THE Political Thread (All Political Discussion Here)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 885, 886, 887, 888  Next

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ExPatLkrFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2726
Location: Mukdahan, Thailand

PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 8:50 pm    Post subject:

akk7 wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
That was directed toward a comment that working class people in rust belt voted on economic issues and the "liberals" were more concerned with their "cultural" or "social" issues. The implication being that voting based on pocket book issues was more legit, and concern for social issues is more like a liberal hobby. My point is that it's all equally legit when it impacts your life.


I found the post that you're referring to, and I agree with you. The idea that social issues are not important to voters in the rust belt seems dubious to me anyway. When we talk about abortion, gay rights, and the Supreme Court, we aren't just talking about something that is important to people in one particular region or one particular side of the political spectrum.

Having said that, the mainstream Democratic Party no longer speaks to the white, working class voters in the Midwest. (Yes, that is an over-generalization, but I'm painting with broad brush strokes.) The Dems need to learn from the Bernie Sanders experience. I don't mean Sanders personally. I think an old Jewish/atheist socialist from Vermont would have gotten chewed up in the general election. I know the polls say he would have beaten Trump, but I'm not sold. He never got placed in the bright spotlight of a general election campaign. He might have beaten Trump, but he might have been McGovern 2.0.

While I don't mean Sanders personally, I do mean his populist message. Sanders talked to people about the things that mattered to them in their lives. Sanders had a message of hope, much like Obama did in 2008. HRC did have a positive message, in all fairness, but it got buried by her mountains of baggage. Besides, her positive message was basically faith in the status quo.

In hindsight, the Dems should have seen this years ago. Every poll tells us that the public thinks that the country is heading in the wrong direction. So what did the Dems do? They served up a status quo, establishment candidate. Even then, they won the popular vote because the GOP served up Trump. Still, this election should have been a beat down.

HRC got the nomination because she played the game skillfully. She lined up establishment support. She lined up establishment money. The DNC was behind her, because she was one of them. Everyone just assumed that she was invincible. When Bernie Sanders (of all people) made her sweat, it was a warning that the establishment had misjudged the mood of the public. It was too late, though.

It's easy to say this with 20-20 hindsight. Heck, if HRC had gotten a few more votes in PA and MI, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Still, the bottom line is that this election should have been a beat down. Now the Democratic Party is weaker than it has been in modern times.


Apparently Bill Clinton wanted to go to these areas and campaign for votes and the campaign blew off his advice. I do think HRC had actual polices that could have helped these very people but the press wanted to focus on emails, faux-controversy, Trump-the-ratings-boom and almost nothing about policy. Hillary gave policy speeches but no one covered them, they were too busy giving free 24/7 media to Trump.

You can say it should have been a beat down, but Trump's celebrity and shtick worked from the beginning of GOP primaries all the way to the end. She won all the debates. The exit polling showed even the people who voted for Trump gave her higher ratings for temperament, ability to handle the job, etc. And yet...

And then there is the Comey thing -- the first letter drove her numbers down. Then when things stabilized, the second letter galvanized Trump supporters.

When all is said and done she will have about 2 million more votes than Trump and the most of any candidate in history not named Barack Obama.

For a multitude of reasons (and yes, gender is one of then), it just didn't happen.


Did it ever come out (probably not, she won't ever say it) why she set up a private server?

What are the explanations for doing so anyway?

That killed her and made her seem very untrustworthy.

In my mind, even if she turned out to be a mediocre president, her being the first woman president alone would've been hope and an inspiration. It's very corny/cliche, but a lot of people would be inspired by that. So I was rooting for her, because I myself wanted to see it happen. While, the person about to take office, doesn't inspire anything positive. Of course that's from my point of view, because many people would say Trump does inspire them.


I believe it was Slate that ran an article saying that the reason for the private server is because she is computer illiterate and has no desire to change that. Thus her staff wanted to set up a server she could use with her Blackberry. The Blackberry was insecure and could not be used with the State Department system. Other than that her staff was printing out everything in hard copy which is one of the reasons Huma Abedin had thousands of emails on the laptop she shared with Weiner so she could print them out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
Shaolin's Finest
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2009
Posts: 1200

PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 9:12 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Shaolin's Finest wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
When you vote for a candidate who openly courts white nationalists, KKK, began his campaign insulting Mexicans, Muslims and women, went on to be revealed as a serial sex offender, and then you choose to vote for that person anyway, you are in essence CONDONING those behaviors and telling your children those behaviors are acceptable. You can't vote for the racist/bigot/misogynist, watch as those attitudes create violence, then say, "Oh well, I'm not a racist I only voted for him." No. You helped create the outcome. You can't vote for a racist then divorce yourself from racism.

And by the way, social issues ARE economic issues -- if you're not a white male. Equal pay for equal work for women, ability to control your own reproductive choices affects ability to go to college, earn income, etc. The ability of LGTB people to legally marry affects their social security, insurance benefits, etc. -- all economic matters. Education and tuition -- all economic matters. The environment -- more floods, more extreme storms, more tornadoes, all cost billions of dollars to the economy -- all economic matters.

Forgive me if I'm interpreting this wrong, but the basic gist of what you are saying is that anyone who voted for Trump is a racist and sexist?


Not speak for CL, but to me, the point is not that all Trump voters are racist, but by voting for a man who very vocally fed those feelings, voters have knowingly and actively participated in creating an environment where such racism has been legitimized.

Gotcha
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 38536

PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 10:24 pm    Post subject:

Shaolin's Finest wrote:

Forgive me if I'm interpreting this wrong, but the basic gist of what you are saying is that anyone who voted for Trump is a racist and sexist?


You are not the only one interpreting it that way.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 13787
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:54 am    Post subject:

Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 6846

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:43 am    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To look at it a different way too, it basically boils down to that there are too few choices to pick from. 2 parties, 2 candidates with occasional 3rd non viable candidate. This is partly i think why Americans are so used to overlook negative qualities of candidate, no other choice. I do agree with you that Trump is different, definitely used bigotry (subtle or not) to rile up his base. I mean I don't like Hillary and I voted for her cause of Trump but I have friends, coworkers, family members that overlook those things. I don't know, I don't know how to digest all this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 28529

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:38 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To look at it a different way too, it basically boils down to that there are too few choices to pick from. 2 parties, 2 candidates with occasional 3rd non viable candidate. This is partly i think why Americans are so used to overlook negative qualities of candidate, no other choice. I do agree with you that Trump is different, definitely used bigotry (subtle or not) to rile up his base. I mean I don't like Hillary and I voted for her cause of Trump but I have friends, coworkers, family members that overlook those things. I don't know, I don't know how to digest all this.


I'm of the opinion that the Democratic Party did a very poor job this election cycle. Its one thing for Trump to win a position of the President of the United States. Great thats the executive branch....but for the Democrats to also not gain enough seats in the House or Senate, well thats a massive screw up on their part. That means they did a very poor job of communicating to the middle class about how they wanted to help them. Don't forget the Republicans like Paul Ryan were trying to save his candidates in the down ticket races and didn't do much to campaign for Donald Trump.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 29617
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:58 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To look at it a different way too, it basically boils down to that there are too few choices to pick from. 2 parties, 2 candidates with occasional 3rd non viable candidate. This is partly i think why Americans are so used to overlook negative qualities of candidate, no other choice. I do agree with you that Trump is different, definitely used bigotry (subtle or not) to rile up his base. I mean I don't like Hillary and I voted for her cause of Trump but I have friends, coworkers, family members that overlook those things. I don't know, I don't know how to digest all this.


I have no doubt there are many Trump voters that think what he says was despicable, but still voted for him because if it came down to voting for a racist or voting for someone who would allow the "murder" of babies, they'd pick racism over murder. The same logic can be applied to whether they would rather vote for a racist or the perception that if they don't, they'll remain unemployed or lose their job or lose the ability to save the lives of themselves and their family by buying guns to use against criminals and the government. I have a friend who's character and morals are beyond reproach and he voted for Trump. Why? Because for him, as a devout Catholic, his #1 issue is abortion and whoever is anti-abortion will always get his vote regardless of what else is said.

Here is an example to illustrate my point as to what is going on for many who voted for Trump. Say I'm in the street and some guy has a gun pointed at me, and this KKK member comes along and says "I have a gun, I'll protect you from this guy who is about to shoot you if you ask me to." I would probably say "yes, please protect me" and then deal with the fact he is a KKK member once I am safe. I'm not condoning the fact he is a KKK member, I'm just using him because I don't want to die. Of course that's an extreme example, but I would imagine many who voted for Trump reflect a more or less extreme version of that. I don't agree that just because you voted for Trump, you condone everything he says anything more than I agree that just because you voted for Hillary you condone everything Hillary has ever done or said (regardless of whether or not such arises to the level of Trump's rhetoric).

Many Trump voters recognize the hate speech but put it to the side because they prioritize other issues. I know a lot of people who did just that, and none of them are racist or think highly of a lot of what Trump said. Many Trump voters also would also simply rather vote for someone who even they think is racist than someone who they are sure is corrupt. They think corruption is worse than hate speech. Of course, there are also many Trump voters who believe he doesn't believe much of what he says, but think he said it because that was the best way to get the votes he needed to win.

This stuff isn't black and white.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service


Last edited by LakerSanity on Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:08 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raijin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 6416

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:04 am    Post subject:

lakersken80 wrote:
governator wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To look at it a different way too, it basically boils down to that there are too few choices to pick from. 2 parties, 2 candidates with occasional 3rd non viable candidate. This is partly i think why Americans are so used to overlook negative qualities of candidate, no other choice. I do agree with you that Trump is different, definitely used bigotry (subtle or not) to rile up his base. I mean I don't like Hillary and I voted for her cause of Trump but I have friends, coworkers, family members that overlook those things. I don't know, I don't know how to digest all this.


I'm of the opinion that the Democratic Party did a very poor job this election cycle. Its one thing for Trump to win a position of the President of the United States. Great thats the executive branch....but for the Democrats to also not gain enough seats in the House or Senate, well thats a massive screw up on their part. That means they did a very poor job of communicating to the middle class about how they wanted to help them. Don't forget the Republicans like Paul Ryan were trying to save his candidates in the down ticket races and didn't do much to campaign for Donald Trump

I have no confidence in the DNC leadership and haven't had any for quite a while. I mean that both in their ability to win elections and their ability to bring about change. I'm still angry they didn't pass single payer; it was a monumentous opportunity they let fall by the wayside because they did not lack conviction. They were more worried about their careers and how they might lose political power in future sessions. They could have done something that would have had a demonstrable positive effect on the American people for generations. That 2 year period from 2008-2010 was a (bleep) golden opportunity to get through what their constituency had elected them to do. Not invoking the nuclear option is lacking conviction and we'll see more of this lack of conviction over the upcoming 2 years when they let the Repubs walk all over them.

They couldn't even win the Presidential election when the Repub party had all but abandoned Donald Trump.
_________________
"It was tough," Kobe Bryant said. "But when it got really tough for me, I just checked myself in."


Last edited by Raijin on Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:13 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19217

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:08 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
I am sure there are some Trump voters that think what he says was despicable, but still voted for him because if it came down to voting for a racist or voting for someone who would allow the "murder" of babies, they'd pick racism over murder. The same logic can be applied to whether they would rather vote for a racist or the perception that if they don't, they'll remain unemployed or lose their job or lose the ability to save the lives of themselves and their family by buying guns to use against criminals and the government.


That's true, but more importantly (as some pundit said), Democrats take Trump literally, but they don't take him seriously, while Republicans take him seriously, but they don't take him literally. You already see people in this forum trying to distinguish between the "win at all costs" Trump on the campaign trail and the "real" Trump.

I think that there is considerable force behind that distinction, but it comes with considerable peril for Trump and the GOP. The angriest Republicans did take him literally. I know a few of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39660
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:10 am    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To borrow someone else's comment:

"Not all Trump voters are racists. But all Trumps voters decided racism wasn't a deal breaker."
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 29617
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:13 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To borrow someone else's comment:

"Not all Trump voters are racists. But all Trumps voters decided racism wasn't a deal breaker."


"Not all Hillary voters believe corruption is good. But all Hillary voters decided corruption wasn't a deal breaker."

I don't think Hillary is corrupt, but its easy to make these arguments depending on what world you believe us all to live in and what you believe to be true in this world. I think we just gotta stop stereotyping each other, whether it be based on our race or our political affiliation.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service


Last edited by LakerSanity on Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:14 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Nordvader
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Jan 2012
Posts: 1658

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:13 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To borrow someone else's comment:

"Not all Trump voters are racists. But all Trumps voters decided racism wasn't a deal breaker."


I think this video sums up a lot of what some of us might be feeling about Trump voters right now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcAPcmorsC8
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tlim
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6391

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:22 am    Post subject:

Trump supporters either rationalize the racism away or are racist. It doesn't matter to them because they "take back my country". And it feels good to them even though it is not.

What did Trump want to give them? A feeling of being top man on the totem pole while making our structural debt problems even worse.

Already there are signs of breaking the pledge on Social Security and Medicare. When will GOP voters recognize that almost all policies by that party is designed to be fool's gold in terms of economics? And do they care?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39660
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:25 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
I have no doubt there are many Trump voters that think what he says was despicable, but still voted for him because if it came down to voting for a racist or voting for someone who would allow the "murder" of babies, they'd pick racism over murder.


There's a major flaw in that reasoning. I am assuming when you say Clinton is a baby "murderer", you are referring to drone strikes overseas that hit civilian targets. That activity is not going to stop under Trump. And if one listens to his bombastic comments about getting ISIS AND KILLING THEIR FAMILIES, that should be obvious.

So, no, the choice was NOT one versus the other. Nor is it with corruption. Trump's every bit as crooked as Hilary just look at Trump University etc.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tlim
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6391

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:28 am    Post subject:

Just want to give a shoutout to the mods. This board has by far the most civil discussion of politics that I know.

It gets a little rowdy sometimes but many people want to contribute and understand the situation and try and move our county forward instead of the memes and name calling that is so prevalent even of Facebook who are supposed to connect people to each other but many posts there have become utter cesspools.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 29617
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:29 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
I have no doubt there are many Trump voters that think what he says was despicable, but still voted for him because if it came down to voting for a racist or voting for someone who would allow the "murder" of babies, they'd pick racism over murder.


There's a major flaw in that reasoning. I am assuming when you say Clinton is a baby "murderer", you are referring to drone strikes overseas that hit civilian targets. That activity is not going to stop under Trump. And if one listens to his bombastic comments about getting ISIS AND KILLING THEIR FAMILIES, that should be obvious.

So, no, the choice was NOT one versus the other. Nor is it with corruption. Trump's every bit as crooked as Hilary just look at Trump University etc.


No, was only referring specifically to abortion. Agree with you on the drone strikes. One of the criticisms I have had about Obama.

I also think its a different thing to say that one is a corrupt politician, abandoning their constituency for self interest versus a businessman who screws over his customers. I mean, both are bad, but they are different and there are good arguments to be made that one is much worse than the other.

I hate that I have to make these arguments by the way. It's just the mentality I am trying to take because I see a country divided and I want to believe it doesn't have to be.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18847

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:31 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
governator wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
Maybe people need to look up the word condone. Of course no one is calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist.

This is a bad analogy but here goes:

If you're walking down the street and you see some thugs beating someone up, you can 1) pretend you didn't see it and keep walking, 2) You can try to stop it, 3) You can call the police.

None of these actions makes you a thug. But one of these things is not like the others.


To look at it a different way too, it basically boils down to that there are too few choices to pick from. 2 parties, 2 candidates with occasional 3rd non viable candidate. This is partly i think why Americans are so used to overlook negative qualities of candidate, no other choice. I do agree with you that Trump is different, definitely used bigotry (subtle or not) to rile up his base. I mean I don't like Hillary and I voted for her cause of Trump but I have friends, coworkers, family members that overlook those things. I don't know, I don't know how to digest all this.


I have no doubt there are many Trump voters that think what he says was despicable, but still voted for him because if it came down to voting for a racist or voting for someone who would allow the "murder" of babies, they'd pick racism over murder. The same logic can be applied to whether they would rather vote for a racist or the perception that if they don't, they'll remain unemployed or lose their job or lose the ability to save the lives of themselves and their family by buying guns to use against criminals and the government. I have a friend who's character and morals are beyond reproach and he voted for Trump. Why? Because for him, as a devout Catholic, his #1 issue is abortion and whoever is anti-abortion will always get his vote regardless of what else is said.

Here is an example to illustrate my point as to what is going on for many who voted for Trump. Say I'm in the street and some guy has a gun pointed at me, and this KKK member comes along and says "I have a gun, I'll protect you from this guy who is about to shoot you if you ask me to." I would probably say "yes, please protect me" and then deal with the fact he is a KKK member once I am safe. I'm not condoning the fact he is a KKK member, I'm just using him because I don't want to die. Of course that's an extreme example, but I would imagine many who voted for Trump reflect a more or less extreme version of that. I don't agree that just because you voted for Trump, you condone everything he says anything more than I agree that just because you voted for Hillary you condone everything Hillary has ever done or said (regardless of whether or not such arises to the level of Trump's rhetoric).

Many Trump voters recognize the hate speech but put it to the side because they prioritize other issues. I know a lot of people who did just that, and none of them are racist or think highly of a lot of what Trump said. Many Trump voters also would also simply rather vote for someone who even they think is racist than someone who they are sure is corrupt. They think corruption is worse than hate speech. Of course, there are also many Trump voters who believe he doesn't believe much of what he says, but think he said it because that was the best way to get the votes he needed to win.

This stuff isn't black and white.


I think you nailed it on the head with your analogy. From the conversations I've had, and interviews I've seen, the majority were faced with the following dilemma:

Do I pick someone who I feel confident would be better for me and my family, even if I am equally confident they are not the best choice for others -- or do I pick someone who I feel confident will be best for others, but am equally confident is not best for me and my family?

So I think what you end up seeing on the coasts is, well, even if Trump ends up lowering my taxes and that is better for me and my family, I still have enough to get by so I'll pick the candidate that's better for everyone else and align with the belief that the rising tide lifts all ships. But in the rustbelt areas, they don't necessarily have that luxury, so, they had to put themselves and their family first.

Even in that Michael Moore video, they asked several Trump-voting veterans about it and they seemed at times to struggle with their choice of Trump, hurt by his comments about McCain.

I mean, they're in a totally different situation than I am. Even though Trump will probably benefit me personally from a financial perspective, I still voted for Hillary but I can afford to do that. But if I'm in Wisconsin, and I'm just trying to get by, how can I be expected to feel any confidence in a candidate's intentions to improve my situation, when she doesn't even bother to show up? First major party candidate to do that in like 50 years.

I can't say I agree with the decision that was made, but I understand it much better after the conversations I've had.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39660
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:59 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
I have no doubt there are many Trump voters that think what he says was despicable, but still voted for him because if it came down to voting for a racist or voting for someone who would allow the "murder" of babies, they'd pick racism over murder.


There's a major flaw in that reasoning. I am assuming when you say Clinton is a baby "murderer", you are referring to drone strikes overseas that hit civilian targets. That activity is not going to stop under Trump. And if one listens to his bombastic comments about getting ISIS AND KILLING THEIR FAMILIES, that should be obvious.

So, no, the choice was NOT one versus the other. Nor is it with corruption. Trump's every bit as crooked as Hilary just look at Trump University etc.


No, was only referring specifically to abortion. Agree with you on the drone strikes. One of the criticisms I have had about Obama.

I also think its a different thing to say that one is a corrupt politician, abandoning their constituency for self interest versus a businessman who screws over his customers. I mean, both are bad, but they are different and there are good arguments to be made that one is much worse than the other.

I hate that I have to make these arguments by the way. It's just the mentality I am trying to take because I see a country divided and I want to believe it doesn't have to be.


And I commend you for doing so.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 13787
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 9:07 am    Post subject:

I didn't agree with McCain's or Romney's policies. But I also didn't think they were dangerous sociopaths who would put our Democracy in jeopardy. This is not an argument I would be making for anyone but Trump. He is a unique threat - no experience, no filter, no attention span, no moral core, admires authoritarian strongmen like Putin, talks about jailing enemies, attacks the free press, whips up violence, never apologizes or thinks he's done anything wrong, has shown no ability to empathize with anyone is not like him, believes in torture, thinks nuclear war should be on the table. And that doesn't include the sexism, misogyny, serial sex offender, bigotry, racism, association with white nationalists.

My god, if a school principal or professional coach had espoused all of the above, they'd be fired in a hot minute. If one of your children's teachers did this stuff, you'd be demanding they'd be fired. If the Lakers had a coach who espoused the is stuffed, he be fired and shunned.

But the leader of the free world? Pfffft, whatever.

If people really think voting for someone with these qualities is A-OK because he espoused some feel good slogan with no policies to back it up, and that they're are going to get a job out of it, then good luck with that. Bless you.

That's my last word on this. Moving on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Laker4andmore
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 17 Sep 2002
Posts: 983

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:49 am    Post subject:

The best part of Trump getting elected is that I think that it avoids a major confrontation with Russia. Hilary and the rest of the military industrial complex warmongers were already setting up the stage with conflict with them by accusing them of being behind Wikileaks despite no evidence. Its understandable why a politician like Hilary who believes politicians should have private and public positions on issues would hate something like Wikileaks and would want to murder Assange like Hilary wants to do.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Laker4andmore
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 17 Sep 2002
Posts: 983

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:53 am    Post subject:

So much stuff about Trump is taken out of context from the left.


Trump doesnt want to jail his enemies.

His comment about jailing Hilary was in relation to Hilary putting our national security at risk by giving access to classified information to people who had no security clearance. It had nothing to do with jailing politicial enemies.


Trump made some comments about illegal immigrants and the response from the left is to call him a racist because hes against immigration. That type of stragety works with young people (the type of people that you ssee protesting). Once you're older and have gone through election cycles, you wise up to this type of tactic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 29617
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:57 am    Post subject:

Laker4andmore wrote:
The best part of Trump getting elected is that I think that it avoids a major confrontation with Russia. Hilary and the rest of the military industrial complex warmongers were already setting up the stage with conflict with them by accusing them of being behind Wikileaks despite no evidence. Its understandable why a politician like Hilary who believes politicians should have private and public positions on issues would hate something like Wikileaks and would want to murder Assange like Hilary wants to do.


Say what you will about Hillary and her intentions. Regardless of whether you are right or wrong about her, Russia is a huge problem and one that will have to be addressed. The question will be whether Trump approaches it the right way. You give Russia an inch, Putin tends to take a foot. We don't want another world war, but, at the same time, conflict with Russia may be inevitable.

The best thing we can do to fend off Russia is create a world where we are the clean energy leaders. The less the world relies on fossil fuels and/or mineral production, the less power Russia has. Reversing our progress in energy and the environment plays directly into Russia's hands in that regard. Ironically, addressing climate change isn't just in our environmental interests, its in our economic interests too... yet I get the feeling a Trump administration won't see it that way.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Laker4andmore
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 17 Sep 2002
Posts: 983

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:00 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:


Say what you will about Hillary and her intentions. Regardless of whether you are right or wrong about her, Russia is a huge problem and one that will have to be addressed. .


Russia is a problem in what context?

If you're talking about Crimea, the US has supported and is supporting a country that has moved its military accross internationally recognized borders and has tried to annex neighboring countries soverign land for 60 years.

Putin gets called the next Hitler for annexing land but Israel, who has tried annexing soverign Egyptian and Syrian land, gets billions in US taxpayer money for doing the same. Go figure.


Last edited by Laker4andmore on Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:07 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 29617
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:01 am    Post subject:

Laker4andmore wrote:
Trump doesnt want to jail his enemies.

His comment about jailing Hilary was in relation to Hilary putting our national security at risk by giving access to classified information to people who had no security clearance. It had nothing to do with jailing politicial enemies.


On a debate stage, for the entire world to see, he threatened to prosecute a political opponent and put her in jail if he won the election. One can try to rationalize that approach, but not another President in U.S. history has ever done that or made that threat to their political opponent. The President sticks to the big picture and leaves these things to the FBI, or else it becomes way too huge of a slippery slope. That not another President has ever done this or would ever think to creates the argument that his intention had nothing to do with whether or not Hillary is a criminal, but, rather, to intimidate her and anyone else who would stand against him. It's an issue.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Laker4andmore
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 17 Sep 2002
Posts: 983

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:04 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:




On a debate stage, for the entire world to see, he threatened to prosecute a political opponent and put her in jail if he won the election. One can try to rationalize that approach, but not another President in U.S. history has ever done that or made that threat to their political opponent. .


He threatened to jail her for putting our national security at risk, not for being his political opponent.

How come he didnt make the jail comment to Bush Carson etc? Because they didnt give access to classified information to people who had no security clearance.


Last edited by Laker4andmore on Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 885, 886, 887, 888  Next
Page 886 of 888
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






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB