Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 07-16-2019, 05:42 PM
KidCharlemagne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
The four women who are the topic of this conversation who were told to go back to their countries are all legal. Three aren’t even immigrants. Seems like you are mistaken.
And the one immigrant has been a citizen longer than Trump's wife.
  #202  
Old 07-16-2019, 05:54 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Les Wizerables View Post
It obviously anywhere near the most egregious or hypocritical things about Trump's new "if you don't like it go back where you came from" rhetoric, but it's absurd to hear it from someone whose campaign slogan was "Make America Great Again" in 2016 and will be "Keep America Great" in 2020.

If America wasn't great prior to January 2017, why didn't Trump and his supporters leave? If it will no longer be great if Trump loses in 2020, will they leave then?
Because it is *their* country, and they are just taking it back.

/s
  #203  
Old 07-16-2019, 05:56 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,776
Bipartisan support for House resolution condemning Trump's racists tweets.

Yea:

All Democrats
4 Republicans
1 Independent (Amash)

Nay:

Rest of Republicans
  #204  
Old 07-16-2019, 05:58 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by aldiboronti View Post
I don't think most people are opposed to immigrants,
Agreed, most people are not republicans.
  #205  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:12 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensive Indifference View Post
I've noticed some news outlets finally giving up the euphemisms and calling Trump's remarks "racist". NPR did so in a tweet and in the most recent hourly news roundup I heard, and the St. Louis Post Dispatch did today as well. I'm glad some news operations are done with "racially charged" and other similar nonsense. I hope more follow suit soon.
They were aided in that decision, probably, by the fact that "go back to your country" is so frequently uttered by those committing hate crimes, during the commission of those crimes.

ProPublica has a discussion here:https://www.propublica.org/article/h...ent-the-damage

Search "hate crime" and "go back to your country" and many more examples will appear.
  #206  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:22 PM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,637
I don't agree with Willliam Hurd's politics, but he deserves some props for his vote on the resolution and for calling the president out as a racist and bigot on national TV.

Granted, he's black and he represents a racially diverse district. But not all the Republicans are douchdicks.
  #207  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:37 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
But not all the Republicans are douchdicks.
4 out of 197 Republican congresspeople = 2%. So around 98% douchdicks.
  #208  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:38 PM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,637
Yes, that is very depressing.
  #209  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:41 PM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensive Indifference View Post
I've noticed some news outlets finally giving up the euphemisms and calling Trump's remarks "racist". NPR did so in a tweet and in the most recent hourly news roundup I heard, and the St. Louis Post Dispatch did today as well. I'm glad some news operations are done with "racially charged" and other similar nonsense. I hope more follow suit soon.
I noticed that, too (on NPR), and did a little happy dance. The word was used as matter-of-factly as if they’d said today was Tuesday.
  #210  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:49 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 8,565
Judy Woodruff reported the remarks as racist on PBS. Which they were, of course. It ain't like when Faux uses a buzzword, this is a simple statement of true fact.

Last edited by bobot; 07-16-2019 at 06:50 PM.
  #211  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:57 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
...You’re right. What I omitted completely changed the meaning of the accusation. Cortez wasn’t implying that Pelosi was racist. She was implying that she was racist and patronising.
...well it did change the meaning. And in a world where 'the squad' are being attacked and where members of the Trump administration are openly lying about things they have said I think its more important now than ever before to get the facts right.

It added context. As did the other words that she said that you ommited. AOC has no hesitation calling racists racist. When asked by Anderson Cooper if she thought Trump as racist she flat out said "yes", he was racist. So if she intended to call Pelosi racist she would have called her racist, not just "imply it."

You can see the context of the reply. They got the "cold shoulder" from the House Dems at the start, but accepted that as part of "how the game is played." But from their point of view: Pelosi has not called out other elements of dissent in the same manner in which she calls out their dissent. And the dismissive tone that she took in the Maureen Dowd article exemplified this.

'Newly-elected women of colour' is about as accurate description of "the squad" as you can get. So no: I don't think Cortez was implying Pelosi was racist.
  #212  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:58 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 8,565
Chicago Tribune, which has a quite conservative editorial board, is using this headline:
House Democrats, over strong GOP opposition, vote to condemn President Trump’s racist tweets



https://www.chicagotribune.com/natio...ueq-story.html
  #213  
Old 07-16-2019, 07:03 PM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
Oh for fuck's sake! Anyone willing to vote out Trump will be willing to look at the actual candidates for Senate in their states and make a determination based on that. Josh Hawley and Roy Blunt were not sent to the Senate by the people of Missouri to provide some sort of counterbalance to Bernie Sanders and Diane Feinstein, nor was its last Democratic Senator elected to counterbalance Chuck Grassley.
I don't understand why you (and others in this thread) seem unwilling to consider the possibility that by making the 'face of the Democratic Party' that of its most progressive members, Trump may instill enough fear in enough voters to make them vote for Republican senators (even if they aren't also going to support Trump).

Here are a NYT piece and one from the CBC going in to the ploy in more detail.
  #214  
Old 07-16-2019, 07:03 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Agreed, most people are not republicans.
Here are the numbers to support you.

"Support for U.S. President Donald Trump increased slightly among Republicans after he lashed out on Twitter over the weekend in a racially charged attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen, a Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll shows."
  #215  
Old 07-16-2019, 07:11 PM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Here are the numbers to support you.

"Support for U.S. President Donald Trump increased slightly among Republicans after he lashed out on Twitter over the weekend in a racially charged attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen, a Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll shows."
Good lord. That is the most depressing thing I’ve heard in many months — and that’s saying something.

Wow. I ... I need to sit down ...

Seriously, this is bad. Like, 1934 Germany bad.
  #216  
Old 07-16-2019, 07:18 PM
Biffster's Avatar
Biffster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,428
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...5f77ddb1d1.jpg
  #217  
Old 07-17-2019, 09:15 AM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,680
It occurs to me that this could be an opportunity for the gentlewomen to visit their respective ancestral homelands, report on conditions there and tie those conditions to specific policies of this administration. AOC would have a ball with this, I'm sure.
  #218  
Old 07-17-2019, 09:26 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,413
one of the 4 GOP who voted yes, Brooks, is not running for re-election next year.
  #219  
Old 07-17-2019, 10:20 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Here are the numbers to support you.

"Support for U.S. President Donald Trump increased slightly among Republicans after he lashed out on Twitter over the weekend in a racially charged attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen, a Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll shows."
Rob Reiner suggested on twitter this morning that, if there are Apprentice tapes with Donald uttering the N-word, Republicans should be working towards their release to help get the base really fired up.
  #220  
Old 07-17-2019, 10:23 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,776
USA Today/Ipsos Poll

Telling minority Americans to "go back where they came from" is a racist statement

Total agree: 65%
Total disagree: 18%

Republican agree: 45%
Republican disagree: 34%

Independent agree: 67%
Independent disagree: 12%
  #221  
Old 07-17-2019, 10:27 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKellyMap View Post
Good lord. That is the most depressing thing I’ve heard in many months — and that’s saying something.

Wow. I ... I need to sit down ...

Seriously, this is bad. Like, 1934 Germany bad.
This is what polarization and tribal politics does: it establishes clear, unambiguous boundaries that are based on loyalty. Cross the line, and you become a target. The party itself will reinforce it because they all understand that if even a handful of people become brave enough to condemn party leadership, the entire house of cards collapses. Privately, many will vent among each other about what a shit show this has become, but they don't dare say it in public because the tribe must stay together, and the reason the tribe must stay together is due to fact that they are a minority that governs as a majority, meaning that they have won hard-earned power despite the fact that a majority of people don't have similar ideology.

That's why I think people are wrong to dismiss the idea that Trump isn't calculating here -- he is absolutely calculating. He may sometimes miscalculate and pay a short-term prices for it in the polls, but what he's doing is building an army with legions of committed holy crusaders and race warriors. Trump knows that he probably can't win a 'normal' election (whatever that is anymore). He needs to fracture the electorate, to splinter it into smaller groups and win with a plurality.

This is why I have suspected that he has actually wanted the Democrats to impeach him. If the Democrats were to move on impeachment before the rest of the country, particularly independents, were ready, then what is the result? It unifies his army, and it potentially divides his enemies.

That being said, if there was ever a time to impeach, now just might be that time, particularly coming at a moment when a solid majority of the country is repulsed by his comments. I don't necessarily think it would succeed, but if you're going to launch that effort, do it when Trump's opponents are united on something.

Last edited by asahi; 07-17-2019 at 10:28 AM.
  #222  
Old 07-17-2019, 10:30 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
USA Today/Ipsos Poll

Telling minority Americans to "go back where they came from" is a racist statement

Total agree: 65%
Total disagree: 18%

Republican agree: 45%
Republican disagree: 34%

Independent agree: 67%
Independent disagree: 12%
The inevitable follow up to that question is, does a racist comment make that president unqualified to lead? Is it a deal-breaker. Probably not, unfortunately.
  #223  
Old 07-17-2019, 10:38 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,228
‘Go back’? Trump’s grandfather’s German hometown has a different message for the U.S. president
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...-us-president/
Quote:
...Born in 1869 into a modest family that ran a small vineyard, Friedrich Trump initially worked in a barbershop in a neighboring town. But opening his own barbershop in Kallstadt proved difficult. There already was a barber in town.

Friedrich Trump was also expected under German law to serve in the military for some time.
...
Like grandpa like grandson, eh?
__________________
"If we're not supposed to dance, why all this music?" Gregory Orr
  #224  
Old 07-17-2019, 12:51 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,680
The entire Republican party needs to go see the Wizard. Ask for the combo, guys: Heart, brains, and courage.
  #225  
Old 07-17-2019, 12:59 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-DUB View Post
The entire Republican party needs to go see the Wizard. Ask for the combo, guys: Heart, brains, and courage.
They'll see that Wizard, when they're done meeting with the Grand Wizard.
  #226  
Old 07-17-2019, 01:04 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,126
Stephen Tompkinson as Phil in Brassed Off:
Quote:
[as Mr. Chuckles] So God was creating man. And his little assistant came up to him and he said: "Hey, we've got all these bodies left, but we're right out of brains, we're right out of hearts and we're right out of vocal cords." And God said: "Fuck it! Sew 'em up anyway. Smack smiles on the faces and make them talk out of their arses." And lo, God created the Tory Party.
  #227  
Old 07-17-2019, 01:21 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
'Newly-elected women of colour' is about as accurate description of "the squad" as you can get. So no: I don't think Cortez was implying Pelosi was racist.
I think it could be read more than one way, but what I find absolutely mystifying is the fact that AFAIK not one of the people who claims that Ocasio-Cortez was calling Pelosi racist by referring to her singling out "newly elected women of color" seems to have suggested that Ocasio-Cortez was also calling Pelosi sexist.

Saying that somebody is singling out women is just as much an accusation of sexism as saying that somebody is singling out persons of color is an accusation of racism. Do people think that Pelosi somehow can't be accused of sexism because women can't be sexist? If so, they have some catching up to do with reality.

Personally, I neither think that Pelosi is sexist/racist nor that Ocasio-Cortez was accusing Pelosi of sexism/racism. I think Ocasio-Cortez was suggesting that Pelosi was trying to discredit potentially divisive left-wing views by specifically critiquing their proponents who are most vulnerable to disparagement and dismissal, by virtue of being not only relatively inexperienced but also female and nonwhite. That's not an accusation that Pelosi herself is sexist or racist: that's an accusation that Pelosi is willing to let pervasive societal sexist/racist prejudice do some of the work of distancing the Democratic Party from more radical liberal views.

I don't know whether that's what Pelosi actually is doing, but I think that's what Ocasio-Cortez was saying she's doing.
  #228  
Old 07-17-2019, 05:28 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
I think it could be read more than one way, but what I find absolutely mystifying is the fact that AFAIK not one of the people who claims that Ocasio-Cortez was calling Pelosi racist by referring to her singling out "newly elected women of color" seems to have suggested that Ocasio-Cortez was also calling Pelosi sexist.

Saying that somebody is singling out women is just as much an accusation of sexism as saying that somebody is singling out persons of color is an accusation of racism. Do people think that Pelosi somehow can't be accused of sexism because women can't be sexist? If so, they have some catching up to do with reality.

Personally, I neither think that Pelosi is sexist/racist nor that Ocasio-Cortez was accusing Pelosi of sexism/racism. I think Ocasio-Cortez was suggesting that Pelosi was trying to discredit potentially divisive left-wing views by specifically critiquing their proponents who are most vulnerable to disparagement and dismissal, by virtue of being not only relatively inexperienced but also female and nonwhite. That's not an accusation that Pelosi herself is sexist or racist: that's an accusation that Pelosi is willing to let pervasive societal sexist/racist prejudice do some of the work of distancing the Democratic Party from more radical liberal views.

I don't know whether that's what Pelosi actually is doing, but I think that's what Ocasio-Cortez was saying she's doing.
Maybe.

I'd go for a simpler explanation: AOC knows she can easily enlist thousands of vocal allies on her behalf by insinuating racial prejudice in Pelosi. Hundreds of thousands of Twitter users are poised to condemn racism, no matter who is accused of it, no matter how little evidence there may be.*

Whereas insinuating 'Pelosi declines to support my action-plan and my ambitions, and is therefore attempting to block my power-play with a power-play of her own' is much, much, much less-likely to generate a massive tweet-storm of support. There isn't a ready-made support base ready to be fired up over something that is so inside-baseball.

So AOC isn't likely to employ that complaint--even though it's more accurate than 'Pelosi is singling out women of color' (newly-elected or otherwise).


I think your analysis is thoughtful. But in this particular case I don't buy the 'AOC has determined that Pelosi is enlisting bigotry in order to keep her caucus in line' theory.





*I'm not decrying that state of affairs, because racism is corrosive, and it's not really reasonable to excoriate people for 'over-reacting' to it. But undeniably there are times when accusations are made that fail to be fully fair.
  #229  
Old 07-17-2019, 05:53 PM
thorny locust is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
"Support for U.S. President Donald Trump increased slightly among Republicans after he lashed out on Twitter over the weekend in a racially charged attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen, a Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll shows."
I wonder whether there was any decrease in the number of people identifying as Republicans.
  #230  
Old 07-17-2019, 06:36 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
For those who think that Trump was just trolling and wasn't making a calculated decision to sow division, consider what happened earlier today:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/con...trump-n1030791

All Republicans + 132 Democrats: Against

95 Democrats: For

It's divide, and conquer.

Having a disagreement (even spirited) over how to deal with Trump by itself isn't a problem. The problem is if/when Trump pisses Democrats off so much that they stop trying to govern and get sucked into a media brawl, and end up spending so much time trying to impeach and censure Trump and his cabinet that they don't have a unified strategy on things like how to deal with the looming budget crisis.
  #231  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:20 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,776
From Trump's rally:
Quote:
The crowd at Trump's rally chants "send her back, send her back" as Trump goes on an extended riff attacking Rep. Ilhan Omar.
  #232  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:31 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
I wonder whether there was any decrease in the number of people identifying as Republicans.
That's an excellent point. It's much less daunting that huge proportions of Republicans support Trump's racism, if there are fewer and fewer self-identified Republicans, the more openly-racist he becomes.

I'm not seeing good numbers on this, and I just spent way too long looking. Party affiliation figures seem to be published only twice a month or so, by major polling firms. For example:

Republicans Independents Democrats
% % %
2019 Jun 3-16 26 46 27
2019 May 15-30 27 45 27
2019 May 1-12 30 38 31
2019 Apr 17-30 29 40 29
2019 Apr 1-9 27 44 26
2019 Mar 1-10 26 42 30
2019 Feb 12-28 30 38 30
2019 Feb 1-10 31 37 30
2019 Jan 21-27 25 41 32
2019 Jan 2-10 25 39 34
  #233  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:41 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
I wonder whether there was any decrease in the number of people identifying as Republicans.
That's an excellent point. It's much less daunting that huge proportions of Republicans support Trump's racism, if there are fewer and fewer self-identified Republicans the more openly-racist he becomes.

I'm not seeing good numbers on this, and I just spent way too long looking. Party affiliation figures seem to be published only twice a month or so, by major polling firms. For example:

Quote:
........... Republicans Independents Democrats
................. ...... % ....... % ....... %
2019 Jun 3-16 ...... 26 ...... 46 ...... 27
2019 May 15-30...... 27 ...... 45 ..... 27
2019 May 1-12 ...... 30 ...... 38 ..... 31
2019 Apr 17-30 . ... 29 ....... 40 ...... 29
2019 Apr 1-9 ........ 27 ...... 44 ...... 26
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/p...filiation.aspx


That doesn't really tell us anything (those figures are as of today---there's quite a delay in posting their results). Still, it's worth keeping an eye on.


eta --sorry about the double post, but I'll keep this one up as the stats are easier to read.

Last edited by Sherrerd; 07-17-2019 at 07:43 PM.
  #234  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:44 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,776
Thoughts from Twitter...

Jon Favreau:
Quote:
The crowd at Trump’s rally chanting “send her back” after the President viciously and dishonestly attacked Ilhan Omar is one of the most chilling and horrifying things I’ve ever seen in politics.
Shaun King:
Quote:
This is one of the single most racist moments in modern American political history. As Trump began attacking my friend Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, the crowd began chanting “SEND HER BACK, SEND HER BACK.” It’s utterly despicable and dangerous. We are here. We are in THAT time. UGLY.

Last edited by Walken After Midnight; 07-17-2019 at 07:44 PM.
  #235  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:50 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
I wonder whether there was any decrease in the number of people identifying as Republicans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
That's an excellent point. It's much less daunting that huge proportions of Republicans support Trump's racism, if there are fewer and fewer self-identified Republicans, the more openly-racist he becomes.

I'm not seeing good numbers on this, and I just spent way too long looking. Party affiliation figures seem to be published only twice a month or so, by major polling firms. For example:

Republicans Independents Democrats
% % %
2019 Jun 3-16 26 46 27
2019 May 15-30 27 45 27
2019 May 1-12 30 38 31
2019 Apr 17-30 29 40 29
2019 Apr 1-9 27 44 26
2019 Mar 1-10 26 42 30
2019 Feb 12-28 30 38 30
2019 Feb 1-10 31 37 30
2019 Jan 21-27 25 41 32
2019 Jan 2-10 25 39 34
It is an excellent point. I can't cite to it because it was a figure I heard some while ago on the news, but there was a statistic that 37% of all Americans identified as Republicans in 2016. Now it's 24%.

Hope this helps.
  #236  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:54 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
It is an excellent point. I can't cite to it because it was a figure I heard some while ago on the news, but there was a statistic that 37% of all Americans identified as Republicans in 2016. Now it's 24%.

Hope this helps.
Yes, thanks. When I first did the search ("identify as Republican"), Google returned a lot of "in 2015" and "in 2016"-type results. Which is all very well, but more-frequent polls would tell us more.

But it may be that no polling firm is checking on this weekly. Ir they did, it would be much more useful in terms of judging how successful Trump's conduct is in winning or losing him support.
  #237  
Old 07-17-2019, 08:29 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
I think this comment from George Will, a noted conservative and former Republican, mirrors my own thoughts.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/15/polit...ncy/index.html

Quote:
"I believe that what this president has done to our culture, to our civic discourse ... you cannot unring these bells and you cannot unsay what he has said, and you cannot change that he has now in a very short time made it seem normal for schoolboy taunts and obvious lies to be spun out in a constant stream. I think this will do more lasting damage than Richard Nixon's surreptitious burglaries did."
I think Trump's spirit will permeate politics until we reach the point where a large chunk of his supporters make the connection between the politics of the right and their own suffering. And that could be a while.

All this country cares about, and the only metric we seem to use to evaluate presidential efficacy, is whether we have a regular job and whether we can afford to buy a smartphone.
  #238  
Old 07-17-2019, 08:32 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
It is an excellent point. I can't cite to it because it was a figure I heard some while ago on the news, but there was a statistic that 37% of all Americans identified as Republicans in 2016. Now it's 24%.

Hope this helps.
Yeah but I think the Democratic party has lost support with it. I would guess that Americans have generally given up on the party system and the only reason that we continue to have Democrats and Republicans is because the machines in both parties have control over the system so that they can still tell which team the candidates are on. But the voters themselves are becoming increasingly unaffiliated, which is also why it's a little harder to predict elections than it used to be.
  #239  
Old 07-17-2019, 08:38 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
All this country cares about, and the only metric we seem to use to evaluate presidential efficacy, is whether we have a regular job and whether we can afford to buy a smartphone.
And I've said for a long time (about 35 years now) that no revolution happens as long as people are comfortable. 35 years ago, the exact quote was "as long as people have indoor plumbing and VCRs, there will be no revolution." The details of that statement may have changed a bit, but the underlying sentiment has not.

Things have to get really bad before people will rise up. We aren't there, but we sure seem to be on the path.
  #240  
Old 07-17-2019, 09:09 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
And I've said for a long time (about 35 years now) that no revolution happens as long as people are comfortable. 35 years ago, the exact quote was "as long as people have indoor plumbing and VCRs, there will be no revolution." The details of that statement may have changed a bit, but the underlying sentiment has not.

Things have to get really bad before people will rise up. We aren't there, but we sure seem to be on the path.
You ain't wrong, Bo.

You ain't wrong.
  #241  
Old 07-17-2019, 09:17 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
I have spent the last 37 years of my life studying this. Specifically: the conditions in the US and the likelihood of a revolution occurring. We still aren't close, but we are on the path.
  #242  
Old 07-17-2019, 09:21 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,593
Kids in high school would be suspended for encouraging a chant that the president seems fine with.
  #243  
Old 07-17-2019, 09:53 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Yeah but I think the Democratic party has lost support with it. I would guess that Americans have generally given up on the party system and the only reason that we continue to have Democrats and Republicans is because the machines in both parties have control over the system so that they can still tell which team the candidates are on. But the voters themselves are becoming increasingly unaffiliated, which is also why it's a little harder to predict elections than it used to be.
Through 2018, both parties were losing support, but Republican support was lost much more rapidly. In my social circle, I've seen a lot of folks switch from unaffiliated to Democratic, but that's not affected actual votes; rather, in a moment of despair, it was a symbolic action.
  #244  
Old 07-17-2019, 10:09 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
All I know is that the president went into the election of 2016 with poll numbers from about 38-43% and ended up with about 46% of the actual vote. For most of the election he trailed Hillary Clinton anywhere from 3-7% points. He lost the election by almost 3%. He won the electoral college, and he did so by a wider margin than George W Bush in both of his elections.

It's hard to defeat an incumbent president, particularly when the economy is going well. Most vote knowing (assuming) "He will be gone in 4 years anyway, so what's the big rush if things are going well?"
  #245  
Old 07-17-2019, 11:09 PM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,276
After coming back from the camps, Pence said, "Mr. President, you're going to have to come up with something GOOD!" Mission accomplished!
  #246  
Old 07-17-2019, 11:38 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,593
Remember when Clinton called his supporters deplorable? Seems like she undersold it.
  #247  
Old 07-17-2019, 11:45 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Remember when Clinton called his supporters deplorable? Seems like she undersold it.
Clinton wasn't wrong about what she said; she was just the wrong pitch person, I guess.
  #248  
Old 07-18-2019, 05:44 AM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 134
Donald Trump ran on "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN"

If he didn't think America was great why didn't he leave?
  #249  
Old 07-18-2019, 06:40 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,413
Politicians love to run against bogeymen and Trump now has 4 of them. He will probably add more later.
  #250  
Old 07-18-2019, 08:47 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,776
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal agency that administers and enforces civil rights laws against workplace discrimination.

From their website:
Quote:
Harassment Based on National Origin

• Ethnic slurs and other verbal or physical conduct because of nationality are illegal if they are severe or pervasive and create an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment, interfere with work performance, or negatively affect job opportunities. Examples of potentially unlawful conduct include insults, taunting, or ethnic epithets, such as making fun of a person's foreign accent or comments like, "Go back to where you came from, " whether made by supervisors or by co-workers.
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 04:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.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.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017