It’s kind of amusing to hear you say that a claim is laughable because only one poster has demonstrated its truth in the same thread. Kind of.
Regards,
Shodan
Which is why the Democrats lost control of both houses of Congress during JugearS reign. They were connecting too well with the voters. Bwahahaha…
The elected Democrats have no intention of working with the elected Republicans. Regardless of who those Republicans are.
Katich strikes me as a somewhat reasonable man who would at least make an effort to work in a bi-partisan manner.
Rubio has criticized Trump publicly. He also seems more reasonable, but I am less familiar with his policies.
In both cases, while Democrats might be upset with the loss, I don’t think we’d see this level of popular unrest. We got through Bush Jr. We would get through a standard Republican presidency. There would be issues that we would be more unhappy about (healthcare), and some that we could work together on (infrastructure), and some that would be fraught with difficulty but still be possible (tax reform).
The point is that both of the men named are capable of being presidential. They would shake hands with a head of state. They would stay at the White House. They would not use twitter to say inappropriate things. They would attend security briefings. They would not use Fox News as their primary source of information. They would not constantly fly off for “meetings” (golf outings). They would not constantly be referring back to their predecessor or to their opponent in the general election or to the size of the crowd at the inauragation or be talking about 3 million illegal voters. They would select halfway reasonable people for their cabinet (I expect Democrats would not be happy with all of them, but I also expect that they would at least be qualified). In short, I believe that both men would be governing and doing the job they were elected to do.
That is the crux of it. I don’t believe that Trump is governing. That being the case, he’s in for a shitload of scrutiny and vitriol from almost all sides. Much more than either Kasich or Rubio would have gotten.
Besides, Kanye West has also been cited in this thread!
Enjoy my humble regards,
CarnalK
Not McCain.
Not Romney. Yes, we called him a pawn of the rich and/or a rich bastard out of touch with the people- and even a robot.
Lets put it this way.
With Rubio or Kasichin the white house, we would still have the Stupid Republican of the day thread, and a few issue oriented pit threads about things like the neutering of the EPA, the faulty Healthcare proposal, etc… But we wouldn’t have multiple additional long running high post threads in the pit discussing their twitter activity, the sad fact that they woke up in the morning, and the overall complete dysfunction of their administration.
You made the claim, as I recall. He just said ‘no.’ So, by your own rationale, it’s on YOU to provide cites.
Yeah, I know, good luck with that.
Shodan, do you honestly believe that the actual things a politician does have absolutely no effect on the response and opinion from the vast majority of liberals (or liberal Dopers), but rather that the response and opinion is entirely based on their political party?
That seems like an absolutely crazy belief. If you’re just saying liberals tend to be harsher on Republicans, then that’s a pretty trivial observation. But it sounds like you really believe that, at least from what I can get from your posts in this thread.
It’s hilarious that the usual suspects are talking about the ‘usual suspects.’
You live in some kind of weird alternate universe if you think people would treat mainstream Pubs the same as this abomination of a leader.
But I get it. You need to justify your own political beliefs by denigrating those of others that (OMG!) happen to differ from yours.
If a single poster making a claim is sufficient to show that it’s “Mainstream opinion hereabouts,” you’re gonna have to explain what you mean by mainstream, because ironically enough your definition of the term is far from mainstream.
Any Republican President or Presidential candidate is going to get called racist, sexist, homophobic, corrupt, stupid, insane and evil on the SDMB. There is such a thing as a knee-jerk response.
What a politician can do to prevent this from happening is not to be a Republican.
Regards,
Shodan
Obviously – there are thousands of posters on the Dope. Probably every president, regardless of party, has been called a Nazi on the Dope. Are you saying that there would be no difference in the character, or quantity, of harsh rhetoric between Trump and a hypothetical President Kasich? Are you saying the difference would be minuscule? Or are you just noting, hum-drum and totally obviously, that among the Dope’s great population are some blind partisans?
It seems to me that some Dopers would blindly criticize Kasich, while some would reasonably criticize him, and some would praise him when he did things (like possibly try and fix, rather than repeal, the ACA) they agreed with. There would be very little harsh criticism of Kasich’s personality, or at least orders of magnitude less than for Trump, and much less criticism of white supremacists being counted among his staff, among many other differences IMO.
In short, the way Trump is criticized (and how much he is criticized) on the Dope is dependent on his own words and behavior at least as much as his political party, IMO.
Show me those comments for McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012.
Trump’s not just getting an unusual amount of criticism from the Left. He’s getting it from the center and right-of-center, too. [SIZE=“1”](Side note: I think “left-of-center” would be more accurate than “the Left,” especially when you capitalize “Left” – many prominent voices on “the Left,” as popularly defined, are busier bashing the Democratic Party than Trump three days out of five. See Glenn Greenwald and much of the Intercept crew, the folks at Jacobin, Susan Sarandon’s “Bernie Woulda Won” ilk, the “alt-left” at Chapo Trap House, et al. But that’s a whole 'nother topic. From the directional left, lowercase “L,” yeah, Trump’s taking unusual heat.)
[/SIZE]
You’re conflating amounts and types of criticism here, I think? Pence would probably be vilified as an “ignorant religious zealot” to a high degree – *but that’s not something you hear about Trump much.
*As for “Hitler clone” – calling GW Bush a proto-fascist or worse was definitely a thing (I seem to remember John Dean [!] hinting at that in the final chapters of Worse Than Watergate, and that Nicholson Baker book about a would-be GWB assassin did it too, and the Larouchites outside my post office definitely said it, and …). Whether or not each of those criticisms had merit, I doubt that a Kasich or Rubio would be doing nearly as badly on the “similar to Hitler” scale. For one thing, they would not have hired Bannon or Gorka, or retweeted neo-Nazis, or taken such strongly Putinesque positions attacking nonpartisan political institutions. Etcetera.
And “however polite” – really? Of course partisanship and policy differences will lead to conflict between politicians of opposing parties. But Trumpian rudeness and jackassery can’t help but exacerbate that conflict. (Not least because it gives opponents an extra dimension to attack him on!)
Rhetorically or procedurally? So far, Schumer has moved towards an oppositional rhetorical stance. Note that this has happened as Trump gets – according to FAKE POLLS, yes – increasingly unpopular and embarassing. If President Rubio, Kasich, or whoever were this unpopular and alienated so much of the public, he’d be doing the same thing. But would this other hypothetical Republican president be like Trump? I doubt it.
(Procedurally, I think Schumer might be doing pretty much what he’s doing now – assuming the Democratic base were as riled up as it is.)
OP, I’m at a loss to how one could reach such a conclusion. I guess this is what folks mean when they talk about normalizing Trump.
How do people make fun of Rubio?
- Immigration flip flops, but liberals don’t care about that.
- Being thirsty that one time.
- Looking like a kid who put on his dad’s suit, “little Marco.”
- Repeating the same talking point about Obama knowing what he’s doing and getting called out by Christie, “Robo-Rubio.”
Other issues would come up if he won the nomination and had to campaign, but this is weak stuff. You couldn’t use this to make endless SNL parodies or fuel breathless coverage on liberal blogs and corporate news media for months on end. Make a list of how people make fun of Trump and you’ll write a book.
Today he asked the FBI to watch Fox News for information on the “wiretapping”. None of the other 15 Repub candidates would have done this.
Saying “Dems would have been just as hard on …” need to explain when … would’ve tweeted a directive to the FBI to watch Fox News.
He brings SO much upon himself, therefore, the shitstorm is even greater. How is this even a debate?
So fuckin what? I’m pretty sure that with a more robust search function, I could find Rand Rover or Clothahump calling Obama a racist, or corrupt, or stupid, or insane, or evil. I guarantee you can find those folks calling Clinton corrupt, insane, and evil. Is it your contention that these are mainstream opinions on this board? Or do you have some other standard for “mainstream” that would make your standard, y’know, mainstream?
They would get a similar frown and gotcha questions from the press that were seldom asked to Obama, but I think either Kasich or Rubio would get more respect for the press. Sometimes if not what you say, but how you say it.
Ronald Reagan did fine with the press, but he had an usually charming demeanor.
The serious answer is…no. The reason is because both of them are seasoned politicians, would listen to political advice, and basically wouldn’t do most of the really stupid stuff that has marked Trump’s time as president so far (hard to believe it’s ONLY been 3 months :eek:). While I’m sure that either Rubio (well, especially Rubio) and Kasich would get shit from the left (goes without saying really), they wouldn’t be getting the same level of shit and certainly not for the same (mainly stupid) things…and they wouldn’t be getting shit from the centrists and independents that Trump has been getting. As a for instance, I can’t see either Rubio or Kasich even trying the first ridiculous attempt by Trump at a Muslim ban. Even if they had it in their mind to try something like that for pure political theater (which I seriously doubt) they would have freaking brought in some people to help them craft it in such a way as to have it work. Same goes for the wall. They wouldn’t have put their foot wrong with, oh, say the Australian PM, or gotten Mexico (or China) all riled up about tariffs or thrown NATO into fits because they are unsure where things stand. Hell, they wouldn’t have ignored the State Department and put MOST of our allies (and even countries we are unfriendly towards) into such confusion.
So, I don’t think it would be even remotely similar. Trump has made truly boneheaded mistakes and fumbles that have made him a target from just about everyone on one thing or another.
Cool story, bro.