Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

[SJHovey]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

As much as it makes up a significant block of his support, it wasn't the wild-eyed crazy bigots that put Trump in office. Fascism was on the ballot and anybody that hemmed and hedged about some stupid made-up email scandal gave it their passive support, which put it over the top. "I just can't support her" = "I'm fine with him being President"

Sorry, but you condone it, you own it. Every story I posted last night of people being called racist slurs and told to leave the country because of their skin color is on them.

All of us vote for politicians who say things, or vote in certain ways. Some of those things we support. Some we are angry about. Some might even embarrass or mortify us. The problem is, it's impossible to find a politician that perfectly aligns with you.

My Congressman for whom I voted this year happens to be a pretty conservative Democrat from Minnesota. He supported the ACA and a few other things that I am very unhappy about, but I find him to be very reasonable and pragmatic on many other things, so I vote for him. When I do, I just kind of forget about those things that I dislike about the guy.

I have only two acquaintances who actually told me before the election they intended to vote for Trump. One is my brother-in-law and the second is a close friend of my wife's, a woman who herself is the wife of a minister of all things.

Now, I know why my brother-in-law supported Trump. He is NRA through and through. If there is such a thing as a single issue voter, Shawn is it. I think if you asked him to list 5 other things Trump said or stood for, I'm not sure he'd be successful.

The minister's wife, fifty years old and probably one of the kindest women I know, was outraged that supporters of HRC, not even Clinton herself, had seen fit to denigrate (her words) evangelicals.

And that's the thing. Political candidates have the ability to tap into just one or two things that may be important to each of us, and cause us to ignore the warts, no matter how odious they may be.

Do I now "own" the ACA just because I voted for a Congressman who also voted for it? Anyone who has seen me post on the subject knows I certainly don't think so.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Probably because Obama opened up relations with Cuba. Rubio is still livid about it.

That makes sense. I'm sure many of them are still very anti-Castro and that would grind at them the wrong way.

 

[trixR4kids]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Do we really know what this voting bloc believes?

The point is that Scooby is being the reactionary village idiot again. Yes some voted for Trump but they weren't the majority of Latinos either.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

The point is that Scooby is being the reactionary village idiot again. Yes some voted for Trump but they weren't the majority of Latinos either.

Uh huh. Yet I was the one who warned Rover over and over again. Yet, I'm the idiot.

 

[MaizeRage]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

And that's the thing. Political candidates have the ability to tap into just one or two things that may be important to each of us, and cause us to ignore the warts, no matter how odious they may be.

We all have our priorities. Basic civil rights is apparently a very low one for you and the rest of the Just Don't Cares. You own the consequences of that.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

I think not at all. One of the things that is overlooked in Reagan's early presidency is that he got shot three months into office. It was an event that changed him from just an actor turned Republican president that the left was exceedingly skeptical of, into something else. The fact is, no matter how much you disagree with a president, we all agree that someone can't just shoot Our American President.
He was bestowed with hero status and he used that enormous political popularity and the power that comes with it to get Dems in Congress to go along with his early policies. Once they got started working together, they continued, and Reagan was able to work with Tip O'Neil in congress on an almost unprecedented run of bill passages.

But that doesn't really answer my question. We're three months away from the beginning of the Trump presidency. We all know how he's viewed. How was that different from Reagan on November 5th, 1980?

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

I imagine Al Franken, Elizabeth Warren, and many others will take the proper tact. And I will continue to vote for them so my conscience is clear. But, I have no sympathy left for the people crying today. None. And I don't have the energy to be emotionally invested in issues I believe in. Life is hard enough as it is.

By the way, the Planned Parenthood thing was explained over and over again. If people didn't get the information then they didn't want it.

I think you need to starting working your way onto the third stage. You'll get there. I skipped bargaining and went straight to depression.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Probably because Obama opened up relations with Cuba. Rubio is still livid about it.

This. Thought some are happy, I think the general idea is that they look at it as a tacit approval of the Castro regime, which is silly. It's a pivot on policy because the old policy wasn't working and hasn't worked since it was implemented.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Do we really know what this voting bloc believes? And remember "Latinos" covers a very broad and ... wait for it ... DIVERSE group of people. Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Nicaraguans and other Central American, and many others. I'm guessing the interests don't completely overlap.

Given that, fact or crap? --> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/v...t-immigration-cap-cut-in-half/article/2606769

Crap. Latinos were one of Hillary's strongest demo's.

NYT: The national exit polls show that Mrs. Clinton drew 65 percent of the Latino vote compared with 29 percent for Mr. Trump.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Are they though? Maybe it's not obvious to me. Can you expand on this a bit? Why aren't they?

I look at them and see two entertainers who were swept into office by an uprising from a single voting bloc. We have absolutely no idea how Trump is going to govern. I wasn't around for Reagan's first term so I have no idea what the feeling was like back then. Did we know what the next eight years were going to be like? And I mean did we truly know?

Reagan was an intellectual featherweight, but (1) he had been around the block and hung out with / absorbed enough conservative soundbites that he could talk the talk, and (2) compared to Trump he was Carl Friedrich Motherf-cking Gauss.

Reagan also had a plan. His advisers had been beavering away in hothouse righty think tanks since 1964 concocting abstruse, good-sounding and ultimately fantastical supply side theories of economics to go along with a rather more earthy, cynical drive to simply enrich the 1% at the expense of everyone else. His team knew what they were doing -- they had the immiseration of the middle class and the institution of American Feudalism all drawn up and ready to go on Inauguration Day. They were evil, but they were prepared. Trump has none of this. His plans, in full, extend to "repeal everything and replace it with something really great!"

Reagan was constructive. His ideas of building an Entrepreneurial Utopia were idiotic, but they were forward-looking. Trump's entire agenda is to pry open the back of the USG mainframe and start pulling out wires. Trump is destruction incarnate.

And ultimately, Reagan was a fundamentally good man who was a fool and listened to anyone who would pay his tab. Trump is a fundamentally terrible man who is a fool whose narcissism prevents him from listening to anyone.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

He isnt saying Dems should do that...he is saying he is doing that. Scooby is done caring because the people he seemed to care about the most screwed themselves by voting for Drumpf who will only make it worse. (see: Flint, Michigan) Scooby is saying HE is done with worrying about all that anymore...

I dont agree, though part of me wants to. Just reminds of my sister who married a lying thief who destroys everything he touches. Everyone tried for years to get her to leave, she sat back as he screwed us all over and lied to us, she never leaves him, backs his lies and sooner or later people just stop caring.

He shouldn't. He should care. We should all care. Just because someone else doesn't vote in their own self-interest doesn't mean that we should marginalize them and throw them to the dogs. If they aren't going to care for themselves, we need to vote people into power who do care about these things.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

After getting over the initial shock of this election, the thing that's really sticking with me is the SCOTUS. The magnitude of the reward McConnell and the GOP received for digging in their heals for 9 months. It's sickening. That's not how this is supposed to work.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Reagan was personally an intellectual featherweight, but (1) he had been around the block and hung out with / absorbed enough conservative soundbites that he could talk the talk, and (2) compared to Trump he was Carl Friedrich Motherf-cking Gauss.

Reagan also had a plan. His advisers had been beavering away in hothouse righty think tanks since 1964 concocting abstruse, good-sounding and ultimately fantastical supply side theories of economics to go along with a rather more earthy, cynical drive to simply enrich the 1% at the expense of everyone else. His team knew what they were doing -- they had the destruction of the middle class and the institution of American Feudalism all drawn up and ready to go on Inauguration Day. They were evil, but they were prepared. Trump has none of this. His plans, in full, extend to "something really great!"

Reagan was constructive. His ideas of building an Entrepenurial Utopia idiotic, but they were forward-looking. Trump's entire agenda is to pry open the back of the USG mainframe and start pulling out wires. Trump is destruction incarnate.

And ultimately, Reagan was a fundamentally good man who was a fool and listened to anyone who would pay his tab. Trump is a fundamentally terrible man who is a fool whose narcissism prevents him from listening to anyone.

So was Reagan just a useful idiot like I believe Trump will end up being? I honestly believe that the GOP will attempt to use Trump like a puppet. It's not to difficult to understand how they will accomplish it either. They'll bait him with re-election and say that if you want to stay here for eight years, you'll need to deliver on the conservative agenda you promised. He might rebel for a while, but he'll eventually figure out he's not going to get re-elected by the Democrats so he's going to fold.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

So was Reagan just a useful idiot like I believe Trump will end up being?

Reagan was a useful idiot for a cadre of Orange County country club as-sholes who wound up pulling off the greatest heist in history: stealing approximately 20 trillion dollars from the American middle class.

Trump is a useless idiot. Unless you count Putin.

The GOP will try to ride him. We'll see how that goes.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Wapo reporting a Russian diplomat has said they were in contact with drunpf campaign team during campaign...here we go!

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

We all have our priorities. Basic civil rights is apparently a very low one for you and the rest of the Just Don't Cares. You own the consequences of that.

Right, but I don't think any of us chatting about this in this forum actually voted for Trump, so...

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Wapo reporting a Russian diplomat has said they were in contact with drunpf campaign team during campaign...here we go!

That's why we have the Electoral College.

Just sayin'.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Right, but I don't think any of us chatting about this in this forum actually voted for Trump, so...

The final Cafe vote had 3 votes for Trump.

 

[Drew S.]

All of us vote for politicians who say things, or vote in certain ways. Some of those things we support. Some we are angry about. Some might even embarrass or mortify us. The problem is, it's impossible to find a politician that perfectly aligns with you.

My Congressman for whom I voted this year happens to be a pretty conservative Democrat from Minnesota. He supported the ACA and a few other things that I am very unhappy about, but I find him to be very reasonable and pragmatic on many other things, so I vote for him. When I do, I just kind of forget about those things that I dislike about the guy.

I have only two acquaintances who actually told me before the election they intended to vote for Trump. One is my brother-in-law and the second is a close friend of my wife's, a woman who herself is the wife of a minister of all things.

Now, I know why my brother-in-law supported Trump. He is NRA through and through. If there is such a thing as a single issue voter, Shawn is it. I think if you asked him to list 5 other things Trump said or stood for, I'm not sure he'd be successful.

The minister's wife, fifty years old and probably one of the kindest women I know, was outraged that supporters of HRC, not even Clinton herself, had seen fit to denigrate (her words) evangelicals.

And that's the thing. Political candidates have the ability to tap into just one or two things that may be important to each of us, and cause us to ignore the warts, no matter how odious they may be.

Do I now "own" the ACA just because I voted for a Congressman who also voted for it? Anyone who has seen me post on the subject knows I certainly don't think so.

I'm in the same boat as Shawn. Regardless of other factors I could never imagine voting for a candidate who is anti-gun. I think gun control is the single biggest issue holding democrats back. The ratio of people who strongly care about gun rights to those who strongly care about gun control is probably 10 or 20 to 1.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXV: Fin

Wapo reporting a Russian diplomat has said they were in contact with drunpf campaign team during campaign...here we go!

If true, not a shocker. Supporters should be ok with this as the Russians and Comey caused the election results.

After getting over the initial shock of this election, the thing that's really sticking with me is the SCOTUS. The magnitude of the reward McConnell and the GOP received for digging in their heals for 9 months. It's sickening. That's not how this is supposed to work.

My thinking all along.