Also want to add that I am disgusted with the boy scouts. I mean I wouldn't allow my kid to be one already because of the things they have said, but letting this misogynist speak to their annual jamboree (40+k people) is disgusting. Way to raise proper young men #######s.
i agree with all of the above, but why trump and not the others? Why was Trump able to light the gas can when the other entrenched Republican candidates could not. That's still one of the greatest mysteries to me. He crushed Rubio, the golden child, in his own state. Maybe it is the branding as witty mentioned. Even FOX was against him at first but turned once they knew he would win.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
It doesn't explain how Trump, an outsider, won the nomination. Trump in his campaigning actually made people think. Yes that sounds weird but he rallied people where Cruz and Rubio (who are more right-learning) could not.
yeah right...
he made them think that their racism, pettiness and virulent anti-intellectualism was actually acceptable...
He had zero policy, no idea of how to run government, went bankrupt a number of times, screwed contractors and employees... but somehow sold the sheeple that he was "for the people"...
its no wonder every other western democracy was stunned at the sheer ignorance that has infected the conservative movement in the US...I don't call them "Conservatives" as I don't want to insult Conservatives...
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to oldschoolcalgary For This Useful Post:
i agree with all of the above, but why trump and not the others? Why was Trump able to light the gas can when the other entrenched Republican candidates could not. That's still one of the greatest mysteries to me. He crushed Rubio, the golden child, in his own state. Maybe it is the branding as witty mentioned. Even FOX was against him at first but turned once they knew he would win.
My hunch is that many of those who voted for Trump did so because:
1) They were disgusted by the entrenched establishment and wanted something completely new;
2) They thought that their vote, in and of itself, was pretty insignificant, and that everyone else would be voting for one of the other candidates, so their vote for Trump was more an inconsequential protest vote; and/or
3) They are those that make the upper 50% of any measurement possible.
ETA:
I work with a fair bit of those who fall into the first and second categories. Those in the first category are, essentially, of the "throw them all out and let's start over" persuasion. Those in the second category are somewhat akin to the Brexit voters, and it was only after the voted did they go "hey, wait, can I vote again please?"
Last edited by HockeyIlliterate; 07-24-2017 at 12:09 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to HockeyIlliterate For This Useful Post:
i agree with all of the above, but why trump and not the others? Why was trump able to light the gas can when the other entrenched republican candidates could not. That's still one of the greatest mysteries to me. He crushed rubio, the golden child, in his own state. Maybe it is the branding as witty mentioned. Even fox was against him at first but turned once they knew he would win.
He won a fractured primary process because of his ability to combine name recognition, isolationist nationalism, and media manipulation superior to his opponents. I have no doubt that if it was only two people running for that nomination instead of the 17 that were all siphoning off votes that he wouldn't have made it out of there.
He won the presidency by a small margin in part due to Democrats overestimating their grip on the rust belt and the lion's share of his support voting for anything with a (R) next to their name. The mythological moderate Republicans was never going to vote for Hillary, never. The burn it down vote is highly overstated IMO, they're more of a very vocal small minority. The constant media assertion that Hillary had it in the bag helped Donald, it drove down voter turnout which always helps conservatives.
And it's likely what's going to surprise a lot of people with how 2018 turns out. Don't be shocked when these sweeping changes we all seem to think are on the horizon never materialize.
The Following User Says Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
Why was Trump able to light the gas can when the other entrenched Republican candidates could not.
It's important to separate out his victory against the rest of the Republican field, and his national victory.
The second it's important to not overstate his victory, it's not like he led a red wave or had a landslide.
The first, as has been mentioned I think the anti-establishment vote was a significant factor. This impacted the national election as well as some people who voted for Obama for change, then voted Trump for change. You'd think that people would realize that sweeping change just isn't happening, but still keep supporting the change candidate.
Also was his brazen courting of people who previously had been relegated to the shadows (racists, bigots, conspiracy theorists, anti-intellectuals, etc). It's liberating as a voter being able to openly advocate for the execution of journalists rather than having to hide because it's not politically correct to do so.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Tillerson must be pretty frustrated, but I take the prediction news stories with a big grain of salt. How many times was it reported that Priebus or Bannon or whoever was on the verge of being shuffled out.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Tillerson must be pretty frustrated, but I take the prediction news stories with a big grain of salt. How many times was it reported that Priebus or Bannon or whoever was on the verge of being shuffled out.
true... but all of these guys have made a Faustian bargain of sorts... so its tough to feel too much sympathy...
i believe that some, like HR McMaster and Matthis agreed to the positions to act as a kind of bulwark to Trump and also as a result of duty to country - especially so in McMaster's situation... as an active military officer, I am not even sure if he could have turned down his commander in chief?
Regardless, everyone in the administration took on their roles knowing that Trump was a volatile, petulant kid who knew nothing about how governments actually run...but they did the calculus and determined that this would ultimately be good for their careers...
I don't expect many to jump ship... In for a penny, in for a pound as they say...
And it's likely what's going to surprise a lot of people with how 2018 turns out. Don't be shocked when these sweeping changes we all seem to think are on the horizon never materialize.
Well history suggests the GOP will lose seats in Congress. Senate is different as the Dems have a lot of defending to do before they can think about picking up a few seats.
That said, I think a lot depends on the Dems putting a new face on the party. My guess is that it'll be Schumer that becomes that face for 2018. He basically is now. Whether they can accomplish the necessary name and face recognition with him is the question.
CNN poll (I think) on the weekend had even numbers on the public wanting impeachment over those not wanting it....with a bunch still undecided of course. That is something that might be interesting to watch.
I read an article on 538 earlier today that suggested that the Democrats would need to win at least 70-75% of "Trump Disapprovers" to have a shot at the 2018 result they're after. That seems like a tall order.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Also want to add that I am disgusted with the boy scouts. I mean I wouldn't allow my kid to be one already because of the things they have said, but letting this misogynist speak to their annual jamboree (40+k people) is disgusting. Way to raise proper young men #######s.
Don't conflate Scouts Canada with Boy Scouts of America. They have similarities and connections but they are far from the same organization. The distance between them is substantially greater than there is between national subsidiaries of major corporations. They are very distinct entities and always have been.
Scouts Canada is way more inclusive than Boy Scouts of America - hell, my Scout troop was Co-ed back in the early 90's - and while Scouts Canada does require 'spiritual' belief, it does not require its members to subscribe to a religion or hold a belief in God. Scouts Canada also has a policy not to discriminate for reasons of gender, culture, religious belief, or sexual orientation.
I highly, highly recommend investigating your local Scout/Cub etc. troop as something that might be beneficial to your kids.
Don't conflate Scouts Canada with Boy Scouts of America. They have similarities and connections but they are far from the same organization. The distance between them is substantially greater than there is between national subsidiaries of major corporations. They are very distinct entities and always have been.
Scouts Canada is way more inclusive than Boy Scouts of America - hell, my Scout troop was Co-ed back in the early 90's - and while Scouts Canada does require 'spiritual' belief, it does not require its members to subscribe to a religion or hold a belief in God. Scouts Canada also has a policy not to discriminate for reasons of gender, culture, religious belief, or sexual orientation.
I highly, highly recommend investigating your local Scout/Cub etc. troop as something that might be beneficial to your kids.
Tillerson must be pretty frustrated, but I take the prediction news stories with a big grain of salt. How many times was it reported that Priebus or Bannon or whoever was on the verge of being shuffled out.
There is talk that Tillerson is resigning because he has hit a wall in getting Russian sanctions lifted for Exxon. Sessions is just convenient timing.
Now, will the Dems parade Americans that have been helped by Obamacare?
I really only know what I've heard, and for the most part I tend to believe what the "experts" say, Tax cut for the wealthy, 26 million will have no coverage etc. Aren't costs just going up (and providers backing out of certain places because of less profit) because the health industry is privatized and making billions? If so, isn't that the first place to start?
I read an article on 538 earlier today that suggested that the Democrats would need to win at least 70-75% of "Trump Disapprovers" to have a shot at the 2018 result they're after. That seems like a tall order.
considering Hillary won the popular vote and how god awful trump has been, I don't really see it as a tall order...
However, the Dems do understand that their messaging wasn't very good and it appears that they are retooling that message to be more populist to some degree https://www.vox.com/2017/7/23/160166...crats-populism .... whether or not their new strategy of "A Better Deal" works is another question.
I don't think winning ought to be a tall order, however, the variable that remains is who would be the democratic nominee that could appeal to the moderate GOP
Last edited by oldschoolcalgary; 07-24-2017 at 03:14 PM.
