2016 Election: a Foreigner's Perspective

[X. Li]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

 

[Meathead]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

 

[X. Li]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

Here's the thing though: is this situation created by the American people because this is what you want, or is it created by the Democrats? If it is the former, you've found your well-deserved leadership; otherwise, you are all screwed.

 

[Alt_Ascendant]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

Here's the thing though: is this situation created by the American people because this is what you want, or is it created by the Democrats? If it is the former, you've found your well-deserved leadership; otherwise, you are all screwed.

It's the latter for sure. I know dozens of people who are Democrats because they think it's best based on the news and their teachers, and don't understand the bias. They lack substance and a passion to research and understand issues.

Regardless, quite well written! I love seeing a foreigner's perspective.

 

[Meathead]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

Here's the thing though: is this situation created by the American people because this is what you want, or is it created by the Democrats? If it is the former, you've found your well-deserved leadership; otherwise, you are all screwed.

It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate. The hope is that democratic institutions are inviolable and under which a sufficiently educated and informed public can and will seek to correct. The problem,as you aptly point out, is the media's obvious imbalance and lack of impartiality. I take solace in the fact that despite the onslaught of a "fourth estate" against Mr Trump, there is an obvious and widespread recognition of their influence and increasing popular revolt brewing in the country.

 

[Fenton Lum]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

Here's the thing though: is this situation created by the American people because this is what you want, or is it created by the Democrats? If it is the former, you've found your well-deserved leadership; otherwise, you are all screwed.

It's the latter for sure. I know dozens of people who are Democrats because they think it's best based on the news and their teachers, and don't understand the bias. They lack substance and a passion to research and understand issues.

Regardless, quite well written! I love seeing a foreigner's perspective.

Funny thing about bias, it's invariably someone else's issue.

 

[Fenton Lum]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

Here's the thing though: is this situation created by the American people because this is what you want, or is it created by the Democrats? If it is the former, you've found your well-deserved leadership; otherwise, you are all screwed.

It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate. The hope is that democratic institutions are inviolable and under which a sufficiently educated and informed public can and will seek to correct. The problem,as you aptly point out, is the media's obvious imbalance and lack of impartiality. I take solace in the fact that despite the onslaught of a "fourth estate" against Mr Trump, there is an obvious and widespread recognition of their influence and increasing popular revolt brewing in the country.

"It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate."

No, it is not, but there will always be some of those assholes among us.

 

[Meathead]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

Here's the thing though: is this situation created by the American people because this is what you want, or is it created by the Democrats? If it is the former, you've found your well-deserved leadership; otherwise, you are all screwed.

It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate. The hope is that democratic institutions are inviolable and under which a sufficiently educated and informed public can and will seek to correct. The problem,as you aptly point out, is the media's obvious imbalance and lack of impartiality. I take solace in the fact that despite the onslaught of a "fourth estate" against Mr Trump, there is an obvious and widespread recognition of their influence and increasing popular revolt brewing in the country.

"It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate."

No, it is not, but there will always be some of those assholes among us.

Fenton, this is no place for you. There are literally thousand of threads on this site and thousands of other sites where you would doubtless feel far more comfortable. Shoo!

 

[Fenton Lum]

For those who don't know me or don't remember me, I'm a Chinese visiting scholar who happens to be interested in American politics. While I don't post a lot, I do read your posts and enjoy reading them. These posts help me understand what the American people think about the politics and future of their country, and a large portion of them are inspiring and interesting. To me, the presidential election is purely an event of intellectual interest. At this point, I would like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you. My intention is to offer a different perspective for those who are interested in learning what a foreigner might think about the election or American politics in general.

1. Highly "Left" Academia
Among the first things that draws my attention is the almost-unanimously-left-leaning political views in the academia. If you ask someone in a university, students or faculty, who they are going to vote for, their answers are almost always Clinton. The reasons are also much similar: Trump is racist/xenophobic/sexist, etc; Trump is vulgar, arrogant, and rude; Trump is reckless and dangerous; Trump is stupid and ignorant ... A few of them might mention several reasons in support of Clinton, most likely being: she could be the first female president, or she represents liberal views which they share.

I find this interesting because the academia represents the intellectuals of a country, and it has a major influence on education. It is amazing to see that the academia of a country with supposedly very diversified political views can be united by a single branch of views to this extent. Liberal educators will produce generations of liberal-leaning youngsters. A highly liberal academia means that liberalism is in position of becoming the dominating ideology if it has not yet become so. I believe it is safe to say that America is on her way towards becoming a country of liberalism: there is still quite some distance to that end, but the speed heading towards that end is very fast.

2. Highly "Left" Media
This is where many of my American friends and I do not agree. However, I am pretty confident about my opinion on it, perhaps because I entered the country as an outsider. To me, the mainstream media such as CNN and MSNBC, New York Times, Washinton Post, etc, are akin to CCTV in China. They are obviously the propaganda machine for a political party. In the case of CCTV, it serves for the Communist Party of China, and the majority of the American media serve for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of Chinese adults are aware that the media in China serve as political propaganda machines, which contrasts sharply with the Americans. It appears to me that a large portion of Americans are either unaware of the bias of the media, or more strangely, rely on what they call "a biased media" to make political decisions such as voting in a presidential election. This is perhaps because they lack alternative source of information, so they decide to rely on "critical thinking based on biased reports". The assumption here is that the media is not biased enough to distort reality, and that the "critical thinker" is informed and intelligent enough to extract facts from the biased reports. I am afraid, based on my experience in China, it is a hopeless task similar to shooting birds with eyes closed.

That being said, the consequences for this bias is what I am most interested in. If the Democratic party is capable of controlling the media to this extent, they are on the track to achieve what the Communist Party has done in China. This, combined with what is going on in the academia, is a clear signal to me that the Democratic party is on its way to stand out as the only dominating political force of the United States.

This is one of the conclusions I draw from my observations. I will share more in the future.

Very articulate and accurate. Bravo!

Here's the thing though: is this situation created by the American people because this is what you want, or is it created by the Democrats? If it is the former, you've found your well-deserved leadership; otherwise, you are all screwed.

It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate. The hope is that democratic institutions are inviolable and under which a sufficiently educated and informed public can and will seek to correct. The problem,as you aptly point out, is the media's obvious imbalance and lack of impartiality. I take solace in the fact that despite the onslaught of a "fourth estate" against Mr Trump, there is an obvious and widespread recognition of their influence and increasing popular revolt brewing in the country.

"It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate."

No, it is not, but there will always be some of those assholes among us.

Fenton, this is a place for you. There are literally thousand of threads on this site and thousands of other sites where you would doubtless feel far more comfortable. Shoo!

Your post makes no sense, premature ejaculational, thanks for the concern, quite comfy.

 

[X. Li]

It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate.

More precisely, it is the nature of politicians to seek to dominate.

The hope is that democratic institutions are inviolable and under which a sufficiently educated and informed public can and will seek to correct. The problem,as you aptly point out, is the media's obvious imbalance and lack of impartiality.

Not just the media, think about the academia and education. If the Democrats are able to keep the media and the academia both in control, dominance is a matter of time, and it won't take too long.

I take solace in the fact that despite the onslaught of a "fourth estate" against Mr Trump, there is an obvious and widespread recognition of their influence and increasing popular revolt brewing in the country.

If the vast majority of the American people do not wish the country to be politically dominated by the Democratic party, I have to say that it is going to be an uphill battle to fight even now, not to mention after four years of Clinton. In fact, I think this election is one of the few chances for the American people to say "no" to the current trend. However, I am not quite sure if there are enough voters who (1) understand the meaning of their choices and (2) would like to prevent the current trend.

What I can say is simply: good luck, and I hope you get what you actually want.

 

[Meathead]

It is in the nature of humanity itself to seek to dominate.

More precisely, it is the nature of politicians to seek to dominate.

The hope is that democratic institutions are inviolable and under which a sufficiently educated and informed public can and will seek to correct. The problem,as you aptly point out, is the media's obvious imbalance and lack of impartiality.

Not just the media, think about the academia and education. If the Democrats are able to keep the media and the academia both in control, dominance is a matter of time, and it won't take too long.

I take solace in the fact that despite the onslaught of a "fourth estate" against Mr Trump, there is an obvious and widespread recognition of their influence and increasing popular revolt brewing in the country.

If the vast majority of the American people do not wish the country to be politically dominated by the Democratic party, I have to say that it is going to be an uphill battle to fight even now, not to mention after four years of Clinton. In fact, I think this election is one of the few chances for the American people to say "no" to the current trend. However, I am not quite sure if there are enough voters who (1) understand the meaning of their choices and (2) would like to prevent the current trend.

What I can say is simply: good luck, and I hope you get what you actually want.

As to your first point, I fail to distinguish between leaders and human nature in the sense that humans, as well as most mammals and even many reptiles have pecking orders. Those at the top seek to preserve and defend their dominance primarily as individuals but also as groups as humans. You are from China I believe, and I can find few clearer example then its Communist Party.

Yes, academia does play a role, especially in younger minds. That translate and conveys itself through the media either by those who go on to be journalists and pundits.

On another level, America is undoubtedly changing demographically. At the risk of running afoul of political correctness, there is a number of shortsighted people to whom education and knowledge are secondary to improving their financial situation. It is unreasonable and extremely self-righteous to discount the increase of the under-educated and the influence that popular media has on them.

 

[Hossfly]

X. Li You also must consider a modern politician's three major goals in life.

1. To get elected.

2. To become wealthy.

3. To be re-elected again and again.

Everything else is secondary and incidental.

Clinton is a greedy, power hungry opportunist.

Trump is not a politician and #1 is his only goal.

 

[X. Li]

X. Li You also must consider a modern politician's three major goals in life.

1. To get elected.

2. To become wealthy.

3. To be re-elected again and again.

Everything else is secondary and incidental.

Clinton is a greedy, power hungry opportunist.

Trump is not a politician and #1 is his only goal.

In China, people in the top tend to focus more on 2. To get "elected" is to get recognized and acknowledged by the elites rather than the general public.

Since the American people (the public) still have an influence on the election, it is quite interesting to me that many of you so eagerly help diminish that influence by voting for a party that is deliberately attempting to manipulate people's mind by controlling education and media, especially when such attempts are dangerously successful. If the party is not what most of you wish to be the only dominate political force in this country, I am afraid you are in serious trouble.

 

[Meathead]

X. Li You also must consider a modern politician's three major goals in life.

1. To get elected.

2. To become wealthy.

3. To be re-elected again and again.

Everything else is secondary and incidental.

Clinton is a greedy, power hungry opportunist.

Trump is not a politician and #1 is his only goal.

In China, people in the top tend to focus more on 2. To get "elected" is to get recognized and acknowledged by the elites rather than the general public.

Since the American people (the public) still have an influence on the election, it is quite interesting to me that many of you so eagerly help diminish that influence by voting for a party that is deliberately attempting to manipulate people's mind by controlling education and media, especially when such attempts are dangerously successful. If the party is not what most of you wish to be the only dominate political force in this country, I am afraid you are in serious trouble.

If only more Americans had the amazing grasp of the obvious that you do.