Except insofar as words have meanings, something which eludes you.
Congratulations America - you got the president you deserve
- Thread starter Hercules Rockefeller
- Start date
Except insofar as words have meanings, something which eludes you.
So am I; so are most liberals. Specifically I want to create a society where everyone's lives are better through social change, the use of technology and the use of science. Some past examples of progressive movements:
-The abolition of slavery
-Widespread vaccination
-Safety regulations for highways, airlines and ships
-Public sewage and water systems
-Public health departments
-Public schools
Some progressive causes today are:
-Reduction of fossil fuel usage to ameliorate climate change
-Use of alternative energy
-LGBT rights
Every one of those changes, past and present, had pushback. It's the way of the world. Always has been, always will. I prefer to be on the side trying to make things better, rather than the side trying to make things worse.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Let's face it, may I be honest? You are a dumbshit. If you can't learn or comprehend it isn't my words that need to be specifically tailored so that you can grasp the concept. It's you.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
None of those are why people rejected Harris and certain progressive policies. You know the ones I'm talking about and it isn't slavery or any of the modern policies that you've mentioned and I'm pretty sure you know that.
You just want to win an argument while ignoring the obvious bad policies associated with the progressive left.
Harris wasn't defeated because of anything that you mentioned. It's the debt and policies like defund the police and the aftermath of that and policies that are supposedly well meaning but thoroughly predictable. We are talking about the ones that cause inflation in the name of making something more affordable. Giving someone money to buy a house to make it more affordable when it will do the opposite, etc.
By "inflation" I'm talking about goods inflation plus monetary inflation and therefore a threshold of 7% and not 2.4%.
Something else that isn't working is implying that the college educated have one view and it's yours and therefore the other viewpoint much be ignorant. It's also implying that half the country is as virtuous and you. There are plenty of idiot Republicans and plenty of Democrats so of course you can find some bigot of the other party to make your point with.
You know that's dishonest and dishonesty is hardly virtuous is it?
Last edited:
TheVat
Registered Senior Member
I think the "knowingly" can be questioned. If you are a MAGA, then you tend to believe (as cultists do) that traditional sources of information are heavily marbled with lies and that most court proceedings against your orange messiah are witch hunts. And even if some believed Trump to be a rapist, they possess that cognitively dissonant double standard in which they allow the rich to inhabit a different moral plane - rich guys can take whatever they want. Thus a bug becomes a feature. What's really weird is this kind of doublethink getting traction in the working class.
It's funny, I'm usually seen IRL as polite and diplomatic, but have encountered some MAGA zealots who literally caused my head to become engorged with blood. I had to walk away, as if from some kind of toxic chemical spill, because there were simply no gears or levers for some kind of civil dialogue, no visible common ground. And that's the real tragedy of the divisiveness that Trump spreads. We aren't much of a nation if we can't talk with each other. (one encounter was in a Habitat for Humanity store - I remember one of the volunteers telling me, next time I stopped in, "Don't think I'd ever seen your face turn red before." Haha!)
TheVat
Registered Senior Member
REG: All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
XERXES: Brought peace.
REG: Oh. Peace? Shut up!
The issue here is if that was the actual reason then Harris would have won their votes, because, by nearly all economists' assessment, Trump's policies will raise the debt significantly more, and raise CPI significantly more.
As such, my take on this is that it was not the policies per se, and their debt/inflation effect, but that those who made their decision on this basis were unable (or unwilling) to understand that Trump's policies will be worse. As to whose fault that is, well, one could say that the Dems did a poor job of pushing that message home, of attacking Trump's supposed policies in a manner that people could understand and believe. One could also argue that Trump's voters were either unwilling or unable to understand, or simply didn't care, and we're going to vote for a 34-count felon and serial sexual abuser irrespective of the alternative.
Personally I don't think the Dems did enough to highlight the likely effects of Trump's economic policies, while focussing on his persona and risk-to-demicracy too much (which his voters don't seem to care about, or don't believe). And I also think mainstream media didn't focus enough on his persona, effectively normalising his serious character flaws.
But, hey, it's the American dream: serial abuser, serial fraudster, convicted felon, pathological narcissist and liar, misogynist, racist, likely dementia-sufferer, wannabe-dictator, and other odious personality (and physical) character traits, and yet can still be voted President.
If it didn't also have an impact on the rest of the world I'd be laughing.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Did he affect your day to day life last time?
Because smart, educated, virtuous people don't vote for uppity Black ladies whom they perceive as somehow both inarticulate and as talking down to them? Oh, and with an annoying laugh? Nothing about her hair?
Last edited:
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
As one of my hillbilly cousins put it "Nobody even remembers the name of the last female president." I had to give him points for that. Happily he keeps his hat on so his point doesn't show.
I remember the "good ole days" when the odd flatearther would come here and spew their beliefs and we'd all laugh and laugh. Now, it appears more than half of the country are flatearthers and they're about to take over all three branches of government and destroy the world.
A few more arguments have come to light regarding the outcome of the election. Apparently, this could be a global phenomenon in which every country that's had an election since the pandemic have chosen the other party and brought down the incumbent. This, a reaction to the global inflation caused by the pandemic and the lack of that government to curb the price increases. If Trump had won his second term in 2020, the Dems would have won a landslide this time round,
Not particularly, but I'm not talking about "day to day". And I'm not talking about last time. He will impact climate action, which will likely push back efforts that other countries are trying to make. But more importantly, at least from the pov of a European, he will likely impact the war in Ukraine. He has promised to "end it in a day", or some such boast, but while it has yet to be seen what that will entail, it will have an impact on European security and relations with our Russian neighbour. Whatever he does in that regard may also empower China in their dealings with Taiwan. So, yes, he will almost certainly impact what goes on in the world. He may also put programs and policies in motion that have far longer ramifications for the US, and thus the rest of the world. But time will tell. He will also impact the global economy with whatever he ends up doing to the US economy.
Last time he was just a turnip, and we laughed at him like we laugh at the antics of monkeys at a zoo. That's not to say most of us were not still bewildered by the fact that you elected him in the first place.
This time he looks to be a lot more dangerous. Maybe still not on a "day to day" basis. But he will have an impact.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
I think there is too much emphasis on Trump. He is who he is and the fact is that now, he is the President.
The question is, where do we go from here? I'm more concerned with the US debt but I'll mention Ukraine first. Yes, he could have a great influence there and that does affect Europe. However, why is that the case?
Europe is more affected by what happens and Europe is roughly the size of the US. So if the US does less to supply arms (if that's the way it turns out) then Europe can do more to take up the slack.
If they don't, it's their fault, not ours. The only way for the US to not always be a war is...to not always be at war.
Our biggest problem is debt. It doesn't matter (to me) that many other countries also have this problem. My concern is our debt.
There are things that a government should do and everything else is better served by the private sector. We have some privately run prisons, for example, but IMO that's not something that should be private. That's a government function.
However, the private sector, comparatively speaking, is much more efficient than the government. This is automatic due to competition. If you are wasteful and your product is priced too high, someone else will be more efficient and you'll either change or go out of business.
This doesn't happen with government. People don't like change, without the profit motive or competition, it doesn't happen. Almost no government programs are ever closed down, whether they are still needed or not, whether they are working or not.
This is kind of the idea of having Elon Musk as an advisor to Trump but really this should have been a cabinet level position from the beginning. We have offices that should or could be doing this but they really aren't.
Elon or such a department could cut waste and help improve efficiency and that should be done and it should have already been done but it hasn't been effectively.
In addition to that though, what is necessary is to "fix" the 3 largest expenses which is Social Security, Medicare and the military budget. The solution there isn't to just "cut". It's to fix the problems. Social Security should be run like a pension. In principal it's like just taking everyone's contributions and putting them in an index fund that they can't touch until retirement.
The returns would be much higher and there is nothing not to work. It wouldn't be a drain on the budget, problem solved. Putting money into Treasuries which are issued by the same "organization" owing the retirement benefits is almost criminal.
The current SS problem is just because of the government borrowing from the SS fund and made worse by the constant debasement of the dollar as well.
Medicare reform should pay for itself. We spend more on the healthcare system than anyone else and yet not everyone is covered. Fixing this should save and not cost more money.
The military budget is as high as the next 10 largest militaries combined. This is too much. It's not something we can afford. Most areas of the world need to do more to take care of themselves. We can focus on fewer areas, the ones that most impact our security and fully fund the military for that while ultimately cutting the military budget in half.
These are the things that need to be done whether it was Trump or Harris and now it's Trump. We need to get our debt in check. Most people outside the country complain that we are too militaristic and yet when it's a area close to their country, they are all for it. You can't have both and it's not sustainable in any event.
You are worried about Russia. Do something about it with your military and military budget. Israel wants us to do something about Iran and Japan, South Korea and Taiwan want us to do something about China.
All we can realistically do, long term, is diplomatic with our strong economy as the leverage. If the debt gets out of hand, we no longer have the leverage of a strong economy either.
Trump isn't really the problem. He is a symptom. The system should have been strong enough to deal with him long ago. It wasn't apparently but it still works well enough that the doomsday scenario regarding Trump aren't going to play out.
The rest, from another country's point of view IMO, has more to do with "their" inadequacies than about Trump. Everyone says that the US affects them, they don't like it and therefore they have an opinion as to how we should do this and that but in reality, their problem is internal. Europe shouldn't need the US to fix every problem IMO.
No, they didn't reject her policies.
When Americans were polled and asked about what policies they preferred - WITHOUT mentioning which candidate is proposing each one - 90% supported Harris policies. Only 50% supported Trump stated policies.
When the candidate's name was included, it fell along the usual partisan lines.
If you did not understand that the top half of those were examples of PAST progressive policies, I suggest you do a little studying.
Out of ALL her policies TODAY, the only ones that Americans didn't want was:
-Increasing refugee admissions
-Increasing fees for oil companies who lease land from the US
-Eliminating filibusters
-Ending protections gun manufacturers have against getting sued
The other 40 or so were supported by 50% or more of Americans.
So again, no, it wasn't policies.
And you just don't want to see the ugly facts behind your memes.
No, it's not. Trump will increase the debt far more than Harris will, at least here in reality.
Harris said she does not support defunding the police. That's her policy. In 2020 she said that "this whole movement is about rightly saying we need to take a look at these budgets and figure out whether it reflects the right priorities" No statement that she would defund the police; that is something that the right made up, and that you believed.
And Trump's tariffs will increase inflation by far more - again, here in reality. So if the issue really is inflation, Harris will increase it less than Trump will.
DocumentCloud
www.documentcloud.org
Some are, some aren't. I have been wrong before and I will be wrong again.
It is worth noting a few things:
- Educational level is the strongest predictor of who will vote for Trump outside of party
- In polls, the less someone knows about current events, the more likely they are to vote for Trump. In October 2024, an Ipsos/Reuters poll showed that the less people knew about immigration, crime, and the economy, the more they tended to vote for Trump.
- Sarah Longwell, a republican analyst, was surprised by the answers to simple questions in her focus groups. “When I ask voters in focus groups if they think Donald Trump is an authoritarian, the #1 response by far is, ‘What is an authoritarian?’”
- When asked by exit pollsters what their biggest issues with Harris were, more than 50% of Trump voters answered with mistruths, including:
--Haitian illegal immigrants are eating pets in Ohio
--Inflation is increasing
--Children are having sex change surgery done in schools
--Illegal immigration is going up
--Fentanyl deaths are going up
I make no claims to any level of virtue (other than I am not a rapist or felon)
No, it's not dishonest. Finding an example of a ten year old that was raped and then denied an abortion by republican government is not dishonest; it is pointing out a fact. You may not like that fact, and you may feel that democrats do that far more often. But that's your problem, not mine.
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
Follow T-rump's reign there will be a careful examination of his tenure with indictments to follow.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
I am educated (as are you) and I disagree with some of that you say. That's the reality.No, they didn't reject her policies.
When Americans were polled and asked about what policies they preferred - WITHOUT mentioning which candidate is proposing each one - 90% supported Harris policies. Only 50% supported Trump stated policies.
When the candidate's name was included, it fell along the usual partisan lines.
If you did not understand that the top half of those were examples of PAST progressive policies, I suggest you do a little studying.
Out of ALL her policies TODAY, the only ones that Americans didn't want was:
-Increasing refugee admissions
-Increasing fees for oil companies who lease land from the US
-Eliminating filibusters
-Ending protections gun manufacturers have against getting sued
The other 40 or so were supported by 50% or more of Americans.
So again, no, it wasn't policies.
And you just don't want to see the ugly facts behind your memes.
No, it's not. Trump will increase the debt far more than Harris will, at least here in reality.
Harris said she does not support defunding the police. That's her policy. In 2020 she said that "this whole movement is about rightly saying we need to take a look at these budgets and figure out whether it reflects the right priorities" No statement that she would defund the police; that is something that the right made up, and that you believed.
And Trump's tariffs will increase inflation by far more - again, here in reality. So if the issue really is inflation, Harris will increase it less than Trump will.
DocumentCloud
Some are, some aren't. I have been wrong before and I will be wrong again.
It is worth noting a few things:
- Educational level is the strongest predictor of who will vote for Trump outside of party
- In polls, the less someone knows about current events, the more likely they are to vote for Trump. In October 2024, an Ipsos/Reuters poll showed that the less people knew about immigration, crime, and the economy, the more they tended to vote for Trump.
- Sarah Longwell, a republican analyst, was surprised by the answers to simple questions in her focus groups. “When I ask voters in focus groups if they think Donald Trump is an authoritarian, the #1 response by far is, ‘What is an authoritarian?’”
- When asked by exit pollsters what their biggest issues with Harris were, more than 50% of Trump voters answered with mistruths, including:
--Haitian illegal immigrants are eating pets in Ohio
--Inflation is increasing
--Children are having sex change surgery done in schools
--Illegal immigration is going up
--Fentanyl deaths are going up
I make no claims to any level of virtue (other than I am not a rapist or felon)
No, it's not dishonest. Finding an example of a ten year old that was raped and then denied an abortion by republican government is not dishonest; it is pointing out a fact. You may not like that fact, and you may feel that democrats do that far more often. But that's your problem, not mine.
I don't read the right nonsense so if there is anything that you think I'm repeating, I'm not.
I don't think that Harris publicly stated that defund the police is her position but she is a progressive and that is what many progressive policies are for on a local level. Many progressives think Modern Monetary Policy is good economics. It's not. Biden and Harris thought it was a good idea to pass a lot of spending bills after just "stimulating" the economy during Covid. That was the wrong approach.
I don't think that Haitians eat dogs and cats. I'm not for Harris or Trump. I don't know if Fentanyl deaths are going up. A friend's daughter did die of Fentanyl recently.
Some Trump voters may not know what authoritarian means, I do. Some Harris voters may not know what micro-aggressions are but that is beside the point as well. There are a lot of dumb sh$t Democrats, just walk by a group of union workers on strike.
The fact is Trump got the popular vote and Harris didn't. If you think that the progressive approach is a winning and popular approach, good luck with that. Debt is the problem.
That's fine. Not everyone is going to agree no matter how much education they have.
Agreed!
Ah, so that's what you assumed. OK.
Again, let's compare that to Trump. He has said, publicly, that he thinks "terminating" the US Constitution is called for - and that parts of it are "phony." That's not an assumption, that's what he publicly said.
So we have one person who you assume will do something even though she didn't say it. You have a second person who has openly stated he plans to destroy the document the US was founded on, and indeed lie when he takes his oath of office. And you assume that either defunding or not defunding the police carries a similar weight.
Do you care?
If being a rapist, felon or dictator is required to win elections, then I will always be in the party that loses. If one must accept that trans people are all mentally ill, that women do not have the right to bodily autonomy and that US veterans are suckers and losers, then I will always be in the party that loses. And I am OK with that. That way I can sleep at night.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Where do you stand on slavery?
Trump, an adjudicated rapist gained more votes from women than the last 2 elections, especially young women. Women actually showed up less for Harris then for Clinton, especially Latino women.
That said, white women have actually only voted in plurality twice for Democrats over the last 72 years, 1964 and 1996. White women in general will often vote Conservative.
Black women are the backbone of the Democratic party.
That said, white women have actually only voted in plurality twice for Democrats over the last 72 years, 1964 and 1996. White women in general will often vote Conservative.
Black women are the backbone of the Democratic party.