USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
POTUS 45.08: Suckers
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
- Status
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
LOL. The only thing he and Jackson have in common is a feverish desire to deport people of color, and re-declare Manifest Destiny for white Christian men.
Ol' Hickory crawled out of poverty to lead an army and a country, was much smarter, didn't dodge military service, lived with lead embedded in him for decades, and was fiercely loyal to his wife, even after she died young. He had his faults, but he's a giant of a man compared to SCROTUS.
*stick tap*
LOL. The only thing he and Jackson have in common is a feverish desire to deport people of color, and re-declare Manifest Destiny for white Christian men.
Ol' Hickory crawled out of poverty to lead an army and a country, was much smarter, didn't dodge military service, lived with lead embedded in him for decades, and was fiercely loyal to his wife, even after she died young. He had his faults, but he's a giant of a man compared to SCROTUS.
*stick tap*
D
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Guest
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
Nothing shocking here. Focus groups from dems suggest voters think democrats will favor the wealthy not the republicans.
Excuse me while I go weep for a while.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-card-a:homepage/story&utm_term=.93937e891d5e
Nothing shocking here. Focus groups from dems suggest voters think democrats will favor the wealthy not the republicans.
Excuse me while I go weep for a while.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-card-a:homepage/story&utm_term=.93937e891d5e
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
He actually said "No one ever asks why we had a Civil War...". I mean outside of the hundreds of books published each decade about it, the thousands of Thesis', Capstones, Dissertations, Position Papers, Scholarly articles, historical reviews published each year and well the Ken Burn's doc
I also enjoyed this:
"He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War, he said, 'There's no reason for this.'"
Jackson, the nation's seventh president, died in 1845. The Civil War began in 1861.
I especially liked when he compared himself to Andrew Jackson...who was mean and nasty and fought a battle with the elites. Apparently Trump is not elite
He actually said "No one ever asks why we had a Civil War...". I mean outside of the hundreds of books published each decade about it, the thousands of Thesis', Capstones, Dissertations, Position Papers, Scholarly articles, historical reviews published each year and well the Ken Burn's doc
I also enjoyed this:
"He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War, he said, 'There's no reason for this.'"
Jackson, the nation's seventh president, died in 1845. The Civil War began in 1861.
I especially liked when he compared himself to Andrew Jackson...who was mean and nasty and fought a battle with the elites. Apparently Trump is not elite
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
This is true today. It's why congress has an approval rating under 20% in most polls but in a year with a lot of turnover over 90% of them still get reelected. People are unwilling to admit that THEY are the problem, only everyone else is voting for the wrong person. What bothers me most though is that in the past, at least people were willing to lie about who they voted for when they realized it was a mistake. Find someone in 1974 who admitted voting for Nixon. Now people not only are still proud of their vote for Trump, they are stupid enough to believe he is doing well. Our pride will always get in the way of admitting a mistake, but at least 40 years ago we KNEW it ended up being a mistake to vote for tricky Dick and wouldn't fess up to voting for him. We're much dumber now and my guess is that in 2018 virtually everyone who voted for Trump that is still alive will claim he is doing a great job as president.
This is true today. It's why congress has an approval rating under 20% in most polls but in a year with a lot of turnover over 90% of them still get reelected. People are unwilling to admit that THEY are the problem, only everyone else is voting for the wrong person. What bothers me most though is that in the past, at least people were willing to lie about who they voted for when they realized it was a mistake. Find someone in 1974 who admitted voting for Nixon. Now people not only are still proud of their vote for Trump, they are stupid enough to believe he is doing well. Our pride will always get in the way of admitting a mistake, but at least 40 years ago we KNEW it ended up being a mistake to vote for tricky Dick and wouldn't fess up to voting for him. We're much dumber now and my guess is that in 2018 virtually everyone who voted for Trump that is still alive will claim he is doing a great job as president.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
The party that taxes the rich to the point they apparently cant stand it anymore favor the rich? The party that cuts taxes to the rich placing more burden on the poor care more about the average citizen? Would someone teach these people how to think...
The party that taxes the rich to the point they apparently cant stand it anymore favor the rich? The party that cuts taxes to the rich placing more burden on the poor care more about the average citizen? Would someone teach these people how to think...
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
Jackson was a jerk, but he was an interesting jerk. He postponed the Civil War for 30 years by completely betraying the nullification movement that had brought him to power; he undercut Calhoun and faced down the South Carolina hicks as effectively as Bobby Kennedy faced down the segregation cowards in the South 130 years later. Like Hamlet said, "He was a man. Take him for all in all." He's roasting in hell, but he's probably far more comfortable there than with that blue nose JQA in heaven.
Jackson was a jerk, but he was an interesting jerk. He postponed the Civil War for 30 years by completely betraying the nullification movement that had brought him to power; he undercut Calhoun and faced down the South Carolina hicks as effectively as Bobby Kennedy faced down the segregation cowards in the South 130 years later. Like Hamlet said, "He was a man. Take him for all in all." He's roasting in hell, but he's probably far more comfortable there than with that blue nose JQA in heaven.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
All the more reason to repeal Obamacare, get those tax cuts for corporations and the 1% passed, and aggressively deport migrant workers. Trumpettes can keep living in their little racist play world until his policies start to hit them in the wallet - rising prices at the grocery, continued wage stagnation, and the continued decline of available blue collar labor.
All the more reason to repeal Obamacare, get those tax cuts for corporations and the 1% passed, and aggressively deport migrant workers. Trumpettes can keep living in their little racist play world until his policies start to hit them in the wallet - rising prices at the grocery, continued wage stagnation, and the continued decline of available blue collar labor.
D
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Guest
Like this? What a fantastic piece. Good work, Tennessee.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/1/15373372/obamacare-tennessee-zero-insurers
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
The creepy thing about this is how all the righty groups are rushing to defend Trump when this is ostensibly the thing they were always afraid of when the president was a "D."
It is remarkable how the Trump presidency has laid bare the total hypocrisy of the "Constitutional" right. Take everything they ever claimed the left "really" wanted, then make it an actual policy objective by their guy, and suddenly it's fine nothing to see here move along.
Can you imagine how Hot Air would have written about this if the letters were switched. But instead, we get this apologia.
The right is utterly without principle.
The creepy thing about this is how all the righty groups are rushing to defend Trump when this is ostensibly the thing they were always afraid of when the president was a "D."
It is remarkable how the Trump presidency has laid bare the total hypocrisy of the "Constitutional" right. Take everything they ever claimed the left "really" wanted, then make it an actual policy objective by their guy, and suddenly it's fine nothing to see here move along.
Can you imagine how Hot Air would have written about this if the letters were switched. But instead, we get this apologia.
The right is utterly without principle.
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
And somehow we are all supposed to stand up for JUST the second amendment.
Nothing else.
And somehow we are all supposed to stand up for JUST the second amendment.
Nothing else.
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
I'm making an assumption that could be way off here, but I'm guessing the people polled were overwhelmingly white. Obama did not turn off white voters in 2008 or 2012. Clinton wrote them off completely in 2016. While Clinton fatigue was a huge obstacle to overcome, she still could have won enough votes in PA, MI or WI to prevail but made no effort to connect with white working class and middle class voters. Identity politics cost votes.
During the campaign I spoke with a lot of white voters who were not necessarily racist, but had some misguided perceptions about matters of racial (and other forms of) discrimination. They saw the Democratic party -- and Clinton's 2016 campaign -- as being overly focused on identity politics when their issue was still jobs, jobs, jobs.
Even though the economic numbers were better in 2016 than in 2012 and far better than in 2008, the level of financial uncertainly and insecurity is still sky high. Especially in the areas of states like OH, PA, MI and WI where you have working class white voters who went for Obama in the previous elections. He spoke to these concerns first and foremost. In 2008 it was his only choice because the crisis we were in the midst of was the worst of our lifetimes (and really the worst we had ever faced had it not been for the modest safety net made up of food stamps, unemployment insurance, medicare and medicaid) and required someone with a real plan for the economy and not just a running mate in red pumps with nice legs to distract us.
While some of the responses in the linked poll and article are disturbing I still believe that completely focusing on real fixes for the economy (which includes a fair tax system) as the concern in 2018 (and 2020) is the way that Democrats and progressives can succeed electorally. It just so happens that the pols who know what a fair system to middle class and working class people looks like also know what a system that is fair to women and immigrants and gay people and people of color looks like. We have to first elect the right people if we want to see the right things done.
I'm making an assumption that could be way off here, but I'm guessing the people polled were overwhelmingly white. Obama did not turn off white voters in 2008 or 2012. Clinton wrote them off completely in 2016. While Clinton fatigue was a huge obstacle to overcome, she still could have won enough votes in PA, MI or WI to prevail but made no effort to connect with white working class and middle class voters. Identity politics cost votes.
During the campaign I spoke with a lot of white voters who were not necessarily racist, but had some misguided perceptions about matters of racial (and other forms of) discrimination. They saw the Democratic party -- and Clinton's 2016 campaign -- as being overly focused on identity politics when their issue was still jobs, jobs, jobs.
Even though the economic numbers were better in 2016 than in 2012 and far better than in 2008, the level of financial uncertainly and insecurity is still sky high. Especially in the areas of states like OH, PA, MI and WI where you have working class white voters who went for Obama in the previous elections. He spoke to these concerns first and foremost. In 2008 it was his only choice because the crisis we were in the midst of was the worst of our lifetimes (and really the worst we had ever faced had it not been for the modest safety net made up of food stamps, unemployment insurance, medicare and medicaid) and required someone with a real plan for the economy and not just a running mate in red pumps with nice legs to distract us.
While some of the responses in the linked poll and article are disturbing I still believe that completely focusing on real fixes for the economy (which includes a fair tax system) as the concern in 2018 (and 2020) is the way that Democrats and progressives can succeed electorally. It just so happens that the pols who know what a fair system to middle class and working class people looks like also know what a system that is fair to women and immigrants and gay people and people of color looks like. We have to first elect the right people if we want to see the right things done.
Last edited:
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
#2A is all the rurals have left to feel powerful and relevant. Let Farmer Bob have his AR-15, if it helps him fake-believe he's ready to start the 2nd American Revolution, as long as he's only using it to turn varmints into Swiss cheese.
#2A is all the rurals have left to feel powerful and relevant. Let Farmer Bob have his AR-15, if it helps him fake-believe he's ready to start the 2nd American Revolution, as long as he's only using it to turn varmints into Swiss cheese.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
I want to care...but I dont. It is very sad but Tennessee did this to themselves. They voted for the "Party of Personal Responsibility" and sure didnt want non of dat Socialism from that Negra Fella so they can sit on it and twirl. Now, I dont want my tax dollars doing anything to help them out going forward.
I want to care...but I dont. It is very sad but Tennessee did this to themselves. They voted for the "Party of Personal Responsibility" and sure didnt want non of dat Socialism from that Negra Fella so they can sit on it and twirl. Now, I dont want my tax dollars doing anything to help them out going forward.
rufus
rock and roller
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
Even more appropriate, In 1972, we had Republicans willing to hold Nixon accountable for what he did, and wanting to get to the bottom of it. Today, not so much.
Even more appropriate, In 1972, we had Republicans willing to hold Nixon accountable for what he did, and wanting to get to the bottom of it. Today, not so much.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
Well according to people on the Ethics Committee they work FOR the President, not as a check against him.
Well according to people on the Ethics Committee they work FOR the President, not as a check against him.
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
I love this gem:
"It was during the revolution that Jackson first confronted and defied an arrogant elite.
Although he did fight in the Revolution, Jackson was only 8 years old when the war began. He didn't volunteer to fight until the ripe ol' age of 13. I seriously doubt Jackson even knew the reasons why he was fighting, other than that they needed bodies.
I love this gem:
"It was during the revolution that Jackson first confronted and defied an arrogant elite.
Although he did fight in the Revolution, Jackson was only 8 years old when the war began. He didn't volunteer to fight until the ripe ol' age of 13. I seriously doubt Jackson even knew the reasons why he was fighting, other than that they needed bodies.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
I love this. Trump claimed Jackson was in the Revolution and the Civil War. I almost missed that. What a maroon
I love this. Trump claimed Jackson was in the Revolution and the Civil War. I almost missed that. What a maroon
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers
Although I suspect they were "willing" in the sense that you are willing to call the cops on your uncle when he deliberately sets your house on fire. It was hardly a principled stand by Goldwater et al. They were saving their own skins. Hence Nixon's line, "the trouble with Republicans is at the first sign of trouble they start acting like cannibals."
Although I suspect they were "willing" in the sense that you are willing to call the cops on your uncle when he deliberately sets your house on fire. It was hardly a principled stand by Goldwater et al. They were saving their own skins. Hence Nixon's line, "the trouble with Republicans is at the first sign of trouble they start acting like cannibals."
- Status