party that has no problem with taking whatever means necessary to ensure that elections are tilted in their favor, will mean that approval by simple majorities of the populace will no longer be sufficient to put Democrats in office.

....
This is the most worrisome thing of all IMHO. Especially "Republican party that has no problem with taking whatever means necessary to ensure that elections are tilted in their favor." Party first, last, and always.
  #114  
Old 12-05-2017, 04:20 PM
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 5,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I would not have voted for Trump, even if he ran as a Democrat. And I consider myself part of the party’s base.
Ok. Your one vote doesn’t negate anything I said though.
  #115  
Old 12-05-2017, 04:24 PM
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 5,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Yes, but do they actually realize that trade is a positive sum game? That when both parties to a negotiation walk away happy, that's the best solution?

Most of the rhetoric on the right indicates that they believe that trade is zero sum, or even negative sum. They complain about automation / immigrants / offshoring is taking their jobs, while ignoring all of the benefits that come from reducing the cost of producing goods and services that we all use.
You realize that the fear of global trade, automation, offshoring, and unrestricted migration are different fears and not even a left wing/right wing schism? It’s a can I compete in this environment concern. My family can. We are highly educated and compensated. We also think in terms of decades not week to week. Many others don’t have that luxury.

Which is why I think protectionism and isolationism are dangerous. I’d like to see a basic income and some spending increases in certain sectors. Unfortunately, that’s a tough sell.
  #116  
Old 12-05-2017, 04:29 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Ok. Your one vote doesn’t negate anything I said though.
2.

It's not just a few votes, democrats would not have elected him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
You realize that the fear of global trade, automation, offshoring, and unrestricted migration are different fears and not even a left wing/right wing schism? It’s a can I compete in this environment concern. My family can. We are highly educated and compensated. We also think in terms of decades not week to week. Many others don’t have that luxury.

Which is why I think protectionism and isolationism are dangerous. I’d like to see a basic income and some spending increases in certain sectors. Unfortunately, that’s a tough sell.
It is the party that you tend to identify with that promotes protectionism and isolationism. It is the party that I affiliate with that promotes things like a basic income and increased spending.
  #117  
Old 12-05-2017, 04:55 PM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
This is the most worrisome thing of all IMHO. Especially "Republican party that has no problem with taking whatever means necessary to ensure that elections are tilted in their favor." Party first, last, and always.
Realistically, can they just create a bunch of new judges like that? What mechanism do they have to do that?
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #118  
Old 12-05-2017, 04:57 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Realistically, can they just create a bunch of new judges like that? What mechanism do they have to do that?
The number of judges is set by congress. Congress can increase the number of seats to fill, then fill them.

It was tried about 100 years ago, and kinda shut down, but that doesn't mean that it can't be tried again.
  #119  
Old 12-05-2017, 05:03 PM
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 5,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
2.

It's not just a few votes, democrats would not have elected him.
That's easy to say. The truth is we don't know how an alternative reality would have unfolded.

Quote:
It is the party that you tend to identify with that promotes protectionism and isolationism.
No. The Republicans are generally not anti trade. Times are changing and political coalitions are shifting. At the moment, "America first" talk is resonating. And it's not resonating with just the typical Republican. It's resonating with a lot of people in the US. Enough to help Trump win. I'm not going to re-argue the whole election cycle but I will remind you that the left helped Trump tremendously in order to troll the Republican primaries.

Quote:
It is the party that I affiliate with that promotes things like a basic income and increased spending.
Proper increased spending is key. With regards to a basic income, get the Democrats to do a better job selling the idea while removing barriers to growth and you might start crushing the right.
  #120  
Old 12-05-2017, 05:11 PM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 11,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Realistically, can they just create a bunch of new judges like that? What mechanism do they have to do that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
The number of judges is set by congress. Congress can increase the number of seats to fill, then fill them.

It was tried about 100 years ago, and kinda shut down, but that doesn't mean that it can't be tried again.
They don't have to create new judge positions. They will be filling vacancies. Read and weep.

"Trump Is Rapidly Reshaping the Judiciary. Here’s How."
Quote:
...
Mr. [Donald F.]McGahn, [White House Counsel] instructed by Mr. Trump to maximize the opportunity to reshape the judiciary, mapped out potential nominees and a strategy, according to two people familiar with the effort: Start by filling vacancies on appeals courts with multiple openings and where Democratic senators up for re-election next year in states won by Mr. Trump — like Indiana, Michigan and Pennsylvania — could be pressured not to block his nominees. And to speed them through confirmation, avoid clogging the Senate with too many nominees for the district courts, where legal philosophy is less crucial.

Nearly a year later, that plan is coming to fruition. Mr. Trump has already appointed eight appellate judges, the most this early in a presidency since Richard M. Nixon, and on Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to send a ninth appellate nominee — Mr. Trump’s deputy White House counsel, Gregory Katsas — to the floor.
...
Appellate judges draw less attention than Supreme Court justices like Neil M. Gorsuch, whom Mr. Trump installed in the seat that Justice Scalia’s death left vacant and that Republicans, led by Mr. McConnell, refused to let Mr. Obama fill. But the 12 regional appeals courts wield profound influence over Americans’ lives, getting the final word on about 60,000 cases a year that are not among the roughly 80 the Supreme Court hears.
...
Mr. Trump is poised to bring the conservative legal movement, which took shape in the 1980s in reaction to decades of liberal rulings on issues like the rights of criminal suspects and of women who want abortions, to a new peak of influence over American law and society.

“What makes this a unique opportunity in modern history is the sheer number of vacancies, the number of potential vacancies because of the aging bench, and the existence of a president who really cares about this issue in his gut,” said Leonard A. Leo, an informal adviser to Mr. Trump on courts who is the executive vice president of the Federalist Society.
...
"Conservatives have a breathtaking plan for Trump to pack the courts"

Quote:
...
If conservatives get their way, President Trump will add twice as many lifetime members to the federal judiciary in the next 12 months (650) as Barack Obama named in eight years (325). American law will never be the same.

...In the final two years of Obama’s presidency, Senate Republicans engaged in tenacious obstruction to leave as many judicial vacancies unfilled as possible. The Garland-to-Gorsuch Supreme Court switch is the most visible example of this tactic but far from the only one: Due to GOP obstruction, “the number of [judicial] vacancies . . . on the table when [Trump] was sworn in was unprecedented,” White House Counsel Donald McGahn recently boasted to the conservative Federalist Society.

Trump is wasting no time in filling the 103 judicial vacancies he inherited. In the first nine months of Obama’s tenure, he nominated 20 judges to the federal trial and appellate courts; in Trump’s first nine months, he named 58. Senate Republicans are racing these nominees through confirmation; last week, breaking a 100-year-old tradition, they eliminated the “blue slip” rule that allowed home-state senators to object to particularly problematic nominees. The rush to Trumpify the judiciary includes nominees rated unqualified by the American Bar Association, nominees with outrageously conservative views and nominees significantly younger (and, therefore, likely to serve longer) than those of previous presidents. As a result, by sometime next year, 1 in 8 cases filed in federal court will be heard by a judge picked by Trump. Many of these judges will likely still be serving in 2050.
...
  #121  
Old 12-05-2017, 05:17 PM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,266
My understanding is of the ~1000 federal judge positions, there were about ~150 vacancies when Trump came to power. Trump is going to fill all of them with the GOP senate.

But adding new judge positions, I'd assume you'd need to overcome the filibuster to do that.

Close to half the federal judge positions are currently occupied by judges appointed by Obama or Clinton. So the courts are, for the time being, still in our favor.

In the unlikely event that the dem win the senate in 2018 (unlikely but still) they need to block all judicial appointments.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #122  
Old 12-05-2017, 05:36 PM
Bryan Ekers Bryan Ekers is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 56,024
I have lots of hope for about 75% of Americans. About 25% of them seem permanently irredeemable.
__________________
Spoofe - Damn youse, Ekers! Damn youse to hell!
Gazelle from Hell - Bwahahahahaha! Oh, my sides! Bryan, you are my hero.
Arnold Winkelreid - Believe me, I would gladly trade all that money in for a romantic walk on the beach with you, Bryan.
Muad'Dib - DAMN YOU BRYAN EKERS !!!!!!!!!! DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!!!!
  #123  
Old 12-05-2017, 05:54 PM
Rushgeekgirl Rushgeekgirl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Memphis
Posts: 5,762
I've lost hope and it has little to do with politics.
  #124  
Old 12-05-2017, 06:27 PM
FoieGrasIsEvil FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 16,192
Let's see...

I think a lot of the issues with America are a sort of cultural isolationism; I firmly believe that if Americans were to experience other cultures, talk to people they thought they hated, broke bread with them...that a lot of the divisiveness could be crossed, like a bridge.

I realize that many people, including myself, do not have the means to travel like this. But you can watch any manner of travel/food based shows like Bourdain and Zimmern to catch a glimpse of what I mean. Food is universal...we all need it. It tends to break down barriers.

Anyway, that's just one thing. What really depresses me is this political system we're locked into where you're pinching your nose from the stench and pulling the lever for whomever you deem to be "the lesser of two evils". That's a lack of choice, and it's all based around campaign money. We should have more parties/candidates that get some level of funding beyond what they raise for themselves just to get exposure. And enough with the negative TV ads already. Only stupid people buy into that shit. If I were running for office, I would ignore negative ads addressed towards me and focus on the things I was/am doing and what I will do to help the nation if elected.

I also believe that term limits for the Senate is a good idea, and possibly for the Supreme Court as well. Why are rich old white guys always deciding everyone else's fate? The only positive ideology coming out of Congress is in the House and from first term Senators, and if they cross party lines, they'll never get elected again. Political suicide these days to stand up for what's right rather than toe the party line should be a badge of honor, instead, it becomes a smear campaign.

My Dad is a retired Army general, and has become enamored with the Republicans. The Party of Lincoln is so far removed from what it once was it's unrecognizable. Instead of inclusion and representing the little guy and small businesses, it's become the xenophobic Party of religious nutjobs, gun toters, zealots and naive poor white fools. My mom did a write in vote this past presidential election and voted for Snow White. She's never shared whom she voted for with me before as she grew up in an era where that wasn't discussed and was a private decision. I just simply didn't vote. I couldn't. Both candidates were so rotten to the core that it was disgusting, although at this stage I wish that Hillary had been President. There's no way she could be worse than what we have now, and I'm betting she wouldn't be expressing her ire at people via Twitter in the wee hours of the morning either. WTF is up with that, anyway? Who does that besides teenagers and disgruntled, cocaine addled celebrities?

In conclusion, it's not over. Unless of course Trump manages to initiate a war with North Korea, which is my biggest fear. We aren't prepared to fight such a war, millions will die, and even the ultimate reunification of the Korean peninsula will not be worth it.

Fuck it. I'm done. I still have hope, but it's diminishing.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #125  
Old 12-05-2017, 07:14 PM
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 5,795
Your and other's obsession with demonizing white people is pretty racist sounding. That's not helping your cause.

Last edited by octopus; 12-05-2017 at 07:15 PM.
  #126  
Old 12-05-2017, 07:33 PM
FoieGrasIsEvil FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 16,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Your and other's obsession with demonizing white people is pretty racist sounding. That's not helping your cause.
There's no obsession. Your and other's support of racist white people is pretty racist sounding. It's not helping your cause.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #127  
Old 12-05-2017, 07:42 PM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Your and other's obsession with demonizing white people is pretty racist sounding. That's not helping your cause.
I'm white (and male, and hetero). Lots of people in America are white and male and they are decent. Bernie Sanders is a hetero white male over the age of 50. So is Howard Dean, Keith Olbermann, Jon Stewart, etc. All are white hetero men over age 50.

The issue always comes back to this fact.

Of the most deranged, dysfunctional, ignorant, arrogant, misinformed, dogmatic, anti-democracy, protofascist, morally bankrupt, brainwashed, dangerous, etc. voters the majority are whites over age 50. More often men than women. Does that mean all whites over 50 fit this bill? No, but it means most people who fit this bill are whites over age 50.

That is a statement of fact, not prejudice. As a white man, I can openly admit that while not all white men are bad people, a disproportionately large % of the voters who are the most deranged and unstable tend to be white men.

Young, poor black men commit a disproportionate number of serious crimes in America. Thats a fact. Not all young, poor black men commit serious crimes. But a disproportionate number of serious crimes are committed by young, poor black men. Again, fact.

And white people over 50 (more often men than women) make up a disproportionate number of the most deranged, ignorant and dangerous voters in America. That is also a fact. Not all white people (more men than women) over age 50 are deranged, morally bankrupt, wildly ignorant and dogmatic when it comes to politics. But if someone is those things, they are probably a white person over age 50, more likely a man than a woman.

Also as far as domestic terrorism, islamic extremists are a major threat but conservative white men are also a major threat of domestic terrorism.

Again, facts.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 12-05-2017 at 07:46 PM.
  #128  
Old 12-05-2017, 07:47 PM
elucidator elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 56,925
If I didn't have hope, I would feel obligated to pretend that I did.
  #129  
Old 12-05-2017, 07:48 PM
Stranger On A Train Stranger On A Train is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 16,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip View Post
I'm on a crowded train. Suddenly, one guy bellows like an elephant, takes a massive shit in his pants, reaches in with both hands and starts flinging it in every direction...
I was hoping this was going to end in some kind of Aristocrats-style joke. So disappointing.

The United States is not going to cease to exist, and despite the schism in socioideology and decline of the middle class I don’t foresee a civil war or the overwhelming rise of fascism taking over or any other obvious calamity. But the current administration certainly has the United States on a rapid decline in global status and leadership that it has enjoyed with greater or lesser success since World War II, and some of the changes that will have long term impacts such as dismantling government agencies which exists to promote and protect public welfare and the appointment of politically conservative judges to lifetime federal appointments do not bode well for the ability of the nation adapt and adjust to changes in society, economy, and technology. In particularly, the coming demographic shifts in employment which may eliminate many service jobs while an aging population requires increasing professional care will require preparation in both education and public finance, issues that essentially no one of any political bent is currently addressing in earnest. Similarly, failing to plan for coming changes and needs in energy policy, information technology, crucial environmental issues that may impact agriculture and industry such as fresh water depletion, extreme weather events due to global climate change, public health and potential pandemic failures, ceding technical leadership to other nations as the US fails to produce indigenous expertise and places undue barriers on employment foreign technical experts, et cetera, is essentially planning for failure. That the current batch of yahoos can’t cooperate enough to even produce a comprehensible tax reform bill—something they’ve campaigned upon and promoted for decades—and yet are in a rush to pass something such that it at least looks like progress does not speak toward an ability to address genuine problems in an effective and practical manner, nor appreciate the long term impacts of such hasty decisions. (For those offended by the partisanship of such a statement, I’ll make essentially the same claim about the failure of the Affordable Care Act to actually do anything about reigning in increased costs and influence of health care and insurance companies.)

I have some hope that, barring the nuclear war that President Trump is seemingly eager to engage in or a catastrophic natural disaster, the United States will recover from the missteps of the last fifteen-odd years, will effectively reengage with other industrial nations to negotiate in a mutually beneficial manner, and address some of the long standing problems of socioeconomic and gender imbalance as well as dealing with radical changes in health care, employment, finance, and technology, but I suspect it is going to take a pretty radical economic or social event to provide impetus for dramatic change. Historians are not going to look back on the direction and leadership of the United States in the post-Cold War environment with a favorable view; it will be looked upon as a time in which the US could have had positive change in the world by converting old enemies to allies, promoted democracy in a positive diplomatic fashion, led the development and application of research science and technology for more useful ends than farting out ignorance en masse across the Internet, and used its economic and technological might to deal with global problems of poverty, injustice, inequity in education, ethnic strife and conflict, conversion from petrofuels and coal to more sustainable and less polluting energy production methods, and generally acting as a global leader should, and will instead look to the US as petty, self-absorbed, often insular nation which ceded the lead in scientific research and promotion of freedom and welfare to smaller, less capable nations while engaging in destructive, costly, and often unilaterally-led conflicts with no plan or strategy for an endgame.

Stranger
  #130  
Old 12-06-2017, 12:06 AM
shunpiker shunpiker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Central North Carolina
Posts: 1,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
Right, and that something is Human Nature. It's not unique to Americans nor to the present day.

Which, I think, is grounds for both pessimism and optimism.
I'm not sure how to put it into words -at midnight after 3 glasses of Montenegro-, but I feel you cheapened what Uniqueorn had to say. It's almost like you're saying, "well yea, but what do you want us to do?" I'll put words in Uniqueorn's mouth and say that it's a call for us all to stand up and do something else. To hell with discounting our behavior as "human nature". We're better than that. I've read your posts, Thudlow... I know you're deeper than that. But no one few of us want to think outside of their (your words) human nature and try to be a better person.

This wasn't an attack on you, just using your post to make my post.
  #131  
Old 12-06-2017, 01:10 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 16,192
Human nature, hell...WHAT DO WE DO? How is this division between us and North Korea resolved without war, for example?
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #132  
Old 12-06-2017, 08:46 AM
Superdude Superdude is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Fortress of Solidude
Posts: 9,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clothahump View Post
That's total bullshit and you know it. Go back and read the post I responded to. That kind of post is almost a liberal signature and I, for one, really don't want people like that in positions of authority.
Given how badly the Republicans/conservatives have fucked up the country during their last few times in the White House, not to mention their absolute refusal to work with Obama on anything during his two terms, we as a nation may not survive if we keep letting the Right run things.

The fact that you are pleased with the job Trump has done only lends credibility to my assessment. I don't think that you're a bad guy, [b]Clothahump[/]. But I think you're being incredibly myopic about the state of the country under the current regime.
__________________
My friend Dan Canon is running for Congress!
www.CanonForIndiana.com
  #133  
Old 12-06-2017, 09:02 AM
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by shunpiker View Post
I'm not sure how to put it into words -at midnight after 3 glasses of Montenegro-, but I feel you cheapened what Uniqueorn had to say. It's almost like you're saying, "well yea, but what do you want us to do?" I'll put words in Uniqueorn's mouth and say that it's a call for us all to stand up and do something else. To hell with discounting our behavior as "human nature". We're better than that. I've read your posts, Thudlow... I know you're deeper than that. But no one few of us want to think outside of their (your words) human nature and try to be a better person.

This wasn't an attack on you, just using your post to make my post.
Yeah the human nature copout is tired.
  #134  
Old 12-06-2017, 09:29 AM
Thudlow Boink Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 24,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by shunpiker View Post
I'm not sure how to put it into words -at midnight after 3 glasses of Montenegro-, but I feel you cheapened what Uniqueorn had to say. It's almost like you're saying, "well yea, but what do you want us to do?" I'll put words in Uniqueorn's mouth and say that it's a call for us all to stand up and do something else. To hell with discounting our behavior as "human nature". We're better than that. I've read your posts, Thudlow... I know you're deeper than that. But no one few of us want to think outside of their (your words) human nature and try to be a better person.

This wasn't an attack on you, just using your post to make my post.
Yeah, thanks for the opportunity to clarify. I didn't intend to invoke human nature as a dismissal or cop-out. What I saw as "grounds for optimism" was the fact that, even though human nature has elements that, as Uniquecorn said, value "selfishness over altruism, tribalism over internationalism, fear over empathy and belief over rational thinking," still, altruism and internationalism and empathy and rational thinking have sometimes managed to win out, to some extent at least, which gives me hope that they can in the present situation.

But yes, we have to act. I reject both the kind of pessimism that says "There's no hope: things are going to hell no matter what we do" and the kind of optimism that says "Things will be fine no matter what we do," in favor of an attitude that what we do matters.
  #135  
Old 12-06-2017, 10:06 AM
Morgenstern Morgenstern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 9,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Your and other's obsession with demonizing white people is pretty racist sounding. That's not helping your cause.
This is just stupid, not even up to your typical troll agenda. Please try harder.
__________________
Remember, pillage before burning.
  #136  
Old 12-06-2017, 10:38 AM
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
You realize that conservative, liberal etc. are poorly defined and encompass many people with conflicting views?
I agree that there are degrees and variants, but we know whom we're talking about I would think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
But to answer your question, I’d reckon most self identified conservatives are pro capitalist and pro trade.
Sure they are, as are most self-identified progressives. But capitalism and trade have rules, and the question is, by what sets of rules do we regulate such systems? Most progressives I know never really argued against trade, but simply pointed out that the rules of trade need to take into account those who are displaced by factors such as outsourcing, automatic, and the like. Conservatives never seemed to question trade until it became clear that a lot of white conservatives and independents were angry about losing their factories to overseas competition working at half the price and the arrival of millions of brown-skinned immigrants due, in no small part, American policies that helped displace them.
  #137  
Old 12-06-2017, 12:19 PM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 19,391
We are at a time of greater danger than any point in our history. Sure, the Civil War was traumatic, but the nation survived because the good side prevailed militarily. It was a great danger to the prospects of the nation's survival, but we know it came out okay. We don't know if we will survive this current crisis.

The 1960s gave us left wing resistance to Vietnam and right wing resistance to civil rights. But you know what the difference was between then and now? We all read the same papers, we all watched the same news. You didn't have the right wing bubble completely detached from reality as we do now. And I don't buy the bothsidesdoitism that is the knee-jerk reaction. There is no liberal equivalent to Fox "News", One America "News", Sinclair Broadcasting, Limbaugh, Savage, etc. The right wing has its own version of reality and they spread lies constantly on Facebook and other social media. A significant number of people get their news from Facebook memes. The people are dumbing down rapidly.

The Republicans have shamelessly exploited the ignorance and bigotry among the least of us. All of our problems are due to "the other". Muslims are all terrorists. Mexicans are coming to steal our jobs and rape the white women. Blacks all want free stuff and the won't even stand for the national anthem! These lies now come in the form of train whistles where in the past they used dog whistles. Nixon's Southern Strategy welcomed the racists with open arms. Reagan's campaign opening in Philadelphia, MS was a dog whistle. His welfare queen fables were a dog whistle. Now Don the Con has made it acceptable for racists and bigots of all stripes to proudly wear their hatred and their ignorance like a badge of "honor".

Yes, we're in extreme danger and the fault lies 100% with Republicans. They're the ones who refused to work with a black president. They're the ones that used the lies about the ACA to take many state houses in 2010 and then gerrymandered themselves into dominance. They're the ones trying to suppress the votes of the opposition.

We have one chance and one chance only- the 2020 election. If Democrats can win all branches of government and take enough statehouses to un-gerrymander the districts, democracy has a chance. If Don the Con himself or another Bannon disciple should win in 2020, then forget about it. The great American experiment will have failed.
  #138  
Old 12-06-2017, 01:15 PM
RandMcnally RandMcnally is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 7,740
One thing I don't think people have mentioned is the self-sabotage. The tax plan is trying to make it impossible for graduate students. You know, the majority of people who do research.

They pushing aside alternative energy, for the sake of the dying cost and fossil fuels. China and Germany aren't going to sit idly by. Just wait until other countries start offering research grants to Americans. Or help with student loans. We'll see a brain drain.
__________________
"Like turning his/her hands into talons & ripping your scrotum off, then leavinng you to die in the gutter?"-Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor
"You know, if this isn't a risk you're willing to take every once in a while... well, I just don't know how you call that 'living".-Dangerous Nan McGrew
  #139  
Old 12-06-2017, 01:56 PM
What Exit? What Exit? is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 27,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
...
The 1960s gave us left wing resistance to Vietnam and right wing resistance to civil rights. But you know what the difference was between then and now? We all read the same papers, we all watched the same news. You didn't have the right wing bubble completely detached from reality as we do now. And I don't buy the bothsidesdoitism that is the knee-jerk reaction. ...
Just want to comment on this point. We had another time where news was divided and we did survive it. The fairly balanced and honest news really only had a short run of maybe 1940s through 1980s. Then TV news became part of the Entertainment branch of TV. The rise of Radio Talk Show hosts began in earnest. Before 1920 the news was only fact based at times and had agendas. The NY Post was started as a politically biased paper and most newspapers had agendas. It culminated in the Hearst chain of papers but it was pretty much all papers.

I admit, news coverage is probably as bad as the 1890s but I don't think it is even at its worst.
  #140  
Old 12-06-2017, 01:58 PM
Mind's Eye, Watering Mind's Eye, Watering is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
The 1960s gave us left wing resistance to Vietnam and right wing resistance to civil rights. But you know what the difference was between then and now? We all read the same papers, we all watched the same news. You didn't have the right wing bubble completely detached from reality as we do now. And I don't buy the bothsidesdoitism that is the knee-jerk reaction. There is no liberal equivalent to Fox "News", One America "News", Sinclair Broadcasting, Limbaugh, Savage, etc. The right wing has its own version of reality and they spread lies constantly on Facebook and other social media. A significant number of people get their news from Facebook memes. The people are dumbing down rapidly.
"The right wing has its own version of reality"

This is the biggest problem in a nutshell. Well said.
  #141  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:09 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 28,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
You realize that conservative, liberal etc. are poorly defined and encompass many people with conflicting views? But to answer your question, I’d reckon most self identified conservatives are pro capitalist and pro trade.
My observation has been that most self-identified conservatives are reactionaries, and to a pretty radical degree (it bears pointing out that conservative and radical are mutually exclusive properties).

So, whatever other qualities they possess, it's clear that they're rubbish at self-identification.
  #142  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:14 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by What Exit? View Post
Just want to comment on this point. We had another time where news was divided and we did survive it. The fairly balanced and honest news really only had a short run of maybe 1940s through 1980s. Then TV news became part of the Entertainment branch of TV. The rise of Radio Talk Show hosts began in earnest. Before 1920 the news was only fact based at times and had agendas. The NY Post was started as a politically biased paper and most newspapers had agendas. It culminated in the Hearst chain of papers but it was pretty much all papers.

I admit, news coverage is probably as bad as the 1890s but I don't think it is even at its worst.
Difference is, is that in order to get news then, you had to go get a paper and read it.

Today, you turn on the TV or the computer, and talking heads tell you all you need to know.
  #143  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:18 PM
Fiveyearlurker Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandMcnally View Post
One thing I don't think people have mentioned is the self-sabotage. The tax plan is trying to make it impossible for graduate students. You know, the majority of people who do research.
I'm a scientist. I really fucking good one, if I do say so myself. I would not have been able to go to graduate school under the GOP tax plan. I was already living in NYC on 19K per year and had the good fortune to be married to someone making a more reasonable salary; it was hard but we got through it.

Taxing me as though I was making 70K per year would have made the whole thing impossible. I would have gone to business or law school instead.
  #144  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:22 PM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 19,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Difference is, is that in order to get news then, you had to go get a paper and read it.

Today, you turn on the TV or the computer, and talking heads tell you all you need to know.
Yes, in the old days you didn't get disinformation bombarding you constantly. "MUSLIM MAN WITH 4 WIVES AND 22 KIDS GETS $357,000 IN WELFARE!" Put it in a dishonest paper 50 years ago, and a few people see it. Put it on Facebook today, and within an hour thousands of people have shared it and hundreds of thousands have seen it. It doesn't matter if it's true or not, it fits their preconceived notions and therefore they not only will swallow the lie, they will pass it on virally. Multiply that by thousands and you see how truth simply doesn't matter in politics anymore.
  #145  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:25 PM
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by What Exit? View Post
Just want to comment on this point. We had another time where news was divided and we did survive it. The fairly balanced and honest news really only had a short run of maybe 1940s through 1980s. Then TV news became part of the Entertainment branch of TV. The rise of Radio Talk Show hosts began in earnest. Before 1920 the news was only fact based at times and had agendas. The NY Post was started as a politically biased paper and most newspapers had agendas. It culminated in the Hearst chain of papers but it was pretty much all papers.

I admit, news coverage is probably as bad as the 1890s but I don't think it is even at its worst.
Your point is well taken, but look at how we're whistling the dark. "Well, it was this bad back in the 1950s, the 1920s, the 1850s...."

When I was a university student some 20 years ago, I always felt like looking forward to the future. Contrary to what people might assume from my writing, I haven't always been a pessimist. I always envisioned myself looking forward to what we as a society could be come. It never really crossed my mind that as a middle-aged man, we as a country would be in the position of trying to reassure ourselves that as shitty as things have become, they could perhaps always be shittier. I was about to say that at least we're not threatened with a mass extinction event, but come to think of it, WE ARE. And we have a president and a congress that calls people who believe in the science "snowflakes" and "buttercups" and "whiners." How did the generation that developed the i-phone simultaneously take us back to the world of Medieval Europe?

Anyway, my point is, is this what we're reduced to now? Trying to talk ourselves up by going back deep into our history and reassuring ourselves that we were once this unjust and barbaric and that we 'survived'? What's infuriating to me is that we can actually do something about this. No revolutions are required. It just requires a little compassion and some education. But we can't even be bothered to go that far.

Last edited by asahi; 12-06-2017 at 02:25 PM.
  #146  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:32 PM
enipla enipla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 11,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandMcnally View Post
<snip>We'll see a brain drain.
I think this would be seen (if they saw it) as a bonus by many repubs. Getting rid of them "smarty pants libruls telling us about global warning."
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #147  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:49 PM
Helena330 Helena330 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Near Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 2,923
Joining this thread late because I was finishing finals. I have a lot of hope for this country because of one reason: Millennials. They're waking up. I spend a lot of time with a lot of Millennials, and contrary to stereotypes, they care about this country and its (their!) future. More of them are becoming politically active, and I'll tell you, they don't like the shit that's been happening.
  #148  
Old 12-06-2017, 02:58 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 28,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Basically, what we have now is Clothahump styled conservatism; It boils down to "fuck you liberals, I will burn down my own country and sell the ashes to the Russians just to make you angry"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clothahump View Post
That's total bullshit and you know it. Go back and read the post I responded to. That kind of post is almost a liberal signature and I, for one, really don't want people like that in positions of authority.
Here's the post you responded to. I have placed emphasizing coding on the portion you quoted, and which presumably provoked your response:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo-Calredic View Post
One simple question: Do you have hope for the future of the United States?

Speaking for myself, I have precious little hope left. Every few days brings some affront to common decency from the piece of human filth currently festooning the Oval Office.
The majority of our politicians have abandoned even the pretense that they answer to anyone but the richest of the rich. There seems to be zero accountability, and the corruption will just keep on spreading throughout the system until it is stopped — sadly, no one who could stop it seems interested in doing so.

The USA has survived incompetence. It’s survived division. What it’s faced with now is essentially open infiltration by an enemy of everything the country claims to stand for; someone who is literally working to make life worse for the average American and to tear down the rights the nation was founded upon — and we’re just letting it happen.

At this point, I’m afraid the best-case scenario after Trump is that the US declines into a second-rate power, but manages to recover at least a modicum of decency within the next few decades. The worst-case scenario is probably a massive new Depression caused by mendacious financial irresponsibility, followed by outright civil war.

The country is very divided right now. Half has been essentially brainwashed into believing the other half are so evil that they actually support child molesters on their own side over anyone on the other side. The cracks are deep, and those in power are committed to making them deeper rather than bringing anyone together. I’m afraid we are teetering on the edge of a very deep, very dark precipice.
So, let's break it down. The first paragraph simply iterates the question in the thread title. Perhaps the fact that the OP felt that it was in any way appropriate to pose it that aroused your ire. If this is the case, can you elaborate on how it (or anything like it) can legitimately be characterized as "a liberal signature?"

The following sentence is merely an expression of the OP's personal opinion. It would take imbecility in titanic quantities for someone to conclude that this opinion is shared by all liberals. While I have observed that you DO possess imbecility in those quantities, the fact that you did not end your snippet with that suggests that you take issue with the final portion, to wit:

Quote:
Every few days brings some affront to common decency from the piece of human filth currently festooning the Oval Office.
TBH, there isn't even anything controversial about that statement. Certainly, the ability to recognize and acknowledge that perfectly obvious fact should be regarded as a requirement for holding a position of authority, and not, as you state, a disqualification.

Feel free to try again to support your argument that Euphonious Polemic's post is "total bullshit."

Or don't. Due to the fact that it's spot-on, you'd be sure to fail just as badly.

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 12-06-2017 at 02:59 PM.
  #149  
Old 12-06-2017, 03:06 PM
Red Wiggler Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helena330 View Post
Joining this thread late because I was finishing finals. I have a lot of hope for this country because of one reason: Millennials. They're waking up. I spend a lot of time with a lot of Millennials, and contrary to stereotypes, they care about this country and its (their!) future. More of them are becoming politically active, and I'll tell you, they don't like the shit that's been happening.
I'm a little leery of some polls I've seen where democratic governments don't rate extremely high on millennials' lists of necessities but overall I share your optimism about that group.

And I'm generally optimistic about the future even though pulling ourselves away from the brink a few times in the past is no guarantee that we'll always be able to do it again. I think we have deep systemic issues (an awkward constitutional structure and a mashup of outdated states' rights values) and far too large a part of the electorate that has no desire to make things better in the future because of a mistaken belief that the past can not be surpassed.
  #150  
Old 12-06-2017, 03:24 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 28,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
And I'm generally optimistic about the future even though pulling ourselves away from the brink a few times in the past is no guarantee that we'll always be able to do it again.
This could almost be a fable.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017