The New American Politics thread

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I explained it in the edit above.

so,,,,"someone who can avoid the divisiveness and negativity"

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

If only we had a uniter, we need a great uniter! This is just hopelessly naive understanding of the current problems.

If by uniter you mean a republican in sheep's clothing, a democrat president (which looks like a long-term trend) that just does whatever republicans went then yes, that would work. That president would "unite"

The bottom line is that you're having intense polarization as a reaction to an increasingly insane extremist sliver of a right wing base.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...migration.html

How can you be a "uniter" while looking at the graph below.

How about a toning down of divisive rhetoric. That's what I'm looking for. Hillary is incapable of it, IMO. Again, that has nothing to do with your arguments and the fact that you don't see the importance of it is laughable given the insults you've been throwing at me.

Of course, you don't live here so that could be a reason why you're having trouble understanding such a simple concept.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

so,,,,"someone who can avoid the divisiveness and negativity"

Yes. Someone smart enough not to poison the rest of us with negativity via the media.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Yes. Someone smart enough not to poison the rest of us with negativity via the media.

lol.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Yes, the whole process is a hot mess. I voted for Obama because I didn't feel he was divisive as a leader, and for the most part he hasn't been. I don't feel that Hillary Clinton is capable of NOT being divsive. It's pretty straight forward and this is the third or fourth time I've explained it.

But it takes two sides to be divisive.

If Hillary wants to put through a bill that lowers interest for student loans to that of the actual interest rate and not have the government (and banks) making money off of students (which they actually just tried to pass but was defeated because only 3 GOP crossed the floor on it), and it gets blocked, who is really being divisive?

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Item #2: I believe a man of his background might have some superior ideas on how to fix healthcare in this country. Lack of personal insurance is a symptom, not the problem.

because he is a doctor?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

lol.

Ah, I should have known.

Maybe you can explain why that is 'lol' worthy.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by MattyC

But it takes two sides to be divisive.

If Hillary wants to put through a bill that lowers interest for student loans to that of the actual interest rate and not have the government (and banks) making money off of students (which they actually just tried to pass but was defeated because only 3 GOP crossed the floor on it), and it gets blocked, who is really being divisive?

How many times is this going to be the response I get?

I'm not talking about passing legislation. I'm talking about leadership.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Ah, I should have known.

Maybe you can explain why that is 'lol' worthy.

your naivety.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

How many times is this going to be the response I get?

I'm not talking about passing legislation. I'm talking about leadership.

You keep using vague, borderline meaningless terminology, that's why no one can understand you.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You keep using vague, borderline meaningless terminology, that's why no one can understand you.

Example please.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

your naivety.

Explain.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

How many times is this going to be the response I get?

I'm not talking about passing legislation. I'm talking about leadership.

Ok, well my thought is that everyone elected, be they congress, senate or president, should have the leadership capabilites to cooperate and compromise with the other side, so I'll ask again:

Do you think there is a Democratic candidate that the GOP would actually cooperate with? Because honestly, from my perspective, it looks like the GOP candidates are getting elected by specifically stating that they WON'T compromise with the current government.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Ok, well my thought is that everyone elected, be they congress, senate or president, should have the leadership capabilites to cooperate and compromise with the other side, so I'll ask again:

Do you think there is a Democratic candidate that the GOP would actually cooperate with? Because honestly, from my perspective, it looks like the GOP candidates are getting elected by specifically stating that they WON'T compromise with the current government.

I seriously doubt it.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Explain.

OK, lets' say you, DFF, gets elected POTUS.

How would you go about being smart enough not to poison the rest of them with negativity via the media.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

OK, lets' say you, DFF, gets elected POTUS.

How would you go about being smart enough not to poison the rest of them with negativity via the media.

I'm starting to wonder if you read the prior post to that where I explained how I believe divisie rhetoric spreads negativity through the country.

You don't speak ill of your opposition in public. That doesn't mean you have to prop them up, but you simply avoid waging battles with the opposition in public to the greatest extent possible (elections aside of course).

Why does thinking that is possible make me naive?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I seriously doubt it.

So "divisive" is really your only choice since an entire party won't work with the other regardless.

So the question to American's becomes, do you vote to keep going the way you have been or give the Democrats enough power to actually pass some legislation, knowing full well that such legislation will likely mean a shift to left on public policy-making, which we all know is just straight up communism (speaking of media fear-mongering)...

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Why does thinking that is possible make me naive?

OK, if I am understanding you.

To fix the problems with the govt,,,
you need to stop the polarization of the parties, by,,,
having a uniting President, who would do this by,,,
being smart enough not to poison the voters with negativity via the media, and he/she would do this by,,,
not speaking ill of their opposition in public?

Am I misunderstanding or missing anything?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by MattyC

So "divisive" is really your only choice since an entire party won't work with the other regardless.

So the question to American's becomes, do you vote to keep going the way you have been or give the Democrats enough power to actually pass some legislation, knowing full well that such legislation will likely mean a shift to left on public policy-making, which we all know is just straight up communism (speaking of media fear-mongering)...

Absolutely that's the question. I'm not sure where you're going with this.

I don't like Hillary, but if Cruz is the GOP nominee and Clinton is the Dem, I'm voting Clinton. I just wish we had better choices.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

OK, if I am understanding you.

To fix the problems with the govt,,,
you need to stop the polarization of the parties, by,,,
having a uniting President, who would do this by,,,
being smart enough not to poison the voters with negativity via the media, and he/she would do this by,,,
not speaking ill of their opposition in public?

Am I misunderstanding or missing anything?

Yes, you are.

That won't "fix the problems with the government". I'm not an idiot as much as you'd like me to be.

I simply believe that we need a President who is above divisive rhetoric. I hope that we get that person. Will we? Probably not. Who is that person? I have no idea. It's NOT Hillary though.

And again, that doesn't mean I won't vote for her.