CDZ Did we just witness a shift in the political parties?

Toronado3800

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
7,608
Reaction score
559
Points
140
Help me word this more neutrally. After staying up too late last night I think I saw the lines move a bit. Do I understand the "white labor class" went Republican? What is the effective platform of each party?

What does it mean to be Trump supporting Republican?
-End of the Marshall Plan, we aren't scared of the spread of socialism anymore and don't want to pay to prop up weak economies.
-Economic protectionism, pro tariffs
-Pro big brother in your everyone's business in the name of security
-We don't care if the terror watchlist is secret, if you are on it you can't have a gun, Constitutional or not
-Lack of a centralized healthcare plan, the free market will work it out
-Fairly neutral on Social Security
-You can pick what public school your kid goes to if you can get them there
-Low taxes spur growth
-Lower environmental standards to help compete with the 3rd world
-A tad pro-white power and quite a bit homophobic (the VP pick weirds me out)
-Let the states hopefully outlaw abortion as the states have the right to choose, we really haven't done anything about this in 40 years though

What does it mean to be a Hillary Democrat?
-Centralized healthcare
-Higher tax rates with targeted loopholes
-Free trade
-Continue the Marshall Plan by helping strategic allies (like Mexico?) at our direct and indirect cost for the greater good
-Pro choice
-Pro big brother in your everyone's business in the name of security
-We don't care if the terror watchlist is secret, if you are on it you can't have a gun
-Would rather you don't own a gun but besides a silly assault rifle ban have done little on it.
-Pump tons of oil but views coal as last century
-Wants to celebrate cultural and sexual diversity and import new Americans....maybe to drive up real estate prices.

What am I skipping?
 

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,298
Reaction score
3,300
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District
This is what I'd say at this point
D means right to health care
but prochoice when it comes to abortion
R means right to life
but free market choices when it comes to health care
D means voting rights can't be touched
even if that allows fraud
R means gun rights can't be touched
even if that allows abuse
D means right to marriage and LGBT
can be paraded in street and recognized by states (but keep prayer
God and creation out of schools)
R means right to prayer and reparative therapy should be allowed for gays
(but keep gay marriage and transgender in private and out of public policy)
D means ban guns and deregulate drugs
R means ban drugs and deregulate guns
D means Govt is the default authority
(and religion church and God are optional and subject to secular laws and can't be in conflict)
R means God and natural rights are the default (and secular laws are secondary to that but can't be in conflict)
D means ending corporate welfare and the rich should be held to pay their costs (and stop punishing the poor for being poor who have committed no crime)
R means ending welfare handouts
and the poor should pay their own costs (and stop punishing the rich for being rich who committed no crime)
 

320 Years of History

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
815
Points
255
Location
Washington, D.C.
What am I skipping?
  • You've left out that supporting Trump, or if not supporting him, acquiescing with squeezed nostrils to his ascendance, marks the nation's approbation of manipulative prevarication and utter ignorance of the truth.
    • I say that not because Trump has told more untruths and made more inaccurate (in cases where he truly didn't know "whatever") statements about "everything" than anyone in recorded history who also sought the American Presidency. He did, but that's not heart of it. I say it because as a man who sought the White House and ran as one who is supposed to be different, he showed us he's no different at all.

      Take a look at everything Politifact or FactCheck.org and other fact checkers identify as his false, mostly false, or flat out made up remarks. Looking at them, ask yourself this, "Why did he need to misrepresent that fact/situation?" Ask yourself, "Would I have expected any other politician to misrepresent that item? If I would, then how is Trump any different, any better than they when he's done as they did, yet he purports to be different then they?"
  • You've left out that high integrity just does not matter to most Americans. If it did, Gary Johnson would have won the Presidency, or at the very least, the decision would have landed in the House of Representatives.
  • You've left out that desperate people are willing to believe anything that is what they want to hear. The viability and veracity of what they hear doesn't matter.
  • You've left out that candidates can one thing and people "hear" whatever they want in it. We see that manifest, for example, in millions of people hearing Trump's rhetoric and taking it literally, but not seriously, yet nearly an equal share heard his words and take him seriously, but not literally. Time will show us which interpretation is correct.

    What irks me most in this context, however, is that the American people countenance such ambiguity and vagueness from their (would-be) political leaders that such dramatically different interpretations can be plausible. I mean really! From whom else would one tolerate such a lack of clarity and in spite of it entrust them to serve one in a highly important capacity? One's kids? Spouse? Boss? Colleague? Doctor? Lawyer? Financial Advisor? Gardener? Teacher? "No one" is my answer. How can that not be everyone else's answer? I don't know, but it's scary as hell that for some half the nation, it doesn't bother them.

    Come the hell on. What is it easier to overcome? The adverse yet continually fluid/unclear situation? Or the adverse situation that is well understood and can be predicted? Change the situation to one of neutrality and again, one is far better able to manage successfully through the latter. And yet that basic tenet has been completely ignored in electing Trump. It makes no sense.
 

Dr Grump

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
30,044
Reaction score
5,661
Points
1,130
Location
From the Back of Beyond
What you have missed out is that the US political system is stuffed. The EC is archaic. You need more third parties and differing points of view so a different political system. People need to learn if they live in a civilised society there is nothing wrong with compromise.
 

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,298
Reaction score
3,300
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District
What am I skipping?
  • You've left out that supporting Trump, or if not supporting him, acquiescing with squeezed nostrils to his ascendance, marks the nation's approbation of manipulative prevarication and utter ignorance of the truth.
    • I say that not because Trump has told more untruths and made more inaccurate (in cases where he truly didn't know "whatever") statements about "everything" than anyone in recorded history who also sought the American Presidency. He did, but that's not heart of it. I say it because as a man who sought the White House and ran as one who is supposed to be different, he showed us he's no different at all.

      Take a look at everything Politifact or FactCheck.org and other fact checkers identify as his false, mostly false, or flat out made up remarks. Looking at them, ask yourself this, "Why did he need to misrepresent that fact/situation?" Ask yourself, "Would I have expected any other politician to misrepresent that item? If I would, then how is Trump any different, any better than they when he's done as they did, yet he purports to be different then they?"
  • You've left out that high integrity just does not matter to most Americans. If it did, Gary Johnson would have won the Presidency, or at the very least, the decision would have landed in the House of Representatives.
  • You've left out that desperate people are willing to believe anything that is what they want to hear. The viability and veracity of what they hear doesn't matter.
  • You've left out that candidates can one thing and people "hear" whatever they want in it. We see that manifest, for example, in millions of people hearing Trump's rhetoric and taking it literally, but not seriously, yet nearly an equal share heard his words and take him seriously, but not literally. Time will show us which interpretation is correct.

    What irks me most in this context, however, is that the American people countenance such ambiguity and vagueness from their (would-be) political leaders that such dramatically different interpretations can be plausible. I mean really! From whom else would one tolerate such a lack of clarity and in spite of it entrust them to serve one in a highly important capacity? One's kids? Spouse? Boss? Colleague? Doctor? Lawyer? Financial Advisor? Gardener? Teacher? "No one" is my answer. How can that not be everyone else's answer? I don't know, but it's scary as hell that for some half the nation, it doesn't bother them.

    Come the hell on. What is it easier to overcome? The adverse yet continually fluid/unclear situation? Or the adverse situation that is well understood and can be predicted? Change the situation to one of neutrality and again, one is far better able to manage successfully through the latter. And yet that basic tenet has been completely ignored in electing Trump. It makes no sense.
Dear 320 Years of History
If people fear liberal judges getting appointed by Clinton while demanding conservative appts. By Trump that's a huge difference
Where Trump went out and met with Latino families and Black pastors left out of the loop and got them on board, Clinton censored and stomped her own progressive support base by undercutting Sanders and that voice to the Point emails were going out on not associating with BLM but distancing themselves
Trump got laughed at for saying he'd take public input from the people.

Can I please ask your help to comment on my post to RWS on this input process to involve all third parties asking Stein and the Greens to mediate or facilitate and Clinton to lead the implementation

Cruz Johnson and Libertarians can oversee the grievance process that touches govt and Constitution

Sanders and Stein can mobilize the workers to turn prisons into medical centers and facilities to treat the public through training interns and resident doctors getting the medical education paid by public service work. So we can afford universal care by repurposing resources already wasted on failed prison and mental health programs we could reform to be self sustaining
 

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,925
Reaction score
3,583
Points
280
What am I skipping?
  • You've left out that supporting Trump, or if not supporting him, acquiescing with squeezed nostrils to his ascendance, marks the nation's approbation of manipulative prevarication and utter ignorance of the truth.
    • I say that not because Trump has told more untruths and made more inaccurate (in cases where he truly didn't know "whatever") statements about "everything" than anyone in recorded history who also sought the American Presidency. He did, but that's not heart of it. I say it because as a man who sought the White House and ran as one who is supposed to be different, he showed us he's no different at all.

      Take a look at everything Politifact or FactCheck.org and other fact checkers identify as his false, mostly false, or flat out made up remarks. Looking at them, ask yourself this, "Why did he need to misrepresent that fact/situation?" Ask yourself, "Would I have expected any other politician to misrepresent that item? If I would, then how is Trump any different, any better than they when he's done as they did, yet he purports to be different then they?"
  • You've left out that high integrity just does not matter to most Americans. If it did, Gary Johnson would have won the Presidency, or at the very least, the decision would have landed in the House of Representatives.
  • You've left out that desperate people are willing to believe anything that is what they want to hear. The viability and veracity of what they hear doesn't matter.
  • You've left out that candidates can one thing and people "hear" whatever they want in it. We see that manifest, for example, in millions of people hearing Trump's rhetoric and taking it literally, but not seriously, yet nearly an equal share heard his words and take him seriously, but not literally. Time will show us which interpretation is correct.

    What irks me most in this context, however, is that the American people countenance such ambiguity and vagueness from their (would-be) political leaders that such dramatically different interpretations can be plausible. I mean really! From whom else would one tolerate such a lack of clarity and in spite of it entrust them to serve one in a highly important capacity? One's kids? Spouse? Boss? Colleague? Doctor? Lawyer? Financial Advisor? Gardener? Teacher? "No one" is my answer. How can that not be everyone else's answer? I don't know, but it's scary as hell that for some half the nation, it doesn't bother them.

    Come the hell on. What is it easier to overcome? The adverse yet continually fluid/unclear situation? Or the adverse situation that is well understood and can be predicted? Change the situation to one of neutrality and again, one is far better able to manage successfully through the latter. And yet that basic tenet has been completely ignored in electing Trump. It makes no sense.
So many words! So little thought!
 

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,298
Reaction score
3,300
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District
What am I skipping?
  • You've left out that supporting Trump, or if not supporting him, acquiescing with squeezed nostrils to his ascendance, marks the nation's approbation of manipulative prevarication and utter ignorance of the truth.
    • I say that not because Trump has told more untruths and made more inaccurate (in cases where he truly didn't know "whatever") statements about "everything" than anyone in recorded history who also sought the American Presidency. He did, but that's not heart of it. I say it because as a man who sought the White House and ran as one who is supposed to be different, he showed us he's no different at all.

      Take a look at everything Politifact or FactCheck.org and other fact checkers identify as his false, mostly false, or flat out made up remarks. Looking at them, ask yourself this, "Why did he need to misrepresent that fact/situation?" Ask yourself, "Would I have expected any other politician to misrepresent that item? If I would, then how is Trump any different, any better than they when he's done as they did, yet he purports to be different then they?"
  • You've left out that high integrity just does not matter to most Americans. If it did, Gary Johnson would have won the Presidency, or at the very least, the decision would have landed in the House of Representatives.
  • You've left out that desperate people are willing to believe anything that is what they want to hear. The viability and veracity of what they hear doesn't matter.
  • You've left out that candidates can one thing and people "hear" whatever they want in it. We see that manifest, for example, in millions of people hearing Trump's rhetoric and taking it literally, but not seriously, yet nearly an equal share heard his words and take him seriously, but not literally. Time will show us which interpretation is correct.

    What irks me most in this context, however, is that the American people countenance such ambiguity and vagueness from their (would-be) political leaders that such dramatically different interpretations can be plausible. I mean really! From whom else would one tolerate such a lack of clarity and in spite of it entrust them to serve one in a highly important capacity? One's kids? Spouse? Boss? Colleague? Doctor? Lawyer? Financial Advisor? Gardener? Teacher? "No one" is my answer. How can that not be everyone else's answer? I don't know, but it's scary as hell that for some half the nation, it doesn't bother them.

    Come the hell on. What is it easier to overcome? The adverse yet continually fluid/unclear situation? Or the adverse situation that is well understood and can be predicted? Change the situation to one of neutrality and again, one is far better able to manage successfully through the latter. And yet that basic tenet has been completely ignored in electing Trump. It makes no sense.
So many words! So little thought!
Au Contraire
320 is a very deep critical analyst when it comes to political issues and complex situations
I'm actually relieved to see some personal spouting off as everyone else does for once!
Even when just expressing disdain and disbelief I see class and never abuse of words for cruel degradation. Only honesty and transparency, even when emotionally charged.

I'd rather read four paragraphs from 320 on a bad day, than four letter words from others on a good one!
 
Last edited:

rahtruelies

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
321
Reaction score
30
Points
68
Help me word this more neutrally. After staying up too late last night I think I saw the lines move a bit. Do I understand the "white labor class" went Republican? What is the effective platform of each party?

What does it mean to be Trump supporting Republican?
-End of the Marshall Plan, we aren't scared of the spread of socialism anymore and don't want to pay to prop up weak economies.
-Economic protectionism, pro tariffs
-Pro big brother in your everyone's business in the name of security
-We don't care if the terror watchlist is secret, if you are on it you can't have a gun, Constitutional or not
-Lack of a centralized healthcare plan, the free market will work it out
-Fairly neutral on Social Security
-You can pick what public school your kid goes to if you can get them there
-Low taxes spur growth
-Lower environmental standards to help compete with the 3rd world
-A tad pro-white power and quite a bit homophobic (the VP pick weirds me out)
-Let the states hopefully outlaw abortion as the states have the right to choose, we really haven't done anything about this in 40 years though

What does it mean to be a Hillary Democrat?
-Centralized healthcare
-Higher tax rates with targeted loopholes
-Free trade
-Continue the Marshall Plan by helping strategic allies (like Mexico?) at our direct and indirect cost for the greater good
-Pro choice
-Pro big brother in your everyone's business in the name of security
-We don't care if the terror watchlist is secret, if you are on it you can't have a gun
-Would rather you don't own a gun but besides a silly assault rifle ban have done little on it.
-Pump tons of oil but views coal as last century
-Wants to celebrate cultural and sexual diversity and import new Americans....maybe to drive up real estate prices.

What am I skipping?
 

rahtruelies

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
321
Reaction score
30
Points
68
Being a Hiliary democrat means being an entitled often white rent-seeker buying off the racist blacks/browns/yellows at the expense of the White working and middle class
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
85,934
Reaction score
25,014
Points
2,180
Help me word this more neutrally. After staying up too late last night I think I saw the lines move a bit. Do I understand the "white labor class" went Republican? What is the effective platform of each party?

What does it mean to be Trump supporting Republican?
-End of the Marshall Plan, we aren't scared of the spread of socialism anymore and don't want to pay to prop up weak economies.
-Economic protectionism, pro tariffs
-Pro big brother in your everyone's business in the name of security
-We don't care if the terror watchlist is secret, if you are on it you can't have a gun, Constitutional or not
-Lack of a centralized healthcare plan, the free market will work it out
-Fairly neutral on Social Security
-You can pick what public school your kid goes to if you can get them there
-Low taxes spur growth
-Lower environmental standards to help compete with the 3rd world
-A tad pro-white power and quite a bit homophobic (the VP pick weirds me out)
-Let the states hopefully outlaw abortion as the states have the right to choose, we really haven't done anything about this in 40 years though

What does it mean to be a Hillary Democrat?
-Centralized healthcare
-Higher tax rates with targeted loopholes
-Free trade
-Continue the Marshall Plan by helping strategic allies (like Mexico?) at our direct and indirect cost for the greater good
-Pro choice
-Pro big brother in your everyone's business in the name of security
-We don't care if the terror watchlist is secret, if you are on it you can't have a gun
-Would rather you don't own a gun but besides a silly assault rifle ban have done little on it.
-Pump tons of oil but views coal as last century
-Wants to celebrate cultural and sexual diversity and import new Americans....maybe to drive up real estate prices.

What am I skipping?

No...Trump was a temporary need in order to stop hilary........
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top