Political Roundtable Part XV

[dckingsfan]

The problem is that no one trusts the Ds in congress either... this is the "we are less evil than they are" argument.

The DNC needs to figure this out - otherwise we will continue to get alternating parties in the white house. Either that or we need a third party to keep the Ds and the Rs focused.

The independent number is also interesting in that 44% of the country now identifies itself as independent.

Maybe what you are saying is true but that isn't what the poll is saying. The poll is stating how Democrats, Republicans, and Independents approve of the job that Congress is doing a a whole. I would assume that the Democratic approval rating of congress is low because it is a Republican congress and the Republicans approval rating of congress has gone down after it has failed to pass significant legislation.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/215630/republicans-approval-congress-drops-new-2017-low.aspx

That is how I am reading it to - but the context is that those numbers have been low across the board for quite some time with the recent (as you pointed out) spike for Rs until they couldn't get anything done.

But those are very low numbers. Another way of looking at it, Trump is 3x as popular as Congress (Ds or Rs).

[penbeast0]

No. We are secular, reasoned, humanist, heterosexuals. Our symbol will be Rutherford splitting the atom. The pun on "Adam", the first hetero, is obvious.

Yes, but didn't Rutherford work for the Commonwealth in non-hetero locations like New Zealand and Canada? Yeah, I'm starting to doubt your heteromometer on this one.

New Zealand and Canada are non-hetero? I hadn't heard that before. The Brits sure, but why are the Kiwis non-hetero? Is this a Lord of the Rings elf thing?

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[Kanyewest]

The problem is that no one trusts the Ds in congress either... this is the "we are less evil than they are" argument.

The DNC needs to figure this out - otherwise we will continue to get alternating parties in the white house. Either that or we need a third party to keep the Ds and the Rs focused.

The independent number is also interesting in that 44% of the country now identifies itself as independent.

Maybe what you are saying is true but that isn't what the poll is saying. The poll is stating how Democrats, Republicans, and Independents approve of the job that Congress is doing a a whole. I would assume that the Democratic approval rating of congress is low because it is a Republican congress and the Republicans approval rating of congress has gone down after it has failed to pass significant legislation.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/215630/republicans-approval-congress-drops-new-2017-low.aspx

That is how I am reading it to - but the context is that those numbers have been low across the board for quite some time with the recent (as you pointed out) spike for Rs until they couldn't get anything done.

But those are very low numbers. Another way of looking at it, Trump is 3x as popular as Congress (Ds or Rs).

True, more people say that Trump is trustworthy than people who trust congress. Although, that doesn't mean that more people trust Trump over Congress because it could be the case that there are people who dislike what Congress is doing but probably hate what Trump is doing. I would be more interested in seeing a poll like this, between 2 options.

Read on Twitter

/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fentry%2Fmore-americans-trust-cnn-than-trump-poll_us_595bc9e9e4b0da2c73258bf2

[cammac]

No. We are secular, reasoned, humanist, heterosexuals. Our symbol will be Rutherford splitting the atom. The pun on "Adam", the first hetero, is obvious.

Yes, but didn't Rutherford work for the Commonwealth in non-hetero locations like New Zealand and Canada? Yeah, I'm starting to doubt your heteromometer on this one.

New Zealand and Canada are non-hetero? I hadn't heard that before. The Brits sure, but why are the Kiwis non-hetero? Is this a Lord of the Rings elf thing?

People who worry about sexuality are not to be taken seriously little less applied to countries.

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

Yes, but didn't Rutherford work for the Commonwealth in non-hetero locations like New Zealand and Canada? Yeah, I'm starting to doubt your heteromometer on this one.

New Zealand and Canada are non-hetero? I hadn't heard that before. The Brits sure, but why are the Kiwis non-hetero? Is this a Lord of the Rings elf thing?

People who worry about sexuality are not to be taken seriously little less applied to countries.

Cmon now. AFM is the ultimate pan sexual. He'll F anything and everything, even a half empty bottle of Fireball

[I_Like_Dirt]

New Zealand and Canada are non-hetero? I hadn't heard that before. The Brits sure, but why are the Kiwis non-hetero? Is this a Lord of the Rings elf thing?

Canada is like the US, but more European. Need I say more? As for the Kiwis, aren't they self-admitted fruits? I can't believe heteroness is even up for debate here.

[dckingsfan]

Maybe what you are saying is true but that isn't what the poll is saying. The poll is stating how Democrats, Republicans, and Independents approve of the job that Congress is doing a a whole. I would assume that the Democratic approval rating of congress is low because it is a Republican congress and the Republicans approval rating of congress has gone down after it has failed to pass significant legislation.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/215630/republicans-approval-congress-drops-new-2017-low.aspx

That is how I am reading it to - but the context is that those numbers have been low across the board for quite some time with the recent (as you pointed out) spike for Rs until they couldn't get anything done.

But those are very low numbers. Another way of looking at it, Trump is 3x as popular as Congress (Ds or Rs).

True, more people say that Trump is trustworthy than people who trust congress. Although, that doesn't mean that more people trust Trump over Congress because it could be the case that there are people who dislike what Congress is doing but probably hate what Trump is doing. I would be more interested in seeing a poll like this, between 2 options.

Read on Twitter

/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fentry%2Fmore-americans-trust-cnn-than-trump-poll_us_595bc9e9e4b0da2c73258bf2

Interesting... and good point. Right and left are polarized - the huge middle will keep determining the elections.

[payitforward]

...Right and left are polarized - the huge middle will keep determining the elections.

What does "left" mean in this sentence? To me, "left" has always meant (at least) "in favor of socialism." I don't think there are many people in this country, maybe not many in the world by now, who are in favor of socialism.

The divisive issues in this country -- at least the alt.right thinks of them as divisive -- are all about economic nationalism & "ethnic purity." Those are issues of a different order altogether.

The alt.right has little to do with what traditionally defined "conservatism." Fascism is not a "conservative" body of thought.

Hence, I don't see that there's any struggle between left & right at all in this country. There's just a struggle against a blip of Fascist sentiment.

[dckingsfan]

...Right and left are polarized - the huge middle will keep determining the elections.

What does "left" mean in this sentence? To me, "left" has always meant (at least) "in favor of socialism." I don't think there are many people in this country, maybe not many in the world by now, who are in favor of socialism.

The divisive issues in this country -- at least the alt.right thinks of them as divisive -- are all about economic nationalism & "ethnic purity." Those are issues of a different order altogether.

The alt.right has little to do with what traditionally defined "conservatism." Fascism is not a "conservative" body of thought.

Hence, I don't see that there's any struggle between left & right at all in this country. There's just a struggle against a blip of Fascist sentiment.

Good points all... my definition was weak and linear. I meant socially left leaning vs socially right leaning and as you point out (indirectly) that doesn't really describe what we have going on in the country. You still have the defining social issues and you can add your "nationalism & ethnic purity" "arguments" as well. I think there is still the big centralized government vs. localized government and the fiscal issues they bring as well.

So, you have your alt-rights (which is the defining issue right now - my guess is this will fade with the next election), social conservatives, social liberals, fiscal conservatives as well as a host of other issues - definitely multi-variable but in a two party system.

My point with the post - was that congress has a lower approval rating among all groups than does the president. And that is a problem.

[DCZards]

Good points all... my definition was weak and linear. I meant socially left leaning vs socially right leaning and as you point out (indirectly) that doesn't really describe what we have going on in the country. You still have the defining social issues and you can add your "nationalism & ethnic purity" "arguments" as well. I think there is still the big centralized government vs. localized government and the fiscal issues they bring as well.

So, you have your alt-rights (which is the defining issue right now - my guess is this will fade with the next election), social conservatives, social liberals, fiscal conservatives as well as a host of other issues - definitely multi-variable but in a two party system.

My point with the post - was that congress has a lower approval rating among all groups than does the president. And that is a problem.

Yes, taken as a whole Congress has a lower approval rating than the president, which is pretty hard to do given that Trump is an atrocious president. However, if you polled individual congresspersons against Trump I think you'll find that most have a much higher approval rating with their constituents than Trump. This has typically been the case, regardless of who's president.

[dckingsfan]

Good points all... my definition was weak and linear. I meant socially left leaning vs socially right leaning and as you point out (indirectly) that doesn't really describe what we have going on in the country. You still have the defining social issues and you can add your "nationalism & ethnic purity" "arguments" as well. I think there is still the big centralized government vs. localized government and the fiscal issues they bring as well.

So, you have your alt-rights (which is the defining issue right now - my guess is this will fade with the next election), social conservatives, social liberals, fiscal conservatives as well as a host of other issues - definitely multi-variable but in a two party system.

My point with the post - was that congress has a lower approval rating among all groups than does the president. And that is a problem.

Yes, taken as a whole Congress has a lower approval rating than the president, which is pretty hard to do given that Trump is an atrocious president. However, if you polled individual congresspersons against Trump I think you'll find that most have a much higher approval rating with their constituents than Trump. This has typically been the case, regardless of who's president.

Good point and true. Kind of like the media - most don't trust the media except the sources that they use. Many would trust someone in congress if they voted for them (although I don't have any data to back this up).

I guess the counterpoint? to this is that as a whole - individuals are more likely to trust Trump moving forward on a specific topic than Congress. I don't have specific data on this either.

[CobraCommander]

Read on Twitter

Hate to say it...but fake news.

How many Trump supporters do you know that have turned on him? None or not Many....its funny but I'm always shocked by the fact that people on both sides seem to stick with their original thought on the right politician. Trump could win all 3 of these states again (i think he won these right?).

[CobraCommander]

So Trump is saying the same thing about Afghanistan as Obama who SAID the same thing as W.

It's sad that when W said we gotta stay in Afghanistan and kill these terrorist and Obama said we gotta leave people loved Obama for saying that we had to leave...then Obama stayed and people praised Obama for being "different than W"...then Trump attacked Obama for staying in Afghanistan and Trumps supporters said they LOVE TRUMP cause he is going to take care of america first...then TRUMP says he is different from Obama but he is going to STAY in Afghanistan. And the Trump supporters calling Obama the worse president ever because he doesnt understand or care about american soilders because they left our troops in Afghanistan...and NOW trump doing the same thing OBAMA DID. So I wonder how the Trump supporters are going to spin this to be different than all the other leaders.

The American public is gullible. The private military complex wins again...we will never leave Afghanistan...and Bernie will use the same "I'm getting out of Afghanistan" speech as Obama and Trump to win in 2020 and then Bernie will have a troop serge in 2021...

[dckingsfan]

So Trump is saying the same thing about Afghanistan as Obama who SAID the same thing as W.

It's sad that when W said we gotta stay in Afghanistan and kill these terrorist and Obama said we gotta leave people loved Obama for saying that we had to leave...then Obama stayed and people praised Obama for being "different than W"...then Trump attacked Obama for staying in Afghanistan and Trumps supporters said they LOVE TRUMP cause he is going to take care of america first...then TRUMP says he is different from Obama but he is going to STAY in Afghanistan. And the Trump supporters calling Obama the worse president ever because he doesnt understand or care about american soilders because they left our troops in Afghanistan...and NOW trump doing the same thing OBAMA DID. So I wonder how the Trump supporters are going to spin this to be different than all the other leaders.

The American public is gullible. The private military complex wins again...we will never leave Afghanistan...and Bernie will use the same "I'm getting out of Afghanistan" speech as Obama and Trump to win in 2020 and then Bernie will have a troop serge in 2021...

The U.S. officially has 662 overseas bases in 38 foreign countries - Rand Paul said we have closer to 900. It is easy to attack politically in the country and then hard to defend internationally.

I think the average voter doesn't want us to be the world's policeman - some think that is an uneducated view (that during our free trade/world enforcement, a billion came out of poverty). But as you pointed out, Trump and Obama rode it to victory.

Trump got all sorts of pushback when he said the EU wasn't meeting their 2% target - but it was really just a bunch of excuses that has gone on for many an administration.

It is an untenable position for the US (spending 3.5% on defense). It is also a terrific political wedge position as you stated.

Then you have Syria - If we had gone in 500K wouldn't be dead and millions more wouldn't have been displaced.

Such a very sucky situation.

[DCZards]

Read on Twitter

Hate to say it...but fake news.

How many Trump supporters do you know that have turned on him? None or not Many....its funny but I'm always shocked by the fact that people on both sides seem to stick with their original thought on the right politician. Trump could win all 3 of these states again (i think he won these right?).

No chance Trump wins all 3 of these states again. Yes, there's been little, if any, erosion of his support among the hardcore Trumpites. But the polls show that there HAS been some decline in support by those who voted for #45. On top of that, Trump won those three states by like a total of 70,000 votes, and you can rest assured that, given what people know now about a President Trump, the anti-Trump turnout in those states--and elsewhere--will be significantly more in 2020 than it was in 2016.

[DCZards]

So Trump is saying the same thing about Afghanistan as Obama who SAID the same thing as W.

It's sad that when W said we gotta stay in Afghanistan and kill these terrorist and Obama said we gotta leave people loved Obama for saying that we had to leave...then Obama stayed and people praised Obama for being "different than W"...then Trump attacked Obama for staying in Afghanistan and Trumps supporters said they LOVE TRUMP cause he is going to take care of america first...then TRUMP says he is different from Obama but he is going to STAY in Afghanistan. And the Trump supporters calling Obama the worse president ever because he doesnt understand or care about american soilders because they left our troops in Afghanistan...and NOW trump doing the same thing OBAMA DID. So I wonder how the Trump supporters are going to spin this to be different than all the other leaders.

The American public is gullible. The private military complex wins again...we will never leave Afghanistan...and Bernie will use the same "I'm getting out of Afghanistan" speech as Obama and Trump to win in 2020 and then Bernie will have a troop serge in 2021...

Totally agree. In addition to being gullible, most Americans won't even realize that what Trump said yesterday was essentially a rehash of what W and Obama said and did. People will, especially Trump supporters, believe that what #45 said yesterday is "new and fresh." Not!

[I_Like_Dirt]

No chance Trump wins all 3 of these states again. Yes, there's been little, if any, erosion of his support among the hardcore Trumpites. But the polls show that there HAS been some decline in support by those who voted for #45. On top of that, Trump won those three states by like a total of 70,000 votes, and you can rest assured that, given what people know now about a President Trump, the anti-Trump turnout in those states--and elsewhere--will be significantly more in 2020 than it was in 2016.

Just because a few people feel less positively about Trump overall doesn't mean they're going to just pick any other Democratic or even Republican or 3rd party candidate over him. How many of those people disapprove of Trump but still, if push came to shove, would feel he's the lesser of multiple evils? How many times does it have to be demonstrated that assuming Trump will implode and become his own worst enemy is a bad idea? Just because his actions are bad for most everyone else doesn't mean he's so foolish that his decisions are actually bad for him.

That said, at this point, I do feel the DNC is well-served to sit back a bit on the presidential front, but they need to get their act together and find a better communicator as a candidate in 2020 because regardless of what he does until then, Trump is going to be tough to beat. It's been proven for centuries of human history both in America and across the globe: these kinds of rulers don't get run out unless it's a sex scandal of some sort or if the country becomes so weak that citizens can topple the government themselves (obviously not going to happen here). And it should be noted that while sex scandals don't always work, they work far more often than they realistically should given all the far more important issues that never work/don't seem to matter to most people, and Trump very obviously tried to get out in front of any potential for a sex scandal at the very start of his campaign for the primaries, even, and nobody really seemed to notice. At it's base, though, it does make a lot of sense, because what history is telling us is that people, on average and in their own ways, care about sex and power above all else, which is pretty depressing, honestly, but does anyone here really not believe that?

[popper]

We’ve discussed this before (especially PIF) but shouldn’t we finally stop with debates predicated upon the false notion of race? I wish the govt. would do so as well and stop dividing people.


August 22, 2017
A subversive idea: The end of race
By John Conlin

What if one of the things you thought were true simply weren’t? Could you let go of your old beliefs? What if they struck at the core of some of your most basic concepts of self? In earlier times people have confronted this unnerving reality, generally as the scientific revolution rolled over their old ideas. We seem to think we are immune, that everything we know is the truth.

Thomas Kuhn, in his The Structure of Scientific Revolutions argued that science is not a steady, cumulative acquisition of knowledge. Instead, “science is a series of peaceful interludes punctuated by intellectually violent revolutions.” After such revolutions, “one conceptual world view is replaced by another”. It is time for another revolution and this one involves the entire concept of race.

As a scientific fact, the black race doesn’t exist. Neither does the white or Asian. There is no race gene. In the year 2000, when the scientists at the National Institutes of Health announced that they had put together a draft of the entire sequence of the human genome, the researchers unanimously declared that there is only one race -- the human race.

The Hispanic “race” didn’t even exist until the 1970 census -- they needed some classification for “them.” Here is a subversive idea; what if there truly isn’t any “them?” What if the whole concept of “them” is simply a creation of our classification? One can take data and classify it in a myriad of ways, but the classification doesn’t become real in any physical sense………………

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/08/a_subversive_idea__the_end_of_race.html#ixzz4qVQdenVs