|
Post by mouse on Aug 15, 2016 2:32:36 GMT -5
From the way things look in the Sunday political round up, Donald and his team may have waited too late to clean up the act. I do see his dilemma. Many in his huge base of supporters are that ol' mass of humanity that has spent a lifetime waiting for their sort of candidate ... a racist, bigoted Hawk, playing into their anger. Is that really who Donald Trump is? IMO, that's up for debate, but I do think he would like to keep that great wave of voters, engaged and activated, until November. That means spending at least a little time pandering to them. Surely the media realizes this! cJust a different perspective, I suggest that many who support him are not racist or bigoted or a hawk, nor are they angry. Surely frustrated with politicians, but not angry. Mostly they want a reduction in the size of an intrusive government, a reduction in federal taxes, a rebuild of our military, and those who look into it an adherence to the Constitution by those elected to government. However, it is true that if these people are continually referred to as racist, bigoted, and hawks, then for a segment of our population that untruth will become the same as being true. """"Just a different perspective, I suggest that many who support him are not racist or bigoted or a hawk,""" sounds like you have the same spin machines going on as Europe and the UK have....[and yes I would add very angry ]the moment any one doesn't agree with the politics/aims of the day..they are imediately labled with offensive labels in the case of Europe/UK they become far right makes no difference that its politos who have caused numerous bad situations..any one who voices their concerns is labeled whether its true or not and those who do the labeling are usually the very people who have caused the distress and anger by their total contempt of the people as they play the system to get deep deep into the trough of self serving and ineptitude...
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 15, 2016 2:58:10 GMT -5
cJust a different perspective, I suggest that many who support him are not racist or bigoted or a hawk, nor are they angry. Surely frustrated with politicians, but not angry. Mostly they want a reduction in the size of an intrusive government, a reduction in federal taxes, a rebuild of our military, and those who look into it an adherence to the Constitution by those elected to government. However, it is true that if these people are continually referred to as racist, bigoted, and hawks, then for a segment of our population that untruth will become the same as being true. """"Just a different perspective, I suggest that many who support him are not racist or bigoted or a hawk,""" sounds like you have the same spin machines going on as Europe and the UK have....[and yes I would add very angry ]the moment any one doesn't agree with the politics/aims of the day..they are imediately labled with offensive labels in the case of Europe/UK they become far right makes no difference that its politos who have caused numerous bad situations..any one who voices their concerns is labeled whether its true or not and those who do the labeling are usually the very people who have caused the distress and anger by their total contempt of the people as they play the system to get deep deep into the trough of self serving and ineptitude... mouse, it's obvious you know little to nothing about the segment of voters I was referring to. They've always been here. They're the ones who responded positively to Sarah Palin's rabble rousing. Has nothing whatsoever to do with PC. Men is talking about the decent Republicans, but we have many who are not interested in sound government but in aggressive, authoritarian government to reflect their views. it isn't really a pol. party thing. These are the off-spring of the people who used to be Dixie-crats. The bottom feeders. A clue might be that David Duke has decided to run for congress again. If you're on the side of these guys, we have less in common than I ever supposed. lol
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 15, 2016 4:02:40 GMT -5
"""mouse, it's obvious you know little to nothing about the segment of voters I was referring to. They've always been here. They're the ones who responded positively to Sarah Palin's rabble rousing."""" every country has its fair share of the types you are reffering to...and no I am not on their side nor would I give them the time of day however the fact is and its a true fact that those who are weary of political troughing and contemptious government.. ...that we have in the west reached a point where any alternative from the norms laid down by the ruling elite is seen as far right or bigotry..racism or what ever we have seen it in both Europe and the UK all to often recently and the rise of Trump indicates that America too has those who are tired of the self serving..the career politos out for them selves.. people in general have lost all faith in the system..a system which does not work for them or their betterment.. government for the people by the people....trouble is the what the people want doesn't coincide with what government wants or intends the discontent that saw Trumps rise is real and wide spread not down to one section of voters..and while you may be lucky and he will not be elected to the whitehouse..the basic problems that allowed his rise still remain...problems brought about by inadequate self serving polititions
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 15, 2016 13:41:56 GMT -5
I still don't think you understand the situation. Our political factions are splintered ... possibly worse than ever before.
The Democratic party is split between 1) Voters who lean progressive and are very disheartened Bernie did't turn out to be the nominee, and will vote write in or not at all, 2) Voters who enthusiastically support Hillary, 3) Voters who are moderates but do not like Hillary and may or may not vote for her and might vote for Trump.
The Republican party has 1) the establishment and it's supporters, who were virtually left without a candidate this time and it's anybody's guess how they'll vote, 2) the raggle-taggle tea partiers who must be horrified at the way things have worked out, but who will probably vote for Trump, 3) the Constitutionalists, who will probably vote for Trump out of fear Hillary will appoint liberal SCOTUS justices, 4) the mostly bad apples I mentioned before ... bigots, racists and haters who will sweep Trump into office if they can based on his rhetoric and the various promises he's made to satisfy their perceived needs. He can't rock that last boat for fear his campaign will go down with a hole in the hull.
mouse, that last group are not simply called racists, bigots and haters as any kind of labeling. They include the KKK and have a long legacy. If you get too tangled up in your own prejudices, you'll have a skewered idea about what's going on.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 15, 2016 14:07:05 GMT -5
I still don't think you understand the situation. Our political factions are splintered ... possibly worse than ever before. The Democratic party is split between 1) Voters who lean progressive and are very disheartened Bernie did't turn out to be the nominee, and will vote write in or not at all, 2) Voters who enthusiastically support Hillary, 3) Voters who are moderates but do not like Hillary and may or may not vote for her and might vote for Trump. The Republican party has 1) the establishment and it's supporters, who were virtually left without a candidate this time and it's anybody's guess how they'll vote, 2) the raggle-taggle tea partiers who must be horrified at the way things have worked out, but who will probably vote for Trump, 3) the Constitutionalists, who will probably vote for Trump out of fear Hillary will appoint liberal SCOTUS justices, 4) the mostly bad apples I mentioned before ... bigots, racists and haters who will sweep Trump into office if they can based on his rhetoric and the various promises he's made to satisfy their perceived needs. He can't rock that last boat for fear his campaign will go down with a hole in the hull. mouse, that last group are not simply called racists, bigots and haters as any kind of labeling. They include the KKK and have a long legacy. If you get too tangled up in your own prejudices, you'll have a skewered idea about what's going on. Mouse, while Beth and I will define the splintered nature of our political factions somewhat differently, she is quite correct as to the lack of cohesive political actions and those splits are very wide in both political parties. And while some say, ‘then I’ll vote Libertarian,’ I will guarantee that from my years in that (the strongest) third party the sub groups and splits inside there are very strong. Right now I believe that anything can happen in the next election and I certainly would not bet on the outcome. Barring the possibility of some outside event causing a ‘coming together’ within the country, no matter who wins the result will produce contention that will be on going and likely changing in focus from month to month. I think to find something this divisive we'd have to go back to the days of the Copper Heads leading into the Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 16, 2016 5:18:54 GMT -5
obviously I am not on the ground so to speak but I do understand the wide differences which exist from such as the kkk you mentioned Beth but to the land grabbers through to the out right nutters on various themes religion etc and from there to the non extreme voters who just want a fair deal and an uncorrupt system where they can work and house and provide for their families and get on with their lives my point is that all over the western world[as that's the one we live in and are concerned about on a daily basis]there is unrest and distrust to varying degrees...and people in general a sick of the antics and self serving of polititions..who have failed time after time to meet the needs of the people..and once in power treat the people with absolute contempt the fact that Trump could come so far is indicative of this under currant of anger distrust..which as Men says """I think to find something this divisive we'd have to go back to the days of the Copper Heads leading into the Civil War."" and as Beth mentions """who will probably vote for Trump out of fear Hillary will appoint liberal"""
to vote in a government or leader...it should be to vote in the person though best to lead for ALL the people not to vote via fear of the alternatives
its come to a pretty pass in the western world when one is reduced to voting the lesser of two evils.....
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 16, 2016 5:28:16 GMT -5
Those aren't the ones that will elect him,though, mouse. His huge numbers come from the rabble. Then, the angry and fearful, might carry him on to a win.
But, I doubt it .. I really do. You guys will probably need to look for your amusement elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 16, 2016 10:20:37 GMT -5
Those aren't the ones that will elect him,though, mouse. His huge numbers come from the rabble. Then, the angry and fearful, might carry him on to a win. But, I doubt it .. I really do. You guys will probably need to look for your amusement elsewhere. Beth I have not heard that term (rabble) in years and then mostly in historic accounts of things such as the French revolution. I really don’t believe that you meant it in that context, but if you did, what is the line that separates ‘rabble’ from others.
|
|
|
Post by Dex on Aug 16, 2016 11:28:53 GMT -5
Those aren't the ones that will elect him,though, mouse. His huge numbers come from the rabble. Then, the angry and fearful, might carry him on to a win. But, I doubt it .. I really do. You guys will probably need to look for your amusement elsewhere. Beth I have not heard that term (rabble) in years and then mostly in historic accounts of things such as the French revolution. I really don’t believe that you meant it in that context, but if you did, what is the line that separates ‘rabble’ from others. lolololol Men an tol, I've never seen anybody that could parse like you do when you're looking for something to be offended about or disagree with. Just my impression. I wouldn't try to answer this and take the pleasure away from Beth.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 16, 2016 12:26:41 GMT -5
Dex, thank you for the reply, but then I know of few others who seem so intent on defining what I meant. I expressed doubt as to how it was meant and how those who are part of the rabble are different from others?
I guess that is something I should have asked. But just to be clear, I though was only trying to clarify the use of the term as it is not something that is often used in modern parlance. When it is, I have only seen it used as demeaning as to those the speaker assumes to be in that category.
It appears that you have some other meaning and I would certainly appreciate being informed as to that 'other' meaning.
My intent was, and is, no more than that. I wasn't offended I least I thought I wasn't but clearly you are setting me straight as to my being offended. And I wasn't trying to disagree, simply trying to be informed.
Obviously I had no idea as to what I was really doing and why.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 16, 2016 12:46:50 GMT -5
Those aren't the ones that will elect him,though, mouse. His huge numbers come from the rabble. Then, the angry and fearful, might carry him on to a win. But, I doubt it .. I really do. You guys will probably need to look for your amusement elsewhere. Beth I have not heard that term (rabble) in years and then mostly in historic accounts of things such as the French revolution. I really don’t believe that you meant it in that context, but if you did, what is the line that separates ‘rabble’ from others. Picky, picky. It was an exaggeration, of course, but in the general ball park. rab·ble ˈrabəl/ noun noun: rabble; plural noun: rabbles
a disorderly crowd; a mob. "he was met by a rabble of noisy, angry youths" synonyms: mob, crowd, throng, gang, swarm, horde, pack, mass, group
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 16, 2016 13:56:37 GMT -5
Beth I have not heard that term (rabble) in years and then mostly in historic accounts of things such as the French revolution. I really don’t believe that you meant it in that context, but if you did, what is the line that separates ‘rabble’ from others. Picky, picky. It was an exaggeration, of course, but in the general ball park. rab·ble ˈrabəl/ noun noun: rabble; plural noun: rabbles
a disorderly crowd; a mob. "he was met by a rabble of noisy, angry youths" synonyms: mob, crowd, throng, gang, swarm, horde, pack, mass, group
Yes, I guess you are using the term as it is typically defined. Your comment, “ . . . It was an exaggeration, of course, but in the general ball park. . . . “whether it was an exaggeration or, in the general ball park, it shows a wide difference from my perspective. I see them as voters, many different types of voters from many different backgrounds, probably many people with whom I would not agree on many things, but never the less, voters. The last I was aware, even the most ignorant, the most unsophisticated, were still voters. Thinking of them as something like, “. . . a disorderly crowd; a mob. . . .“ is not what I see among his supporters. Maybe passionate, concerned, frustrated with an increasingly intrusive government but certainly following the rules of conduct within a community. But not as "a rabble of noisy, angry youths" Am I picky? I guess so, but words are important and here I see such words as contributing to an undeserved near fear of Donald Trump supporters. This election cycle is critical on defining the direction of our country for a generation to come. It is important for voters to have the best information possible on which they will make their decision and it appears that getting such information from either candidate will be challenging, but (apparently) intentionally demeaning voters (even as exaggeration) would seem to help nothing but split the people farther apart.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 16, 2016 14:01:46 GMT -5
Yes, you are being picky to a ridiculous degree.
Obviously, Dex was right.
end of
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on Aug 16, 2016 15:14:06 GMT -5
Picky, picky. It was an exaggeration, of course, but in the general ball park. rab·ble ˈrabəl/ noun noun: rabble; plural noun: rabbles
a disorderly crowd; a mob. "he was met by a rabble of noisy, angry youths" synonyms: mob, crowd, throng, gang, swarm, horde, pack, mass, group
Yes, I guess you are using the term as it is typically defined. Your comment, “ . . . It was an exaggeration, of course, but in the general ball park. . . . “whether it was an exaggeration or, in the general ball park, it shows a wide difference from my perspective. I see them as voters, many different types of voters from many different backgrounds, probably many people with whom I would not agree on many things, but never the less, voters. The last I was aware, even the most ignorant, the most unsophisticated, were still voters. Thinking of them as something like, “. . . a disorderly crowd; a mob. . . .“ is not what I see among his supporters. Maybe passionate, concerned, frustrated with an increasingly intrusive government but certainly following the rules of conduct within a community. But not as "a rabble of noisy, angry youths" Am I picky? I guess so, but words are important and here I see such words as contributing to an undeserved near fear of Donald Trump supporters. This election cycle is critical on defining the direction of our country for a generation to come. It is important for voters to have the best information possible on which they will make their decision and it appears that getting such information from either candidate will be challenging, but (apparently) intentionally demeaning voters (even as exaggeration) would seem to help nothing but split the people farther apart. Well, Men, you are wearing your "victim badge" today, I guess. How do you know she didn't mean "a crowd" or "a group". You picked the choices you could be offended about. tsk tsk You've managed to get the thread all off topic. Surely you didn't mean to do something like that. If she had used the same word about a Clinton rally, I'm betting you wouldn't have said a word. I think she meant "crowd" and you've gone PC.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 16, 2016 20:11:13 GMT -5
Possible roles for Bill.Bill Clinton couldn’t serve in Hillary Clinton’s cabinet if she’s elected president, but he could have a powerful, less formal role in her administration, according to an MSNBC analysis of federal law governing the appointment of relatives. Hillary Clinton this week said she would put her husband “in charge of revitalizing the economy,” especially in economically depressed areas, leading many to wonder what shape the former president’s role would take. Ironically, Hillary Clinton’s role in her husband’s administration provides the best precedent for what the former president’s job might look like. “I have asked, actually, to be given the job of trying to help every part of the United States that has been left out and left behind economically,” Bill Clinton said while campaigning for his wife in Puerto Rico Tuesday. “And I think it is very, very important.” www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bill-clinton-cant-serve-hillarys-cabinet Should we worry about Bill Clinton’s role in a Hillary Clinton administration? We’ve never had a First Gentleman in America before, but more to the point, we’ve never had a presidential spouse like Bill Clinton. So it’s natural to wonder what he’ll be doing should Hillary Clinton become our next president, and the Clinton campaign has an answer, one that’s politically beneficial to them, but probably wrong on the merits. On the campaign trail in the last couple of days, Clinton has said that her husband would be “in charge of revitalizing the economy, because, you know, he knows how to do it,” but also said he wouldn’t be in the cabinet. So what would he be doing? Here’s the Clinton campaign’s clarification: Aides said Mr. Clinton’s role would be narrowly defined to focus on hard-hit areas of the country, such as the Rust Belt, and they rejected any implication that Mrs. Clinton would outsource a central part of her administration to her spouse. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/05/17/should-we-worry-about-bill-clintons-role-in-a-hillary-clinton-administration/?utm_term=.0d9d88808094
|
|