Moderators: montestewart, LyricalRico, nate33
Zonkerbl wrote:I can't believe how hard I'm rooting for a recession. Now that's privilege for you - I have a govt job and live in a region that is largely recession proof, so I can afford to do it.
dckingsfan wrote:Zonkerbl wrote:I can't believe how hard I'm rooting for a recession. Now that's privilege for you - I have a govt job and live in a region that is largely recession proof, so I can afford to do it.
You know - those are the kind of comments that got Trump elected
I_Like_Dirt wrote:dckingsfan wrote:Zonkerbl wrote:I can't believe how hard I'm rooting for a recession. Now that's privilege for you - I have a govt job and live in a region that is largely recession proof, so I can afford to do it.
You know - those are the kind of comments that got Trump elected
Not really, no. The economy is really just continuing the trends from under Obama and Trump was elected anyway. And it isn't like there has been much in the way of trickle down despite the robust economy, either.
The flip side, there will be another recession. It's inevitable. And we're going to see political games of hot potato in terms of trying to dump it on the other party even before it happens.
dckingsfan wrote:Yes really. Remember drain the swamp. The notion behind that is reflected in the OP.
And yes, blame on the economy is rarely rational - always good to stick it to the other side.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:dckingsfan wrote:Yes really. Remember drain the swamp. The notion behind that is reflected in the OP.
And yes, blame on the economy is rarely rational - always good to stick it to the other side.
Yes, I remember drain the swamp. That was always a cover, too. Nobody who is serious about draining the swamp is electing Trump. There are other issues here that are obvious but that don't always get mentioned. And no, they're not as reasonable as you make them out to be. Even at best, we're talking about trying to pick the lesser of two evils but it doesn't actually get phrased that way unless at times they're really pushed on the issues and then when it's pointed out that those issues are honestly worse for the guys they've voted for they sidestep the conversation.
And yes, I'm using the word "they" - it's not specifically any political party but it's a strong theme in modern politics and anyone who claims not to be aware of the type of people I'm referencing are playing games or are those people themselves (potentially even unaware of it) or both. And while it's not specifically any political party, it's definitely the more on the conservative side and pushing it towards the extreme reactionary part of the political spectrum around the world at this point in time.
I can't believe how hard I'm rooting for a recession. Now that's privilege for you - I have a govt job and live in a region that is largely recession proof, so I can afford to do it.
dckingsfan wrote:This is why the "drain the swamp" narrative was successful... that was the point I made.
gtn130 wrote:You seem to think there is a coherent, consistent and intellectually honest reason to vote for Trump when the vast, vast majority of Trump voters simply liked the racist businessman guy who yelled a lot and owned the libs.
gtn130 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:This is why the "drain the swamp" narrative was successful... that was the point I made.
Wasn't Bernie Sanders a far better totem for draining the swamp than Trump was? If Trump supporters actually felt like corruption in politics was a central issue, then maybe Bernie would have come out of the primary?
You seem to think there is a coherent, consistent and intellectually honest reason to vote for Trump when the vast, vast majority of Trump voters simply liked the racist businessman guy who yelled a lot and owned the libs.
Thinking the reality show fake businessman from Manhattan is a populist fighting against corrupt elites is absurd - anyone who can perform that level of mental gymnastics is not a voter who can be reached or someone with any serious principles. The drain the swamp stuff had no impact on anything because Trump supporters will support him unconditionally.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:See, I do think it goes beyond this. I'd suggest that the world suits them just fine and they aren't happy with the concept of the world changing to suit others more, too, nor are they willing to really concern themselves to the point of actions beyond words where something might inconvenience them in the short term for a long term gain they're not 100% sure they will receive or want. The only time actions come about is when some sense of blame is shifted onto them at which point they will do whatever it takes to shift that blame onto someone else because it isn't their fault - they were just looking out for themselves as best they could.
Realistically, I don't actually think that's a problem in and of itself and it isn't something that is unique to any particular category of individual or however you want to categorize anything. It's a bigger problem, though, when people won't admit it and collectively group together on those grounds, yet denying those grounds, because it's a platform for an all out attack on the "other," however it's characterized in that particular setting.
gtn130 wrote:I wouldn't say I necessarily disagree with any of that, but I do think Trump was more so just a Rorschach test for [mostly] suburban white people without any real policy goals who were voting on an identity basis. Whether it was racism, owning the libs, or broad visceral fear of change, the coalition is ultimately built around white people voting for the party of white people, and most white people are financially stable and politics is a sporting event to them.
Trump understood this and became an avatar for white identity politics that people can superimpose whatever they want onto. And that's why so much of the discourse is totally incoherent - it doesn't matter and nobody really believes any of it anyway.
The drain the swamp stuff is an example of that. Nobody voting for Trump truly, genuinely cares about draining the swamp. It's something that sounds kind of good and gives them cover for the actual reasons they're voting for Trump, which for some people might be more abstract, but still ultimately boils down to white identity politics.
dckingsfan wrote:I believe all races care about the political landscape - they just have different preferred outcomes.
gtn130 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:I believe all races care about the political landscape - they just have different preferred outcomes.
I don't disagree with this at all. The difference is that the outcomes Trump supporters want are very frequently *not* policy outcomes.
Think about how many things the Trump administration has done that are 100% symbolic and have no functional value in society. I mean, the wall itself is far more of a symbolic gesture than a desired policy outcome. It's easy to figure out how ineffective and cost inefficient a southern border wall would be in deterring immigrants, but does a single Trump supporter care? It's the symbolic gesture they care about, and that is what I mean when I say it's a sporting event to them.
Look at Trump's approval rating among Republicans. Look at how much legislation the Trump admin has passed.
gtn130 wrote:
This is such wonderful news. We are truly blessed to have Trump's son-in-law running our foreign policy. #MAGA
gtn130 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:This is why the "drain the swamp" narrative was successful... that was the point I made.
Wasn't Bernie Sanders a far better totem for draining the swamp than Trump was? If Trump supporters actually felt like corruption in politics was a central issue, then maybe Bernie would have come out of the primary?
You seem to think there is a coherent, consistent and intellectually honest reason to vote for Trump when the vast, vast majority of Trump voters simply liked the racist businessman guy who yelled a lot and owned the libs.
Thinking the reality show fake businessman from Manhattan is a populist fighting against corrupt elites is absurd - anyone who can perform that level of mental gymnastics is not a voter who can be reached or someone with any serious principles. The drain the swamp stuff had no impact on anything because Trump supporters will support him unconditionally.
dobrojim wrote:gtn130 wrote:
This is such wonderful news. We are truly blessed to have Trump's son-in-law running our foreign policy. #MAGA
Blatant corruption is the essential feature (not a bug, a feature) to this administration.
A new FB friend of mine is posting comments reflecting outrage about a congressional pay raise.
But nothing about stories like this one. If he wants to be outraged about congressional pay,
that's his right. That said it's small potatoes compared to the graft they're doing every day.
Ruzious wrote:LOL, in my line of work, firms go to great lengths to make sure - not only do they not factually have any conflicts of interest - but they don't even have the appearance of having any conflicts of interest. It's part of our standard ethics. It's a primary issue. This WH makes a complete mockery of the issue. It's almost like they take pride in being unethical. Actually no, it's not "almost". They do take pride in being unethical. This WH is run much like a mafia. They've already had a presidential appointee publicly saying she doesn't give a **** about the Hatch Act. That's the mindset.
gtn130 wrote:I_Like_Dirt wrote:See, I do think it goes beyond this. I'd suggest that the world suits them just fine and they aren't happy with the concept of the world changing to suit others more, too, nor are they willing to really concern themselves to the point of actions beyond words where something might inconvenience them in the short term for a long term gain they're not 100% sure they will receive or want. The only time actions come about is when some sense of blame is shifted onto them at which point they will do whatever it takes to shift that blame onto someone else because it isn't their fault - they were just looking out for themselves as best they could.
Realistically, I don't actually think that's a problem in and of itself and it isn't something that is unique to any particular category of individual or however you want to categorize anything. It's a bigger problem, though, when people won't admit it and collectively group together on those grounds, yet denying those grounds, because it's a platform for an all out attack on the "other," however it's characterized in that particular setting.
I wouldn't say I necessarily disagree with any of that, but I do think Trump was more so just a Rorschach test for [mostly] suburban white people without any real policy goals who were voting on an identity basis. Whether it was racism, owning the libs, or broad visceral fear of change, the coalition is ultimately built around white people voting for the party of white people, and most white people are financially stable and politics is a sporting event to them.
Trump understood this and became an avatar for white identity politics that people can superimpose whatever they want onto. And that's why so much of the discourse is totally incoherent - it doesn't matter and nobody really believes any of it anyway.
The drain the swamp stuff is an example of that. Nobody voting for Trump truly, genuinely cares about draining the swamp. It's something that sounds kind of good and gives them cover for the actual reasons they're voting for Trump, which for some people might be more abstract, but still ultimately boils down to white identity politics.