RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

The suffering of Trump voters the last 8 yrs

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/17 6:16 pm    ::: The suffering of Trump voters the last 8 yrs Reply Reply with quote

There will never be a President who does everything to everyone’s liking. There are things President Obama (and President Clinton) did that I do not like and conversely there are things I can point to that the Presidents Bush did that I agree with. So I am not 100% in lock step with the outgoing President but have supported him and the overall job he did.

And, if you recall, during the Presidential Campaign back in 2008 the campaign was halted because of the “historic crisis in our financial system.” Wall Street bailout negotiations intervened in the election process. The very sobering reality was that there likely could be a Depression and the world financial markets could collapse. The United States was losing 800,000 jobs a month and was poised to lose at least 10 million jobs the first year once the new President took office. We were in an economic freefall. So let us recall that ALL of America was suffering terribly at the beginning of Obama’s Presidency.

But I wanted to look back over the last 8 years and ask you a few questions. Since much of the rhetoric before Obama was elected was that he would impose Sharia Law, Take Away Your Guns, Create Death Panels, Destroy the Economy, Impose Socialism and, since you will agree that NONE of this came to pass, I was wondering: Why have you suffered so?

So let me ask: Gays and Lesbians can now marry and enjoy the benefits they had been deprived of. Has this caused your suffering?

When Obama took office, the Dow was 6,626. Now it is 19,875. Has this caused your suffering?

We had 82 straight months of private sector job growth – the longest streak in the history of the United States. Has this caused your suffering?

Especially considering where the economy was when he took over, an amazing 11.3 million new jobs were created under President Obama (far more than President Bush). Has this caused your suffering?

Obama has taken Unemployment from 10% down to 4.7%. Has this caused your suffering?

Homelessness among US Veterans has dropped by half. Has this caused your suffering?

Obama shut down the US secret overseas prisons. Has this caused your suffering?

President Obama has created a policy for the families of fallen soldiers to have their travel paid for to be there when remains are flown home. Has this caused your suffering?

We landed a rover on Mars. Has this caused your suffering?

He passed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Has this caused your suffering?

Uninsured adults has decreased to below 10%: 90% of adults are insured – an increase of 20 Million Adults. Has this caused your suffering?

People are now covered for pre-existing conditions. Has this caused your suffering?

Insurance Premiums increased an average of $4,677 from 2002-2008, an increase of 58% under Bush. The growth of these insurance premiums has gone up $4,145 – a slower rate of increase. Has this caused your suffering?

Obama added Billions of dollars to mental health care for our Veterans. Has this caused your suffering?

Consumer confidence has gone from 37.7 to 98.1 during Obama’s tenure. Has this caused your suffering?

He passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Has this caused your suffering?

His bi-annual Nuclear Summit convinced 16 countries to give up and destroy all their loose nuclear material so it could not be stolen. Has this caused your suffering?

He saved the US Auto industry. American cars sold at the beginning of his term were 10.4M and upon his exit 17.5M. Has this caused your suffering?

The deficit as a percentage of the GDP has gone from 9.8% to 3.2%. Has this caused your suffering?

The deficit itself was cut by $800 Billion Dollars. Has this caused your suffering?

Obama preserved the middle class tax cuts. Has this caused your suffering?

Obama banned solitary confinement for juveniles in federal prisons. Has this caused your suffering?

He signed Credit Card reform so that rates could not be raised without you being notified. Has this caused your suffering?

He outlawed Government contractors from discriminating against LGBT persons. Has this caused your suffering?

He doubled Pell Grants. Has this caused your suffering?

Abortion is down. Has this caused your suffering?

Violent crime is down. Has this caused your suffering?

He overturned the scientific ban on stem cell research. Has this caused your suffering?

He protected Net Neutrality. Has this caused your suffering?

Obamacare has extended the life of the Medicare insurance trust fund (will be solvent until 2030). Has this caused your suffering?

President Obama repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Has this caused your suffering?

He banned torture. Has this caused your suffering?

He negotiated with Syria to give up its chemical weapons and they were destroyed. Has this caused your suffering?

Solar and Wind Power are at an all time high. Has this caused your suffering?

High School Graduation rates hit 83% – an all time high. Has this caused your suffering?

Corporate profits are up by 144%. Has this caused your suffering?

He normalized relations with Cuba. Has this caused your suffering?

Reliance on foreign oil is at a 40 year low. Has this caused your suffering?

US Exports are up 28%. Has this caused your suffering?

He appointed the most diverse cabinet ever. Has this caused your suffering?

He reduced the number of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Has this caused your suffering?

Yes, he killed Osama Bin Laden and retrieved all the documents in his possession for analysis. Perhaps THIS caused your suffering?

From an objective standpoint it would appear that the last eight years have seen some great progress and we were saved from a financial collapse. Things are not perfect. Things can always be better. We are on much better footing now than we were in 2008.

I look forward to understanding what caused you to suffer so much under Obama these last eight years.”



http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/02/22/trump-voters-say-suffered-8-years-obama-heres-perfect-response/



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 1:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Unemployment is only one metric to use. People who give up looking is not reflected in unemployment. People who want to work full-time but are only working part-time is not reflected in unemployment. Unemployment also doesn't reflect people who at one point had a good income and are now working for minimum wage.

Obama did not stop job export (nor did Bush, and Clinton signed a job export bill - NAFTA). Attacking job export was a big reason for the success of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The effects of job export were not as apparent to the neo-liberals as they should have been.

Obama, like all of his predecessors did not stop illegal immigration, and illegal immigration has hurt American workers.

I think the coastal neo-liberals should re-think their support of job export and illegal immigration if they want to maximize their support. Taking a stand against illegal immigration is not going to cause the Hispanics to vote Republican. And the good news for them is that Trump has no intention to fully enforce immigration law - that is, put employers in jail or heavily fine them for illegally hiring illegal workers. They could get to Trump's left on the issue (left in that they are protecting American workers) advocating enforcement of the law with regard to employers.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 11:42 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Unemployment is only one metric to use. People who give up looking is not reflected in unemployment. People who want to work full-time but are only working part-time is not reflected in unemployment. Unemployment also doesn't reflect people who at one point had a good income and are now working for minimum wage.

Obama did not stop job export (nor did Bush, and Clinton signed a job export bill - NAFTA). Attacking job export was a big reason for the success of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The effects of job export were not as apparent to the neo-liberals as they should have been.

Obama, like all of his predecessors did not stop illegal immigration, and illegal immigration has hurt American workers.

I think the coastal neo-liberals should re-think their support of job export and illegal immigration if they want to maximize their support. Taking a stand against illegal immigration is not going to cause the Hispanics to vote Republican. And the good news for them is that Trump has no intention to fully enforce immigration law - that is, put employers in jail or heavily fine them for illegally hiring illegal workers. They could get to Trump's left on the issue (left in that they are protecting American workers) advocating enforcement of the law with regard to employers.



Do you have a definition?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 12:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
Unemployment is only one metric to use. People who give up looking is not reflected in unemployment. People who want to work full-time but are only working part-time is not reflected in unemployment. Unemployment also doesn't reflect people who at one point had a good income and are now working for minimum wage.

Obama did not stop job export (nor did Bush, and Clinton signed a job export bill - NAFTA). Attacking job export was a big reason for the success of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The effects of job export were not as apparent to the neo-liberals as they should have been.

Obama, like all of his predecessors did not stop illegal immigration, and illegal immigration has hurt American workers.

I think the coastal neo-liberals should re-think their support of job export and illegal immigration if they want to maximize their support. Taking a stand against illegal immigration is not going to cause the Hispanics to vote Republican. And the good news for them is that Trump has no intention to fully enforce immigration law - that is, put employers in jail or heavily fine them for illegally hiring illegal workers. They could get to Trump's left on the issue (left in that they are protecting American workers) advocating enforcement of the law with regard to employers.



Do you have a definition?


I don't think there is one statistic to measure the worker situation. It's like measuring your health, you need more than one lab test done.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10701
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 1:09 pm    ::: Re: The suffering of Trump voters the last 8 yrs Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
I look forward to understanding what caused you to suffer so much under Obama these last eight years.”


Cthskzfn, you silliest of twits! Laughing Did you forget? Barack Hussein Obama is....BLACK. Of Negroid ethnicity. Can you not comprehend how being white, in a supremely Anglo-American society BUT presided over by a Negro is not suffering enough?

Never mind the factoids you spew, those Obvious Positives only the intellectually-challenged cannot comprehend--Obama and his entirely black family was a constant reminder that minorities can and do hold power in this land of The Kennedys and The Cleavers, The Rockefellers and The Bunkers.

Okay. Mayhaps I hyperbolize a bit. But only a tiny bit! I can't tell you how *I* suffered, from '08 on, when I'd encounter "friends" and neighbors who would admit their racial bias re: Obama. And I don't live in an area considered a hotbed of racial divide.

Obama Lover that I am, I, too, can list things that were flaws of his presidency. But they are FEW AND FAR BETWEEN, compared to A: his POSITIVES, and B: his successor, even one month in.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
myt



Joined: 29 Nov 2007
Posts: 3923
Location: California


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 1:29 pm    ::: Re: The suffering of Trump voters the last 8 yrs Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
I look forward to understanding what caused you to suffer so much under Obama these last eight years.”


Cthskzfn, you silliest of twits! Laughing Did you forget? Barack Hussein Obama is....BLACK. Of Negroid ethnicity. Can you not comprehend how being white, in a supremely Anglo-American society BUT presided over by a Negro is not suffering enough?

Never mind the factoids you spew, those Obvious Positives only the intellectually-challenged cannot comprehend--Obama and his entirely black family was a constant reminder that minorities can and do hold power in this land of The Kennedys and The Cleavers, The Rockefellers and The Bunkers.

Okay. Mayhaps I hyperbolize a bit. But only a tiny bit! I can't tell you how *I* suffered, from '08 on, when I'd encounter "friends" and neighbors who would admit their racial bias re: Obama. And I don't live in an area considered a hotbed of racial divide.

Obama Lover that I am, I, too, can list things that were flaws of his presidency. But they are FEW AND FAR BETWEEN, compared to A: his POSITIVES, and B: his successor, even one month in.



Howee,

tsk, tsk... You know that Obama is only HALF black. Wink

Unfortunately, the half he does represents appears to be too much for some. Confused

Yes, Obama had his flaws; we all do.

However, the list of accomplishments he was able to achieve in the face of the GOP that was determined to fight him every step of the way is amazing.



_________________
SuziQ wrote:
ima say this only once, and I'm never gonna say it again. Parker's damn good.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 1:43 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 2:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
Unemployment is only one metric to use. People who give up looking is not reflected in unemployment. People who want to work full-time but are only working part-time is not reflected in unemployment. Unemployment also doesn't reflect people who at one point had a good income and are now working for minimum wage.

Obama did not stop job export (nor did Bush, and Clinton signed a job export bill - NAFTA). Attacking job export was a big reason for the success of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The effects of job export were not as apparent to the neo-liberals as they should have been.

Obama, like all of his predecessors did not stop illegal immigration, and illegal immigration has hurt American workers.

I think the coastal neo-liberals should re-think their support of job export and illegal immigration if they want to maximize their support. Taking a stand against illegal immigration is not going to cause the Hispanics to vote Republican. And the good news for them is that Trump has no intention to fully enforce immigration law - that is, put employers in jail or heavily fine them for illegally hiring illegal workers. They could get to Trump's left on the issue (left in that they are protecting American workers) advocating enforcement of the law with regard to employers.



Do you have a definition?


I don't think there is one statistic to measure the worker situation. It's like measuring your health, you need more than one lab test done.



i meant what is your definition of a "coastal neo-liberal".

FWIW, the list contained many more positive things than the unemployment picture. On the other hand, you seem to be hung up on one issue most of the time anyway.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 2:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


What is the point you're trying to make here?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 2:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
Unemployment is only one metric to use. People who give up looking is not reflected in unemployment. People who want to work full-time but are only working part-time is not reflected in unemployment. Unemployment also doesn't reflect people who at one point had a good income and are now working for minimum wage.

Obama did not stop job export (nor did Bush, and Clinton signed a job export bill - NAFTA). Attacking job export was a big reason for the success of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The effects of job export were not as apparent to the neo-liberals as they should have been.

Obama, like all of his predecessors did not stop illegal immigration, and illegal immigration has hurt American workers.

I think the coastal neo-liberals should re-think their support of job export and illegal immigration if they want to maximize their support. Taking a stand against illegal immigration is not going to cause the Hispanics to vote Republican. And the good news for them is that Trump has no intention to fully enforce immigration law - that is, put employers in jail or heavily fine them for illegally hiring illegal workers. They could get to Trump's left on the issue (left in that they are protecting American workers) advocating enforcement of the law with regard to employers.



Do you have a definition?


I don't think there is one statistic to measure the worker situation. It's like measuring your health, you need more than one lab test done.



i meant what is your definition of a "coastal neo-liberal".

FWIW, the list contained many more positive things than the unemployment picture. On the other hand, you seem to be hung up on one issue most of the time anyway.


You have to deal with the most important issues first.

Coastal neo-liberals are the Democrats on the coasts who subscribe to the new Democratic philosophy that arose with Bill Clinton. One that appeals to big rich donors and supports job export and historically low taxes on the rich. You would think that with Trump on the right talking about deportation and a wall, (which ironically, is not what the rich want and protects workres) the neo-liberals could have held their ground on illegal immigration. But instead they went running the other way with "build bridges not walls" and fully embraced illegal immigration (while also not calling for the law to be changed) . Which is something that Chris Matthews lamented on the night of the election on MSNBC.




Last edited by tfan on 02/28/17 2:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
norwester



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6347
Location: Seattle


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 2:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The trap we fall into here is thinking that Trump supporters are making decisions based on logic.

Much of the reading I've done about folks doing actual research, or at least interviewing middle class and poor republican strongholds, or places that went red for Trump, logic doesn't factor into it much; therefore, trying to argue with logic (like the list of benefits in the OP) is a non-starter.

Two major motivating factors stood out for me in my reading:

1. Republican as an identity
When it comes down to it, people vote Republican because they and their family always have for generations. They may talk about issues of concern, etc., but when it comes down to casting their vote, they're most comfortable voting Republican because it's part of their identity. Nothing more.

2. The story they tell themselves about their lives
The story goes like this: they're standing in a long line. This line represents playing by the "rules". As they stand there, they watch the government (or Obama, etc.) usher minorities and women into line in front of them. Poor people. Homeless people. Immigrants. They're standing in line, playing by the rules, and yet everyone is ushered into line in front of them.

There is no arguing with either of these viewpoints with logic.

The only people you convince with logic are potentially the swing votes in the middle, or independents. It's probably worth your time having a conversation with them, but the large percentage of people falling into the two world views I've described will not be swayed with the 'accomplishments' laid out in the OP.



_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 2:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

norwester wrote:


1. Republican as an identity
When it comes down to it, people vote Republican because they and their family always have for generations. They may talk about issues of concern, etc., but when it comes down to casting their vote, they're most comfortable voting Republican because it's part of their identity. Nothing more.


That applies as much to Democrats and Republicans. All that campaigning the parties do in the swing states is only for a minority of voters.

Quote:

2. The story they tell themselves about their lives
The story goes like this: they're standing in a long line. This line represents playing by the "rules". As they stand there, they watch the government (or Obama, etc.) usher minorities and women into line in front of them. Poor people. Homeless people. Immigrants. They're standing in line, playing by the rules, and yet everyone is ushered into line in front of them.

There is no arguing with either of these viewpoints with logic.


Did you leave out illegal immigration so you wouldn't have to argue with it after you mentioned "play by the rules"? If you are an employer and you can employ a 55 year old white American male for your house and apartment painting business, or a 25 year old from <fill in any country outside the USA sending us economic migrants>, which would you hire? Rather hire a 63 year old American janitor or a 30 year old <fill in any country outside the USA sending us economic migrants>.?

It's also unnatural to expect people to want to be overrun by foreigners. That is why we have to be trained to like it. What is sufficient training for someone who has a corner office in a skyscraper and lives in a 2,500 square foot house in the suburbs, might not be sufficient training for someone who can't get a job washing dishes on the bad side of town or doesn't have a single person in their apartment complex who speaks English in their household.




Last edited by tfan on 02/28/17 2:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 2:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
Unemployment is only one metric to use. People who give up looking is not reflected in unemployment. People who want to work full-time but are only working part-time is not reflected in unemployment. Unemployment also doesn't reflect people who at one point had a good income and are now working for minimum wage.

Obama did not stop job export (nor did Bush, and Clinton signed a job export bill - NAFTA). Attacking job export was a big reason for the success of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The effects of job export were not as apparent to the neo-liberals as they should have been.

Obama, like all of his predecessors did not stop illegal immigration, and illegal immigration has hurt American workers.

I think the coastal neo-liberals should re-think their support of job export and illegal immigration if they want to maximize their support. Taking a stand against illegal immigration is not going to cause the Hispanics to vote Republican. And the good news for them is that Trump has no intention to fully enforce immigration law - that is, put employers in jail or heavily fine them for illegally hiring illegal workers. They could get to Trump's left on the issue (left in that they are protecting American workers) advocating enforcement of the law with regard to employers.



Do you have a definition?


I don't think there is one statistic to measure the worker situation. It's like measuring your health, you need more than one lab test done.



i meant what is your definition of a "coastal neo-liberal".

FWIW, the list contained many more positive things than the unemployment picture. On the other hand, you seem to be hung up on one issue most of the time anyway.


You have to deal with the most important issues first.

Coastal neo-liberals are the Democrats on the coasts who subscribe to the new Democratic philosophy that arose with Bill Clinton. One that appeals to big rich donors and does things like condoning job export and historically low taxes on the rich.



Yeah, they are the problem with the Democratic Party, and the reason for Bernie's rise. They are no friends of mine.

Let it be known that every major so-called "free trade" law was a Republican-led effort, with support by the majority of Republicans and the non-support of the majority of Democrats. Yes, Clinton signed NAFTA, which was produced during GHWB's tenure.

Of course, Clinton should have vetoed the thing.

So let's not kid ourselves- the "neo-liberal" policy is the whoring of the Democratic Party in order to match the already whored Republican Party for funds.

The major difference is that the Dems throw more crumbs to the "working man", "working poor", and non-worker than do Republicans, and Republicans will always reduce taxes on the extremely wealthy and will try to privative (read "profitize") everything.

All the rest from Limbaugh to OReilly to Jones to FOX NEWS is bullshit.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 2:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
norwester wrote:


1. Republican as an identity
When it comes down to it, people vote Republican because they and their family always have for generations. They may talk about issues of concern, etc., but when it comes down to casting their vote, they're most comfortable voting Republican because it's part of their identity. Nothing more.


That applies as much to Democrats and Republicans. All that campaigning the parties do in the swing states is only for a minority of voters.

Quote:

2. The story they tell themselves about their lives
The story goes like this: they're standing in a long line. This line represents playing by the "rules". As they stand there, they watch the government (or Obama, etc.) usher minorities and women into line in front of them. Poor people. Homeless people. Immigrants. They're standing in line, playing by the rules, and yet everyone is ushered into line in front of them.

There is no arguing with either of these viewpoints with logic.


Did you leave out illegal immigration so you wouldn't have to argue with it after you mentioned "play by the rules"? If you are an employer and you can employ a 55 year old white American male for your house and apartment painting business, or a 25 year old from <fill in any country outside the USA sending us economic migrants>, which would you hire? Rather hire a 63 year old American janitor or a 30 year old <fill in any country outside the USA sending us economic migrants>.?

It's also unnatural to expect people to want to be overrun by foreigners. That is why we have to be trained to like it. What is sufficient training for someone who has a corner office in a skyscraper and lives in a 2,500 square foot house in the sTHwreuburbs, might not be sufficient training for someone who can't get a job washing dishes on the bad side of town or doesn't have a single person in their apartment complex who speaks English in their household.



It's illegal to hire illegals. Arrest the employer.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 3:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
norwester wrote:


1. Republican as an identity
When it comes down to it, people vote Republican because they and their family always have for generations. They may talk about issues of concern, etc., but when it comes down to casting their vote, they're most comfortable voting Republican because it's part of their identity. Nothing more.


That applies as much to Democrats and Republicans. All that campaigning the parties do in the swing states is only for a minority of voters.

Quote:

2. The story they tell themselves about their lives
The story goes like this: they're standing in a long line. This line represents playing by the "rules". As they stand there, they watch the government (or Obama, etc.) usher minorities and women into line in front of them. Poor people. Homeless people. Immigrants. They're standing in line, playing by the rules, and yet everyone is ushered into line in front of them.

There is no arguing with either of these viewpoints with logic.


Did you leave out illegal immigration so you wouldn't have to argue with it after you mentioned "play by the rules"? If you are an employer and you can employ a 55 year old white American male for your house and apartment painting business, or a 25 year old from <fill in any country outside the USA sending us economic migrants>, which would you hire? Rather hire a 63 year old American janitor or a 30 year old <fill in any country outside the USA sending us economic migrants>.?

It's also unnatural to expect people to want to be overrun by foreigners. That is why we have to be trained to like it. What is sufficient training for someone who has a corner office in a skyscraper and lives in a 2,500 square foot house in the sTHwreuburbs, might not be sufficient training for someone who can't get a job washing dishes on the bad side of town or doesn't have a single person in their apartment complex who speaks English in their household.



It's illegal to hire illegals. Arrest the employer.


In my example, the immigrant was legal. But yeah, arrest the employer. Neither party supports that practice and Trump has never said a word about it. I saw someone claim that after the first amnesty (1986/Reagan) they did briefly do that but were quickly convinced not to.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10701
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 4:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
It's also unnatural to expect people to want to be overrun by foreigners. That is why we have to be trained to like it.


Remind me again....what 'training program' was provided by the Euros to the Algonquins, Cherokee, Iroquois, et. al.? And how DID they like it, in the end?

I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 220
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 4:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This original post can be torn to shreds it's filled with so many holes. It's quite laughable.

By the way, most of us never suffered under Obama. We succeeded in life in spite of his Presidency. We just didn't trust your candidate and for many good reasons.

Stop living in this imaginary past and start dealing with the fact that the only real legacy of Obama's that will be remembered is the systematic destruction of the Democrat Party. Think things are going to get better for you? Just wait 2 more years when all of the Democrats from states in which Trump carried double-digit margins are up for re-election. It's going to be a bloodbath.




Last edited by Stonington_QB on 02/28/17 4:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 220
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 4:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).

Who is bitching about the inconvenience of immigrants? The strawmen that live in your head?

I know a lot of (legal) immigrants. You don't even want to know what they really think of people like you.


RM619



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 958
Location: Southern Calif.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 4:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
Howee wrote:
I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).

Who is bitching about the inconvenience of immigrants? The strawmen that live in your head?

I know a lot of (legal) immigrants. You don't even want to know what they really think of people like you.


My family has also weathered the past leaders. Good or bad, we the people elected them. I always give the current POTUS the benefit to see what can be accomplished. I even survived through Clinton's reign when he killed off many manufacturing jobs in the mid 2000's


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 5:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


What is the point you're trying to make here?


Why didn't white people vote in Romney after 4 years of black Barack Obama?


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 5:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


What is the point you're trying to make here?


Why didn't white people vote in Romney after 4 years of black Barack Obama?



I asked what is the point .



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
scullyfu



Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 8460
Location: Niagara Falls


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 5:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
Howee wrote:
I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).

Who is bitching about the inconvenience of immigrants? The strawmen that live in your head?

I know a lot of (legal) immigrants. You don't even want to know what they really think of people like you.


oh, why don't you tell us what they think of 'people like Howee'. you mean gay people? smart people? compassionate people? humorous people? please explain.



_________________
i'll always bleed Storm green.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 5:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


What is the point you're trying to make here?


Why didn't white people vote in Romney after 4 years of black Barack Obama?



I asked what is the point .


My question was demonstrating the point. And your answer is?

You are claiming Trump was elected as a backlash to a black president. Well, where was the backlash in 2012 to a black president?


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10701
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 6:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

scullyfu wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
Howee wrote:
I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).

Who is bitching about the inconvenience of immigrants? The strawmen that live in your head?

I know a lot of (legal) immigrants. You don't even want to know what they really think of people like you.


oh, why don't you tell us what they think of 'people like Howee'. you mean gay people? smart people? compassionate people? humorous people? please explain.

You're kind to defend, scullyfu, but it's not necessary. I simply don't interact with the intellectually challenged here, and ignore their posts. Cool



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 6:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
This original post can be torn to shreds it's filled with so many holes. It's quite laughable.


I'm listening....

By the way, most of us never suffered under Obama. We succeeded in life in spite of his Presidency. We just didn't trust your candidate and for many good reasons.


I'm listening....

Stop living in this imaginary past and start dealing with the fact that the only real legacy of Obama's that will be remembered is the systematic destruction of the Democrat Party. Think things are going to get better for you? Just wait 2 more years when all of the Democrats from states in which Trump carried double-digit margins are up for re-election. It's going to be a bloodbath.



We shall see.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 6:18 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


What is the point you're trying to make here?


Why didn't white people vote in Romney after 4 years of black Barack Obama?



I asked what is the point .


My question was demonstrating the point. And your answer is?

You are claiming Trump was elected as a backlash to a black president. Well, where was the backlash in 2012 to a black president?



I think your question is trying to demonstrate that you and Trump voters aren't racist. Is that it?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10701
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 8:43 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RM619 wrote:
My family has also weathered the past leaders. Good or bad, we the people elected them. I always give the current POTUS the benefit to see what can be accomplished. I even survived through Clinton's reign when he killed off many manufacturing jobs in the mid 2000's


Wrong guy....you might wanna check with George Bush on that one.... Laughing



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 9:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


What is the point you're trying to make here?


Why didn't white people vote in Romney after 4 years of black Barack Obama?



I asked what is the point .


My question was demonstrating the point. And your answer is?

You are claiming Trump was elected as a backlash to a black president. Well, where was the backlash in 2012 to a black president?



I think your question is trying to demonstrate that you and Trump voters aren't racist. Is that it?


My question was demonstrating that your reason and the reason of a great many neo-liberals as to why Hillary Clinton lost, hasn't got a leg to stand on. You need to revisit your data and rework your theory.


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 9:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
It's also unnatural to expect people to want to be overrun by foreigners. That is why we have to be trained to like it.


Remind me again....what 'training program' was provided by the Euros to the Algonquins, Cherokee, Iroquois, et. al.? And how DID they like it, in the end?

I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).


The guy who delivers my newspaper is Native American and grew up on a reservation. You are punishing him with immigration after his ancestors were already punished. You should at least advocate segregating all those with English ancestry (maybe Germans as well) dating back to the slaughter to be segregated into certain states - and then hit only those states with immigration as their punishment. Let the Native Americans and the non-English go unscathed in separate states


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10701
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 11:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
It's also unnatural to expect people to want to be overrun by foreigners. That is why we have to be trained to like it.


Remind me again....what 'training program' was provided by the Euros to the Algonquins, Cherokee, Iroquois, et. al.? And how DID they like it, in the end?

I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).


The guy who delivers my newspaper is Native American and grew up on a reservation. You are punishing him with immigration after his ancestors were already punished. You should at least advocate segregating all those with English ancestry (maybe Germans as well) dating back to the slaughter to be segregated into certain states - and then hit only those states with immigration as their punishment. Let the Native Americans and the non-English go unscathed in separate states


Again, you avoid the question: "...what 'training program' was provided by the Euros to the Algonquins, Cherokee, Iroquois, et. al.? And how DID they like it, in the end?" You're the one who brought up the need for 'training'.

And why segregate to shield from immigration? If your ancestors weren't directly responsible for Native deaths, then at the very least, your ancestors were IMMIGRANTS. Looking for....exactly what immigrants want today.

I think you should, like the Native Americans, just hope to survive it all, and hope you're afforded more mercy than they were. What entitles you and your people to remain 'in charge'?

Karma, baby. Cool



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17809



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 12:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
Unemployment is only one metric to use. People who give up looking is not reflected in unemployment. People who want to work full-time but are only working part-time is not reflected in unemployment. Unemployment also doesn't reflect people who at one point had a good income and are now working for minimum wage.

Obama did not stop job export (nor did Bush, and Clinton signed a job export bill - NAFTA). Attacking job export was a big reason for the success of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The effects of job export were not as apparent to the neo-liberals as they should have been.

Obama, like all of his predecessors did not stop illegal immigration, and illegal immigration has hurt American workers.

I think the coastal neo-liberals should re-think their support of job export and illegal immigration if they want to maximize their support. Taking a stand against illegal immigration is not going to cause the Hispanics to vote Republican. And the good news for them is that Trump has no intention to fully enforce immigration law - that is, put employers in jail or heavily fine them for illegally hiring illegal workers. They could get to Trump's left on the issue (left in that they are protecting American workers) advocating enforcement of the law with regard to employers.



Do you have a definition?


I don't think there is one statistic to measure the worker situation. It's like measuring your health, you need more than one lab test done.



i meant what is your definition of a "coastal neo-liberal".

FWIW, the list contained many more positive things than the unemployment picture. On the other hand, you seem to be hung up on one issue most of the time anyway.


You have to deal with the most important issues first.

Coastal neo-liberals are the Democrats on the coasts who subscribe to the new Democratic philosophy that arose with Bill Clinton. One that appeals to big rich donors and supports job export and historically low taxes on the rich. You would think that with Trump on the right talking about deportation and a wall, (which ironically, is not what the rich want and protects workres) the neo-liberals could have held their ground on illegal immigration. But instead they went running the other way with "build bridges not walls" and fully embraced illegal immigration (while also not calling for the law to be changed) . Which is something that Chris Matthews lamented on the night of the election on MSNBC.


Clinton significantly increased taxes on the rich.

The Democratic party moved to the center BECAUSE IT HAD TO. Why? Because the country went crazy right wing after/because of Reagan, and the only way to get our country in a somewhat progressive direction.

And if you remember, the villain of that administration was Bill's socialist feminazi wife.



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 5515



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 12:48 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
It's also unnatural to expect people to want to be overrun by foreigners. That is why we have to be trained to like it.


Remind me again....what 'training program' was provided by the Euros to the Algonquins, Cherokee, Iroquois, et. al.? And how DID they like it, in the end?

I got NO sympathy for folks who wanna bitch about the 'inconvenience' of immigrants, and cultures being overrun. Karma's a bitch, and the Iniquities of the Fathers are very real.....they will not remain only on the pages of history books (if they've even MADE it to those books!).


The guy who delivers my newspaper is Native American and grew up on a reservation. You are punishing him with immigration after his ancestors were already punished. You should at least advocate segregating all those with English ancestry (maybe Germans as well) dating back to the slaughter to be segregated into certain states - and then hit only those states with immigration as their punishment. Let the Native Americans and the non-English go unscathed in separate states


Again, you avoid the question: "...what 'training program' was provided by the Euros to the Algonquins, Cherokee, Iroquois, et. al.? And how DID they like it, in the end?" You're the one who brought up the need for 'training'.


I am missing what comparison you are making. The Native Americans fought their takeover, which wasn't the same today, as it involved giving up their land and/or their lives (we sell our land and give up jobs, but not our lives). To be analogous, any training program to accept an English takeover (should a non-violent one have been possible) would have come from their leadership, not from the Europeans. Americans aren't being trained to accept immigration by immigrants (for the most part), but by American political leaders, business people, teachers - anyone with a pulpit to promote a sacred cow.

Quote:

And why segregate to shield from immigration? If your ancestors weren't directly responsible for Native deaths, then at the very least, your ancestors were IMMIGRANTS. Looking for....exactly what immigrants want today.


So why punish people who didn't conquer? Why cause their traffic to get worse, their house prices to soar, their schools to over-crowd, why have them struggle even harder than normal, to find a job particularly as they age, when they don't deserve to be punished for what their ancestors did?

Quote:

I think you should, like the Native Americans, just hope to survive it all, and hope you're afforded more mercy than they were. What entitles you and your people to remain 'in charge'?

Karma, baby. Cool


It's only "Karma" if you apply "Karma" to things your ancestors did, and only then if my ancestors were slaughtering Native Americans. They certainly weren't on my mother's side. Don't know when people on my father's side came over.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 8:57 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
tfan wrote:
If white Hillary Clinton lost because she followed black Barack Obama, how did black Barack Obama win two elections, one of which followed a black Barack Obama presidency?


What is the point you're trying to make here?


Why didn't white people vote in Romney after 4 years of black Barack Obama?



I asked what is the point .


My question was demonstrating the point. And your answer is?

You are claiming Trump was elected as a backlash to a black president. Well, where was the backlash in 2012 to a black president?



I think your question is trying to demonstrate that you and Trump voters aren't racist. Is that it?


My question was demonstrating that your reason and the reason of a great many neo-liberals as to why Hillary Clinton lost, hasn't got a leg to stand on. You need to revisit your data and rework your theory.


Have I ever claimed that was the only reason Clinton lost the electoral vote? I don't think so. (feel free to point out if I did).

Racism is one part of the equation, as are other general undertones of the so-called "right"- nationalism, white-ism, xenophobia, homophobia, war-mongering, "law and order", etc etc.

Also, Clinton's public personality was a drag.

The Republican propaganda machine, led by FOX NEWS, is another factor. As was the Comey Weiner email fiasco, as well as the suppression of the info re: Russia and Trump which was led by McConnell and Comey. MSM's wall-wall coverage of Trump, to chase ratings, and their refusal to call out his countless lies played a big role too.

The number of dupedplorables is another.

Probably the biggest reason is Republican-led voter suppression which in part resulted from the supreme court ruling on voting rights (in 2013?) and included Interstate Crosscheck, reduction of voting times, polling places, and other shenanigans.

Interestingly, despite all that bullshit, Clinton received millions more votes. Thus, Trump is the least popular president of all time.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 220
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 9:50 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
Racism is one part of the equation, as are other general undertones of the so-called "right"- nationalism, white-ism, xenophobia, homophobia, war-mongering, "law and order", etc etc.

Where is this data that racism and xenophobia were factors? There is a laundry list of blacks, Hispanics, Indians, Asians, whites and women who voted for Trump. It comes off like you're saying that everyone who didn't vote for Hillary was racist. What about racist people who voted for Hillary? That statistic is just vapor research. White-ism sounds extremely derogatory and racist btw (not to mention contradictory to your claims of racism by the other side).

cthskzfn wrote:
Also, Clinton's public personality was a drag.

That's an understatement. If the candidate were anyone else it probably would have been a Democrat victory.

cthskzfn wrote:
The Republican propaganda machine, led by FOX NEWS, is another factor. As was the Comey Weiner email fiasco, as well as the suppression of the info re: Russia and Trump which was led by McConnell and Comey. MSM's wall-wall coverage of Trump, to chase ratings, and their refusal to call out his countless lies played a big role too.

The number of dupedplorables is another.

Probably the biggest reason is Republican-led voter suppression which in part resulted from the supreme court ruling on voting rights (in 2013?) and included Interstate Crosscheck, reduction of voting times, polling places, and other shenanigans.

Interestingly, despite all that bullshit, Clinton received millions more votes. Thus, Trump is the least popular president of all time.

Come on. There was no "Russia and Trump." MSM was not refusing to call out lies. In fact, there was piece after piece "fact checking" Trump when the facts had to be invented out of thin air (by the media). That was big turn off.
I'm not familiar with this Republican-led voter suppression. Interstate crosscheck was put in place to put a stop to people voting more than once. That's not voter suppression, that's enforcing the law. Everyone gets ONE vote.
I think it's a little early to be declaring President Trump the least popular of all time. He is delivering on his promises so far. We will see what happens in the next 4 years. How about giving him a chance to deliver before writing his eulogy? What if he does great things for the country and gets re-elected overwhelmingly?


RM619



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 958
Location: Southern Calif.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 12:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Racism is one part of the equation, as are other general undertones of the so-called "right"- nationalism, white-ism, xenophobia, homophobia, war-mongering, "law and order", etc etc.

Where is this data that racism and xenophobia were factors? There is a laundry list of blacks, Hispanics, Indians, Asians, whites and women who voted for Trump. It comes off like you're saying that everyone who didn't vote for Hillary was racist. What about racist people who voted for Hillary? That statistic is just vapor research. White-ism sounds extremely derogatory and racist btw (not to mention contradictory to your claims of racism by the other side).

cthskzfn wrote:
Also, Clinton's public personality was a drag.

That's an understatement. If the candidate were anyone else it probably would have been a Democrat victory.

cthskzfn wrote:
The Republican propaganda machine, led by FOX NEWS, is another factor. As was the Comey Weiner email fiasco, as well as the suppression of the info re: Russia and Trump which was led by McConnell and Comey. MSM's wall-wall coverage of Trump, to chase ratings, and their refusal to call out his countless lies played a big role too.

The number of dupedplorables is another.

Probably the biggest reason is Republican-led voter suppression which in part resulted from the supreme court ruling on voting rights (in 2013?) and included Interstate Crosscheck, reduction of voting times, polling places, and other shenanigans.

Interestingly, despite all that bullshit, Clinton received millions more votes. Thus, Trump is the least popular president of all time.

Come on. There was no "Russia and Trump." MSM was not refusing to call out lies. In fact, there was piece after piece "fact checking" Trump when the facts had to be invented out of thin air (by the media). That was big turn off.
I'm not familiar with this Republican-led voter suppression. Interstate crosscheck was put in place to put a stop to people voting more than once. That's not voter suppression, that's enforcing the law. Everyone gets ONE vote.
I think it's a little early to be declaring President Trump the least popular of all time. He is delivering on his promises so far. We will see what happens in the next 4 years. How about giving him a chance to deliver before writing his eulogy? What if he does great things for the country and gets re-elected overwhelmingly?


Very well said. I don't see any major changes in my life during his term. Survived all previous ones. On a side note, I enjoyed his speech last night. Rather laid back, but addressed the issues. Was happy that he didn't bash the media.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 1:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Racism is one part of the equation, as are other general undertones of the so-called "right"- nationalism, white-ism, xenophobia, homophobia, war-mongering, "law and order", etc etc.

Where is this data that racism and xenophobia were factors? There is a laundry list of blacks, Hispanics, Indians, Asians, whites and women who voted for Trump. It comes off like you're saying that everyone who didn't vote for Hillary was racist. What about racist people who voted for Hillary? That statistic is just vapor research. White-ism sounds extremely derogatory and racist btw (not to mention contradictory to your claims of racism by the other side).

cthskzfn wrote:
Also, Clinton's public personality was a drag.

That's an understatement. If the candidate were anyone else it probably would have been a Democrat victory.

cthskzfn wrote:
The Republican propaganda machine, led by FOX NEWS, is another factor. As was the Comey Weiner email fiasco, as well as the suppression of the info re: Russia and Trump which was led by McConnell and Comey. MSM's wall-wall coverage of Trump, to chase ratings, and their refusal to call out his countless lies played a big role too.

The number of dupedplorables is another.

Probably the biggest reason is Republican-led voter suppression which in part resulted from the supreme court ruling on voting rights (in 2013?) and included Interstate Crosscheck, reduction of voting times, polling places, and other shenanigans.

Interestingly, despite all that bullshit, Clinton received millions more votes. Thus, Trump is the least popular president of all time.

Come on. There was no "Russia and Trump." MSM was not refusing to call out lies. In fact, there was piece after piece "fact checking" Trump when the facts had to be invented out of thin air (by the media). That was big turn off.
I'm not familiar with this Republican-led voter suppression. Interstate crosscheck was put in place to put a stop to people voting more than once. That's not voter suppression, that's enforcing the law. Everyone gets ONE vote.
I think it's a little early to be declaring President Trump the least popular of all time. He is delivering on his promises so far. We will see what happens in the next 4 years. How about giving him a chance to deliver before writing his eulogy? What if he does great things for the country and gets re-elected overwhelmingly?



Laughing


The good news is that more Americans saw through the Trump bullshit than didn't, and by millions.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 6522
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 1:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RM619 wrote:

Very well said. I don't see any major changes in my life during his term. Survived all previous ones. On a side note, I enjoyed his speech last night. Rather laid back, but addressed the issues. Was happy that he didn't bash the media.

If you, like me, are a decently well off white cisgender heterosexual male, then yes, I imagine survival without too many changes is in the cards.

If someone is transgender, gay, a minority, an undocumented immigrant, or poor, that is another story.

Or, you know, live down stream from a mine....



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 220
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 2:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RM619 wrote:
Very well said. I don't see any major changes in my life during his term. Survived all previous ones. On a side note, I enjoyed his speech last night. Rather laid back, but addressed the issues. Was happy that he didn't bash the media.

I found it to be very inspiring. I hope he can deliver on the promises. He will make believers out of many if he can turn things around for people who are struggling, from all walks of life. It won't be easy. There will be many hurdles to clear, mainly from the Washington establishment, from both sides of the aisle. We will see. I went to bed with an air of optimism that's for sure.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10701
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/17 10:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
I am missing what comparison you are making.....why punish people who didn't conquer?


Yes, you are missing it....you're overthinking it, darlin'. This isn't about punitive measures, or 'training' anybody. It's about Simple but Unmistakable socio/anthropological trends: one people/culture/tribe impinges on another. Assimilation.

It's not "unfair" that people who are in poor and under-producing places flow to better places. This is what has caused the flow of humans across all the continents. "Illegal" is a human construct. Because we SAY it's "ours" doesn't mean it IS, in the cosmic sense. Of course, if we SAY it is, and BELIEVE it is, and make rules to PRETEND it is....? That's how/why people have been building kingdoms and empires for the past few thousand years.

We humans endow far more rights of ownership to ourselves and our ideas of appropriation than....than we have a right to. Of course, there's the basic rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. But I think that's all the immigrants are after. That there is inconvenience to us, even LOSS to us, is just history's repetitive rhythm.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 220
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/02/17 9:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
The good news is that more Americans saw through the Trump bullshit than didn't, and by millions.

Yes, we are certainly getting our mileage out of THAT issue.

I will concede that millions more in California went for Hillary (by about 3 and a half million votes), which made the difference in the total count. If that reason alone doesn't justify an Electoral College, I don't know what does! Thank God our founders were wise enough to predict outcomes like this, and created a system that represents EVERYONE in the country fairly.


mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17809



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/02/17 8:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
The good news is that more Americans saw through the Trump bullshit than didn't, and by millions.

Yes, we are certainly getting our mileage out of THAT issue.

I will concede that millions more in California went for Hillary (by about 3 and a half million votes), which made the difference in the total count. If that reason alone doesn't justify an Electoral College, I don't know what does! Thank God our founders were wise enough to predict outcomes like this, and created a system that represents EVERYONE in the country fairly.


Right, because some people's vote should count more just because of where they live. Rolling Eyes



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8753
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/02/17 11:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
The good news is that more Americans saw through the Trump bullshit than didn't, and by millions.

Yes, we are certainly getting our mileage out of THAT issue.

I will concede that millions more in California went for Hillary (by about 3 and a half million votes), which made the difference in the total count. If that reason alone doesn't justify an Electoral College, I don't know what does! Thank God our founders were wise enough to predict outcomes like this, and created a system that represents EVERYONE in the country fairly.


Right, because some people's vote should count more just because of where they live. Rolling Eyes


Of course! The fewer number of votes a candidates gets, the more fairly he represents all the citizens. Laughing



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 220
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/03/17 12:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It's funny how the rules should only apply when the outcome is favorable. Once the outcome doesn't go your way, complain about it and cry foul. Kind of like the superdelegates rule.

This is a representative republic. Always has been. Don't like it? Move someplace else. If the shoe were on the other foot I'm sure this incessant whining wouldn't be happening because you would be touting "the law of the land."


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 6522
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/03/17 12:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
It's funny how the rules should only apply when the outcome is favorable. Once the outcome doesn't go your way, complain about it and cry foul. Kind of like the superdelegates rule.

This is a representative republic. Always has been. Don't like it? Move someplace else. If the shoe were on the other foot I'm sure this incessant whining wouldn't be happening because you would be touting "the law of the land."

Actually, I have been calling for the end of the electoral college since long before this election. It is an outdated model that relies upon conditions that were in place when the country was new. Since then, we have given much more power to the federal government and have eliminated the abiity for states to leave the union. At the birth of our nation it took weeks to go from one side to the other. Now it takes hours.

Due to sociological and demographic realities like urban packing and ideological grouping, it seems silly to continue to award more strength to certain votes simply because of where they live. Not to mention the fact that people are de facto disenfranchised in the presidential election based on where they live. A Republican in California or a Democrat in Texas might as well not even vote in the presidential election for all their votes will be represented. It is one of the major reason our voter turnout is so low.

Of course, you know who also called for the end of the electoral college? Donald Trump in 2012.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 220
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/03/17 1:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
Actually, I have been calling for the end of the electoral college since long before this election.

Is that supposed to matter?
justintyme wrote:
It is an outdated model that relies upon conditions that were in place when the country was new.

Actually that's not the case at all. It was done to prevent a tyrant from manipulating the citizens into electing him / her. It was a check on the electorate. Our founders feared unrestrained democracies that had brought down past republics. I hear from the left that the Second Amendment is outdated too. That's because it gets in the way of their quest for absolute power. Just like the Electoral College.

I'm not going to discuss this (or anything else) further with you. We all know how this will end. You will insist on having the last word, and if you don't get it you will run to the moderators. So go ahead, have it.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 55031
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/03/17 1:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
Actually that's not the case at all. It was done to prevent a tyrant from manipulating the citizens into electing him / her. It was a check on the electorate.


Since the electors are now legally compelled to vote for whoever won the popular vote in their state, this function is moot.



_________________
I'm goin' way down South
Way down where I can be free
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 6522
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/03/17 2:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
Actually that's not the case at all. It was done to prevent a tyrant from manipulating the citizens into electing him / her. It was a check on the electorate.


Since the electors are now legally compelled to vote for whoever won the popular vote in their state, this function is moot.

Not to mention the moment they actually voted in someone different it would create a constitutional crisis.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
NYL_WNBA_FAN



Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 11450



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/05/17 1:48 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
Actually that's not the case at all. It was done to prevent a tyrant from manipulating the citizens into electing him / her. It was a check on the electorate.


Since the electors are now legally compelled to vote for whoever won the popular vote in their state, this function is moot.


Which is exactly why the electoral college should be abolished. It no longer serves one of its originally intended purposes.



_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin