Author Topic: the next President of the United States  (Read 487 times)

Offline reasonist

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2017, 01:26:46 PM »
Everything about the Clintons is deliberate.  Sanders was nixed by choosing the new DNC chair ... who is a Clinton cuck.  The voters only choose in primaries, as they are manipulated by the DNC/RNC.  Though this last time, I think the RNC was incompetent ... JEB was their man.

Reasonist ... aren't you Canadian?  What you you mean about ... we?  Are you interfering in our elections, you Putin you?

Hahaha! Where did you read the 'we'? I wrote YOU need fresh ideas and fresh people. But anyhow, unfortunately your groper in chief has an adverse effect on other countries, even Canada. The first layoffs have begun at saw mills in Quebec, more to come for sure. I hope this clown gets impeached before the damage is irreversible on both sides.
I asked my parents when I was young 'how come so many people could be so stupid as not to see what's coming from Hitler?' Listening to his speeches it is crystal clear what his intentions were. The answer was that it was a time of utter economic depression, no jobs, no food, no clothes to buy. Hitler promised jobs (albeit mostly in the armament industry) and blamed all the ills on the Jews. Seemed like a plausible explanation for the millions in the streets in March 1938 when Hitler annexed 'his homeland into the German Reich', waving swastikas and raising their right arms with enthusiasm. But when Trump promised jobs and making America great again, the unemployment rate was 4.8% which is full employment for any economist. Poverty rate was at 17% down from 38% in 1999. So what was he talking about and why did it resonate among voters?
But at least I have an answer now how so many people can be so stupid, looking at the Trump boot lickers of today. Nothing has changed, the brown shirts are alive and well, resurrected and willingly lead to the altar for sacrifice.
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities
Voltaire

Offline SGOS

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2017, 02:09:03 PM »
But at least I have an answer now how so many people can be so stupid, looking at the Trump boot lickers of today. Nothing has changed, the brown shirts are alive and well, resurrected and willingly lead to the altar for sacrifice.
I like to stay away from comparing US Presidents to Hitler, not because the comparisons aren't applicable (sometimes they are), but mostly because it's so cliché.  Every president from both parties is compared to Hitler at sometime or other during his presidency.  It's what we do.

Thankfully, there are some safeguards in the Constitution to keep this from happening.  Not that the Constitution couldn't be trashed by congress (it has provisions that allow that too), but no single president can step into our government and just take over the place.  Trump would like to, but his approval from both the public and congress just keeps going down, so he's losing power, rather than gaining it.

But your parent's pretty much nailed it.  When times get hard, as they are for many people now, people start acting crazy, grabbing for straws, and are ready to embrace just about any charlatan that promises the moon.  Throw in some terrorism, and suddenly there's a nefarious Muslim hiding behind every bush with a bomb, and people feel threatened.  More promises and they feel like someone is making them safer.  It's the ugly side of hope, which is supposed to be a wonderful thing, but is really just some bullshit on the order of faith.  That's what the German's must have felt in the promise of jobs, security, and a scapegoat minority to hold responsible. 

Your parents explained the underlying dynamic for why people can lose control of their minds and act in opposition to their best interests.  And human nature is such that this dynamic isn't just a one time fluke.  It's always just under the service, and there is always some self serving politician waiting around to use it for his own ends when people start to exhibit the symptoms of hopelessness.

Of course in the end, things didn't work out so well for the Germans.  Hope, security, and phony explanations ended in unconditional defeat and humiliation.  No one would do that to themselves, right?  Nope! That dynamic is built into our species.  Maybe we want leaders to give it to us.  When people are frustrated and have no control over their lives (or just believe this is so), having someone give it to you seems like the only option, and you will start grabbing at people who are willing to promise what you think you want.

Offline reasonist

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #17 on: May 17, 2017, 02:46:11 PM »
I think you mistook my purpose. I didn't compare Trump with Hitler. I compared the die hard followers of Trump with the die hard brown shirts of the 30's. I understand the dynamics of longing for a strong hand, especially during hard times, but do not comprehend how so many can be so blind NOW! The economy is in fine shape, not perfect but better than in Europe, poverty is down, everybody can own a gun, even the mentally ill, but yet 62 million voters wanted a cartoon character as their leader! The guy laid out all his intentions and let everybody know that he is a pathological liar, sexual predator, ruthless businessman, and so much more; he didn't make it a secret and change his skin after the election. No! He was very open about it all and yet...look what happened. And after three months of chaos and dilettantism, of constant lies and cover ups, 96% still stick with this man-child! This is perverse, really!
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities
Voltaire

Offline trdsf

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #18 on: May 17, 2017, 03:34:49 PM »
Or perhaps Hillary was simply the strongest candidate the Democrats could muster.  I doubt this, however.  There are likely many others that could have done better.  Bernie Sanders, I think may have, but in the end, the primary election decides who gets the nomination.  So in the end, much of the responsibility for the choice of candidate falls on the voters.
To be fair, and I did vote Bernie in the primary, Sanders was never a Democrat before the '16 campaign, and he's still an independent who caucuses with the Dems, not a Democratic Senator.  So Hillary was the strongest actual Democrat in the field.

I'm not sure who I'm looking to in '20.  I wouldn't mind seeing Howard Dean have another go, although by then he'll be 72, and I'd much rather see him and some Obama '08 veterans pushing the 50 State Strategy again.  I could cheerily vote Al Franken, but he will be nearing 70 himself by then.  I wouldn't mind seeing my own senator, Sherrod Brown, have a go.

I have a feeling our '20 contender is going to be someone that makes a name over the next couple years, rather than someone who already is one.  The only other potential candidate I can think of would be Julián Castro, Obama's HUD secretary and former mayor of San Antonio.
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning." -- Calvin and Hobbes
"Confused? At a loss for what to do? Wow, sounds like you're human. Good luck." -- Welcome to Night Vale

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #19 on: May 17, 2017, 04:00:00 PM »
The economy is in fine shape, not perfect but better than in Europe, poverty is down
Yeah, but that's only because of job creators.  They selflessly hook up a ton of people with jobs and only ask for a tiny cut of the profits.  They're entitled to that.  But these anti-american commies want to increase their taxes, causing these noble souls to flee the country they love.  It'll be just like Atlas Shrugged, just you watch.

Quote
everybody can own a gun, even the mentally ill
Just as Jesus intended when he wrote the constitution.  It's simple: more guns = more safe.  But the (D)emons want to take away all the guns.  Sure, they say they just want to do this restriction or that restriction.  Some gun show something or another, blah blah blah.  Each restriction is a just another chink in the armor of freedom and a mile marker on the road to complete pacification, enabling the evil government's military (which I normally revere) to run roughshod over American citizens.

Quote
The guy laid out all his intentions and let everybody know that he is a pathological liar, sexual predator, ruthless businessman
I think you meant to say flexible thinker, alpha male, and successful businessman.

Quote
96% still stick with this man-child! This is perverse, really!
Nope.  He ordered some people to drop a bomb half the world away.  It takes real courage to do that.  Trump became President that day.  Finally, a manly man to look up to.  A real role model for the kids.

Offline SGOS

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #20 on: May 17, 2017, 04:05:08 PM »
@Resonist : I was thinking along the lines of the similar dynamics that brought Hitler to power.  They were more intense, but the feeling of hopelessness, real or imagined, sets the same stage.  It's the dynamics that allow this to happen.  People get a little nuts.  Perhaps hysterical is a better word.

As to the shape of the economy, it's not as bad as the Third Reich, but right now, the government defines the economy on criteria like the stock market, which serves the interests of a few.  Most people I know can't afford stocks, and they are not participating in the improved economy.  As for guns, the advocates always fear losing them, and are constantly being told the government is going to take them away.  There is a whole different feel in the country than 30 years ago, with the wealthy having a field day, while the proletariat worries.  And things don't have collapse entirely for people to worry, and when people worry or long for some past that is no longer available, the dynamic sets in.

I find the whole thing interesting.  I'm old enough not to worry about my personal future.  If I died tomorrow, I wouldn't miss much of my life, and after I'm gone, I won't worry about anything.  That may sound crass, but it's honest.  I can afford to observe.  I've done my part to try to make things better.  I've been deeply involved in grass roots efforts to make small changes in our approach to the environment.  I haven't accomplished much, even though I have worked my ass off, but at least I can leave this place with a clear conscience.  It's not like I've been detached from this or the mess we are in.

Remember the justification for supporting Trump?  "He tells it like it is."  Fits rather well on a bumper sticker, and means about as much.  Actually, he just blurts out his own thoughtless remarks.  He certainly does tell it.  Like it is?  Not so much.  Come on.  It's worth a chuckle at least.  But your parents are right.  They explained the basics of the dynamics at play.  There should be some closure in that, if only closure of understanding.

I'm sorry to hear that Canada is already being affected.  That's not a good thing.  And I get no joy from that.  Economists were predicting trade would be affected negatively for all countries.  They also predicted a short bounce for the US, before the negatives hit here.  I don't know what's true or what's going to happen, however.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2017, 04:25:11 PM by SGOS »

Offline SGOS

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #21 on: May 17, 2017, 04:24:32 PM »
To be fair, and I did vote Bernie in the primary, Sanders was never a Democrat before the '16 campaign, and he's still an independent who caucuses with the Dems, not a Democratic Senator.  So Hillary was the strongest actual Democrat in the field.

I'm not sure who I'm looking to in '20.  I wouldn't mind seeing Howard Dean have another go, although by then he'll be 72, and I'd much rather see him and some Obama '08 veterans pushing the 50 State Strategy again.  I could cheerily vote Al Franken, but he will be nearing 70 himself by then.  I wouldn't mind seeing my own senator, Sherrod Brown, have a go.

I have a feeling our '20 contender is going to be someone that makes a name over the next couple years, rather than someone who already is one.  The only other potential candidate I can think of would be Julián Castro, Obama's HUD secretary and former mayor of San Antonio.
I think it will be an unknown in 2020, also.  Hillary is done, and all we've been hearing for the last 8 years was Hillary, so it's mostly just unknowns to choose from.  For some reason, this gives me some hope.  Maybe just because it gets us off this Hillary fixation.  And I'm not saying Hillary would have been a bad president, just not the type that would take us out of this slow decline and wretched political division that has taken hold of the country.  Maybe no one can.  I think an unknown gives me hope, because I don't know anyone that might.  So it almost has to be an unknown, to me anyway.   Not that I'm even remotely aware of all the material that's out there.

And then there still is "we the people" not often heard from, but it was we the people that changed the country's position towards gay marriage.  Congress talked about it, but didn't do much.  Obama thought long and hard before saying he thought it would be OK.  In other words, he was watching the polling data of the people.  The courts decided it, but changing demographics of "we the people" played a huge part in that.  I'll give that one to the little people, who got that through with out many key players in the leadership having to do much but talk about it and keep their asses out of the line of fire by not having it on their voting record.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2017, 07:41:20 AM by SGOS »

Offline reasonist

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #22 on: May 17, 2017, 04:35:26 PM »
Yeah, but that's only because of job creators.  They selflessly hook up a ton of people with jobs and only ask for a tiny cut of the profits.  They're entitled to that.  But these anti-american commies want to increase their taxes, causing these noble souls to flee the country they love.  It'll be just like Atlas Shrugged, just you watch.
Just as Jesus intended when he wrote the constitution.  It's simple: more guns = more safe.  But the (D)emons want to take away all the guns.  Sure, they say they just want to do this restriction or that restriction.  Some gun show something or another, blah blah blah.  Each restriction is a just another chink in the armor of freedom and a mile marker on the road to complete pacification, enabling the evil government's military (which I normally revere) to run roughshod over American citizens.
I think you meant to say flexible thinker, alpha male, and successful businessman.
Nope.  He ordered some people to drop a bomb half the world away.  It takes real courage to do that.  Trump became President that day.  Finally, a manly man to look up to.  A real role model for the kids.

Funny! That made me laugh!!!
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities
Voltaire

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #23 on: May 17, 2017, 04:43:45 PM »
To be fair, and I did vote Bernie in the primary, Sanders was never a Democrat before the '16 campaign, and he's still an independent who caucuses with the Dems, not a Democratic Senator.  So Hillary was the strongest actual Democrat in the field.
True, but policywise, Sanders has far more in common with Democrats (the rank-and-file Dems if not the DNC) than a lot of actual Democrat politicians, some of whom have waffled on healthcare and increasing the minimum wage.  This apparent discrepancy between Democrats and their representatives does not bode well for the future of the party.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2017, 04:45:53 PM by Hydra009 »

Offline Baruch

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #24 on: May 17, 2017, 06:15:03 PM »
I think you mistook my purpose. I didn't compare Trump with Hitler. I compared the die hard followers of Trump with the die hard brown shirts of the 30's. I understand the dynamics of longing for a strong hand, especially during hard times, but do not comprehend how so many can be so blind NOW! The economy is in fine shape, not perfect but better than in Europe, poverty is down, everybody can own a gun, even the mentally ill, but yet 62 million voters wanted a cartoon character as their leader! The guy laid out all his intentions and let everybody know that he is a pathological liar, sexual predator, ruthless businessman, and so much more; he didn't make it a secret and change his skin after the election. No! He was very open about it all and yet...look what happened. And after three months of chaos and dilettantism, of constant lies and cover ups, 96% still stick with this man-child! This is perverse, really!

And if it were Hillary, 96% would stick with her too.  Sorry, America is toast.  Better learn Russian or Chinese ... this country has no future at all.  And sorry, I don't see Europe as better ... different ... but not better.  Society is criminogenic, all of them, not just Germany in the 1930s.  There is no place to retire to that would be better, with the top million sociopaths (and occasional psychopaths) in charge.  The ancient Greeks had a saying ... count no man happy until he is dead.  I am beginning to think they were right.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2017, 06:20:13 PM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline Baruch

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #25 on: May 17, 2017, 06:17:03 PM »
To be fair, and I did vote Bernie in the primary, Sanders was never a Democrat before the '16 campaign, and he's still an independent who caucuses with the Dems, not a Democratic Senator.  So Hillary was the strongest actual Democrat in the field.

I'm not sure who I'm looking to in '20.  I wouldn't mind seeing Howard Dean have another go, although by then he'll be 72, and I'd much rather see him and some Obama '08 veterans pushing the 50 State Strategy again.  I could cheerily vote Al Franken, but he will be nearing 70 himself by then.  I wouldn't mind seeing my own senator, Sherrod Brown, have a go.

I have a feeling our '20 contender is going to be someone that makes a name over the next couple years, rather than someone who already is one.  The only other potential candidate I can think of would be Julián Castro, Obama's HUD secretary and former mayor of San Antonio.

I would give Al Franken a go ... for the chuckles.  I like him, don't care if he is a Constitutional a-hole lawyer or not.
שלום

Offline trdsf

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2017, 09:44:09 AM »
True, but policywise, Sanders has far more in common with Democrats (the rank-and-file Dems if not the DNC) than a lot of actual Democrat politicians, some of whom have waffled on healthcare and increasing the minimum wage.  This apparent discrepancy between Democrats and their representatives does not bode well for the future of the party.
Oh, absolutely.  He reminds me of the party before the DLC took over and shifted the party to the right.  Labor -- or at least what's left of the labor movement -- has been largely abandoned by the modern party, as has the working class, organized or otherwise.  Hopefully Bernie is the start of reversing that.
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning." -- Calvin and Hobbes
"Confused? At a loss for what to do? Wow, sounds like you're human. Good luck." -- Welcome to Night Vale

Offline AllPurposeAtheist

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #27 on: May 18, 2017, 09:52:46 AM »
The next president just needs to be a better liar and not have the initials MP. 
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Offline AllPurposeAtheist

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #28 on: May 18, 2017, 09:53:56 AM »
By the way,  anyone else have the feeling Pencil Mike is about to get the grand tour of the bottom of the bus?
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Offline SGOS

Re: the next President of the United States
« Reply #29 on: May 18, 2017, 11:08:43 AM »
True, but policywise, Sanders has far more in common with Democrats (the rank-and-file Dems if not the DNC) than a lot of actual Democrat politicians, some of whom have waffled on healthcare and increasing the minimum wage.  This apparent discrepancy between Democrats and their representatives does not bode well for the future of the party.
Oh, absolutely.  He reminds me of the party before the DLC took over and shifted the party to the right.  Labor -- or at least what's left of the labor movement -- has been largely abandoned by the modern party, as has the working class, organized or otherwise.  Hopefully Bernie is the start of reversing that.
As far as I'm concerned, this part of the discussion could be a brief summary of the most significant aspect of American politics over the last 40 years.  Thirty years ago, I would have protested it as the wrong direction.  Today I would add that it has been a grave failure. 

I presume the strategy was to strengthen the Democratic Party by moving as close to the Republicans as possible thereby abandoning the base in an attempt to capture the undecided who might support what was then the R Party.  This would pick up enough votes to win at least some elections, hopefully all of them.  The base, having nowhere to go, would still vote D as the lesser of two evils.  It makes sense on paper if you don't mind the eventual outcome and disregard potential negative consequences.

The republicans reacted to the strategy, not by coming closer to the middle, but by turning farther to the right, because they had the foresight to understand that compromise didn't win elections.  Separation of ideology and demonization of the opposition is the key, which maintains the perception that the choices are clear, while pointing out the devastating consequences of the "wrong" choice.

The Democrats countered by running even faster to the right, but still hoping that the base would not abandon them, which most haven't really, because it's still about the lesser of evils.  BUT the unintended consequence is that a portion of the base is feeling disenfranchised, beaten, unrepresented, and consequently, losing interest, and with their stuffings knocked out of them by their own party, unresponsive.

A few years ago, right here in this forum, I heard members (now gone) talking about the brilliance of the Democratic strategy; Push the Republicans so far to the right that they fall off the cliff. That made no sense to me.  There was no cliff, just a sea of ignorance and fear yet untapped to draw new voters into the right.  And when you consider the big picture (I guess the point of the big picture would be a goal of helping America), the picture has taken a back seat to winning elections.  Helping America has either been lost, or maybe it was just always a fantasy.  What good does winning elections do, when there is no benefit other than a temporary rush one can feel when the home team wins a football game?  Winning in politics should result in accomplishing goals.  Not to say the Democrats haven't accomplishing some goals, but nothing truly dramatic, and quite a few that are what the Republicans want anyway.

Now the Democrats are in a kind of nowhere and their only strategy left is to focus on refranchising the disenfranchised.  But it doesn't seem to be working because the disenfranchised don't have much left to be franchised about.  They remain unrepresented, abandoned, and in near despair, except for some table scraps now and then.  And the flaw in chasing after the Republican votes is that most Republicans are conditioned to vote Republican even if it ends up hurting them.  The Democrats can be as right wing as they want, but they bear the unshakeable name of the "Democratic Party," guaranteed to strike fear and distain into the rightwing, the very voters the Democrats are trying to curry.

In the end, nothing changes because both parties represent 90% of America, probably always have (America being that 1% that holds 90% of the wealth).  They represent America's wealth more than it's demographics.  I'm not saying this is right or wrong.  It is what it is, I suppose.  But it's not something that excites me.

These are just my perceptions, somewhat exaggerated at times.  Just me trying to make my point in the way I usually do in my ranting sort of way.  We can quibble about the details.  Don't get me wrong.  I believe we need the Democratic Party to be a counterpoint to the Right.  But I don't want them to mirror the Right.  If that's what this is, then I guess we only need one party, and we could drop all the rancor and have a love in, doing our American stuff to the wonder of the rest of the world.

Do I dare click on the post button?  What the fuck.  I'll just do it.  <thunk>