The New American Politics thread

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by peter12

The future won't be built around big centralized government, but rather a government that facilitates, and enables communities to create flexible solutions to particular problems.

I'm not seeing anything someone could describe as a tool. A tool is device that aids in accomplishing a task. That's not what the above is.

Originally Posted by peter12

They had to get over the Reagan nostalgia first, and I think Trump has done that for them.

Don't be silly. If anything Trump will exacerbate the Reagan nostalgia... his loss will be blamed on him being "not a real conservative like Reagan". Although honestly Republicans get Reagan's appeal completely wrong... they focus on what they believe to be his conservative bonafides when really they should focus on was his communication skills.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

I think some of you forgot this...



That is not compromise, that is obstructionism.

Who cares about compromise? They are from different parties. They don't have to cooperate. Now, granted today's partisanship is like nothing seen before in American history.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by nik-

Leaders of the right in the US on their knees in praise of the Russian ex-KGB pseudo dictator and the right wingers are loving it.

What a time to be alive.

Got this from here (https://twitter.com/williamjordann/s...30137097379840), but here's Putin net favorability, July 2014 versus now

Democrats
July 2014: -54
Aug 2016: -54

Republicans
July 2014: -66
Aug 2016: -27

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...t.pdf#page=172

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...rt.pdf#page=13

[Looch City]

Hahaha Putin must be so flattered.

[photon]

I actually laughed out loud when Trump said Putin called him brilliant during the Commander-In-Chief forum. Trump doesn't know what Putin actually meant brilliant as in colourful, not brilliant as in smart or clever!

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

She is an inveterate liar. He should be allowed on the debate stage with her.

Trump is an inveterate liar as well, but that does not mean he should be on the same stage as Clinton in this particular situation; running for President of the United States of America. Trump has no qualifications to be on that stage in any shape or fashion. The only reason he is in the position he is in is because he managed to tap into the primal fears and deep seeded hatred of the Republican base. They did not vote him as their nominee because he was qualified for the position, they voted him in because he said the things they were ashamed to publicly say themselves. That is not a qualification for political office. We have seen other rodeo clowns (Louie Gohmert, Steven King, Michelle Bachman, etc.) who found their way into congress simply by saying stupid things that voters believed. We found just how ineffective these representatives are and how much damage they can contribute to the system. Allowing a rodeo clown an opportunity to run for President of the most powerful country on the planet is just plain stupid. Donald J. Trump should not be allowed on any political stage as he does not represent the people, he only represents himself and his twisted view of reality.

People aren't thinking straight at all in this thread.

I think you are the one not thinking straight. Someone educated in politics should certainly understand the concept of being qualified for office. There are two candidates in this race, one of which has held office and worked her whole life in the public sector, and another who has zero qualifications for the office of the local city councilor let alone the highest office in the land. If you were reviewing resumes blindly you would laugh and shred Trumps resume without a second thought. The fact that you consider them equals says you are not thinking straight on the topic.

It's a display of the most crude moral absolutism. One can despise Trump - I do - and still despise Clinton. One does not excuse the other. Sure, America will be in a bad place if Trump wins, but I don't think it can take more of the same from Clinton either.

You really need to start paying attention. You really need to start behaving like the political scientist you claim to be. There is someone in this race defining actual policy positions. There is another candidate defining nothing. You fear the one that had developed a tangible platform and think that the empty suit, making wild suggestions that fly in the face of decades of strategic doctrine and alliances, is something that could be an alternative solution? I get that you don’t like the individuals, but when that happens you have to dig deeper to define what the ramifications of each platform would have on the country as a whole. Get with the program.

It's a very bad election for American democracy.

No argument about that, but that doesn’t mean you throw your hands in the air and make a game show out of the process.

I am totally against Trump, but quite sympathetic to Trumpism.

Sympathetic to Trumpism? You mean inveterate lying and cheating? No, that only counts when the name is Clinton, right? Trumpism is the most vile form of political expression to come along in American politics. Trumpism is about lying your ass off, saying the most repugnant things, having no plan to deal with real issues, and pandering to the worst part of people’s souls. And you are sympathetic to that?

Come onnnnnnnnn!

The U.S. has a significant, and growing problem with economic inequality, and the collapse of certain social groups. This has gotten worse under the Obama administration, and it will continue to get worse under Clinton.

Caveat: Trump would do nothing to stop it. He is an ignorant, impulsive buffoon.

So vote Trump because… why? He’s not going to stop anything. In fact, he’s going to make it worse. A lot worse than would happen under Clinton because Trump has suggested stripping out many of the controls that have helped maintain what middle class is left.

Seriously, you’re making no sense here.

The reason for this is that the Democrats are no longer the party of the blue-collar middle-class but the party of the elite. You can see this in Clinton's fundraising strategy, her public appearances, and her close ties to Silicon Valley and Wall Street.

And what are the Republicans again? They’re the party that got us into this mess over the past 40 years. To suggest they have the concept to lead the way out of the wilderness they lead us into in the first place is laughable.

Originally Posted by peter12

We all know that Presidents don't run the economy, and yes, I agree. No good options for the working class right now.

The Republicans have the ideological tools to rebuild, and actually have a positive impact. The party is in ruins, and I hope they use that opportunity to change things.

What ideological tools would those be? I mean, trickle-down economics was a real winner. Corporate welfare has been a real winner. Investment in the military industrial complex has been a winner. Deregulation of almost everything, and especially the banking sector, has been a real winner. What is the next fresh ideological position that is going to get the country back on track? The Republicans, and conservatives in general, have run out of ideas. They have driven the country off a cliff and are looking to extremes to try and find solutions. Time to go back to the party and ideals that built the middle class to begin with. Going back to the times of the robber barons has proven to be an abject failure for the vast majority of Americans.

[nik-]

I think he's referring to Trumpism as in an angry populism centred on the fact that a large portion of the electorate feels ignored by their elected officials regardless of what party wins and who legitimately thinks that their lives have not improved. For many of them, they haven't.

Some of the gripes are legitimate and will be brushed away because the method of delivery is a totally narcissistic psychopath. Which is unfortunate.

That's my assumption anyway, maybe he's referring to Trumpism and unfocused racism and anger?

[Lanny_McDonald]

^^^^ How does Trump represent the portion of the electorate that is ignored? Trump himself said that hen he calls congress they "kiss his ass." I don't see the connection at all. Trump says the hateful things his base is thinking. That is why they love him. Nothing more, nothing less.

[peter12]

You know you are completely in the wrong when you only see tribalism in the other tribe.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by peter12

You know you are completely in the wrong when you only see tribalism in the other tribe.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

You know you are completely in the wrong when you only see tribalism in the other tribe.

Is that the best you got Peter? More philosophical jackassery?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by New Era

^^^^ How does Trump represent the portion of the electorate that is ignored? Trump himself said that hen he calls congress they "kiss his ass." I don't see the connection at all. Trump says the hateful things his base is thinking. That is why they love him. Nothing more, nothing less.

Naw, that's not true. There's definitely an strong underlying message of "these people are corrupt and don't serve you" that forms a base for the support from a lot of people. Racists support Trump, but not all Trump supporters are racist. They're just ignoring it.

Pretending it's solely "racists gonna racist" is dishonest.

[jammies]

One thing this election has highlighted is the vast superiority of parliamentary democracy over the American model. It didn't last a century without a civil war, and it's pretty well a civil war, albeit in slow motion, again.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by nik-

Naw, that's not true. There's definitely an strong underlying message of "these people are corrupt and don't serve you" that forms a base for the support from a lot of people. Racists support Trump, but not all Trump supporters are racist. They're just ignoring it.

Pretending it's solely "racists gonna racist" is dishonest.

It's definitely not solely that but it can't be discounted how much more comfortable it makes people to give a white guy control again. It doesn't need every label on it whether that be racist, bigot, misogynistic, or plain old stupidity. Simple people take comfort in simple things, and going back to having a strong man run the country is as simple as it gets. The policy (of which he has next to none) is irrelevant, it's the symbol that matters.

[HotHotHeat]

During the electoral wave of ’54, Lincoln was in Illinois and had just re-entered politics to fight the pro-slavery Kansas-Nebraska Act. Although he lost his Senate run, he famously declared his opposition to slavery. That following summer, Lincoln wrote to his lifelong friend Joshua Speed about the Trumpism of the 1800s: “Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that ‘all men are created equal.’ When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read ‘all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.’ ”

How Lincoln fought Trumpism in the 1850s

[peter12]

Originally Posted by jammies

One thing this election has highlighted is the vast superiority of parliamentary democracy over the American model. It didn't last a century without a civil war, and it's pretty well a civil war, albeit in slow motion, again.

Oh yes, this is completely true.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by nik-

Naw, that's not true. There's definitely an strong underlying message of "these people are corrupt and don't serve you" that forms a base for the support from a lot of people. Racists support Trump, but not all Trump supporters are racist. They're just ignoring it.

Pretending it's solely "racists gonna racist" is dishonest.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but suggesting Trump is resonating because he is the champion of the people in fighting an imbalanced and corrupt system is also dishonest. Trump's actions show this is a false narrative. No one can honestly believe that he is making points with people because he can understand the plight of the down-trodden. Trump is one of those that has done the down trodding. Surely even the most brainless of rubes can see that? So there must be something else. The other option is... ?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

It's definitely not solely that but it can't be discounted how much more comfortable it makes people to give a white guy control again. It doesn't need every label on it whether that be racist, bigot, misogynistic, or plain old stupidity. Simple people take comfort in simple things, and going back to having a strong man run the country is as simple as it gets. The policy (of which he has next to none) is irrelevant, it's the symbol that matters.

No, I'm not discounting it at all. That campaign is a tire fire of racism and ridiculousness. I'm just saying there are reasons that some of his message resonated, particularly early on (and less so now since he doesn't seem to talk about it anymore) with people that aren't just racists or will vote Red no matter what.

It's a shame in a way, because there are some things he brought up which I feel are legitimate. In no way was he capable of bringing about a solution to any of them, but still. However, because he's such a rampaging blowhard, all that stuff is out the window now and who can ever bring it up again without being lumped in with the disaster that is this Republican election cycle?

Originally Posted by New Era

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but suggesting Trump is resonating because he is the champion of the people in fighting an imbalanced and corrupt system is also dishonest. Trump's actions show this is a false narrative. No one can honestly believe that he is making points with people because he can understand the plight of the down-trodden. Trump is one of those that has done the down trodding. Surely even the most brainless of rubes can see that? So there must be something else. The other option is... ?

No, it's not dishonest because it actually happened. He wasn't going to fix it, and was probably guilty in aiding and abetting that very system, but that was his message in part, and a good portion of people liked him because if it. What do you think the entire "he's an outsider and not corrupt" segment of his support is referring to? I mean, they're wrong, but it's legitimately a reason for some of his support.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by peter12

Who cares about compromise? They are from different parties. They don't have to cooperate. Now, granted today's partisanship is like nothing seen before in American history.

You really have no idea how their system of government works, do you?

Edit: this was too much of a drive by comment on its own. The American system of government and party system is set up to almost always have opposing forces, such that the only way to get things done is via compromise. There's a great tradition of bi-partisanship though it seems almost a quaint notion in recent years. How can you deny that compromise is important in this system??

[Drak]

Originally Posted by nik-

Naw, that's not true. There's definitely an strong underlying message of "these people are corrupt and don't serve you" that forms a base for the support from a lot of people. Racists support Trump, but not all Trump supporters are racist. They're just ignoring it.

Pretending it's solely "racists gonna racist" is dishonest.

Racism and bigotry is a big deal. Promoting racism and bigotry as part of the party platform is harmful to society and the people its targeting. Supporting that candidate and saying you're ignoring the racism bigotry aspect makes you just as guilty as the actual bigots and racists.