Political Roundtable Part XII

[bsilver]

It was odd seeing a Republican ad for their Obamacare Replacement during today's Wiz-Blazers game. It basically said the old plan was bad and ours will be great. That strategy worked for the election, so why not keep going with it. They must be looking at their polling numbers, and are trying to stop the damage.

[nate33]

Trump lost the popular vote by ~3 million. Majority of Americans are elitists I guess.

Scoreboard.

Believe it or not there people who care about politics for reasons other than their team winning.

You misunderstand. My point was that the only score that matters is the electoral college. Winning the popular vote is about as useful as losing the Super Bowl but outgaining the opponent in total yardage.

[gtn130]

Scoreboard.

Believe it or not there people who care about politics for reasons other than their team winning.

You misunderstand. My point was that the only score that matters is the electoral college. Winning the popular vote is about as useful as losing the Super Bowl but outgaining the opponent in total yardage.

Ok, I guess you misunderstood my point then?

You're calling everyone who thinks Trump is a moron an elitist. The majority of the country voted against him, and he has a 37% approval rating. You're likely calling the majority of Americans elitists. Not a very elite group there.

[nate33]

Believe it or not there people who care about politics for reasons other than their team winning.

You misunderstand. My point was that the only score that matters is the electoral college. Winning the popular vote is about as useful as losing the Super Bowl but outgaining the opponent in total yardage.

Ok, I guess you misunderstood my point then?

You're calling everyone who thinks Trump is a moron an elitist. The majority of the country voted against him, and he has a 37% approval rating. You're likely calling the majority of Americans elitists. Not a very elite group there.

No. I said "not intellectually curious" is an elitist word for idiot.

I don't think all the people that voted against Trump are either elite or stupid. However, I do believe that all the people that think Trump is stupid are either stupid themselves, or are incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed by the media.

[gtn130]

You misunderstand. My point was that the only score that matters is the electoral college. Winning the popular vote is about as useful as losing the Super Bowl but outgaining the opponent in total yardage.

Ok, I guess you misunderstood my point then?

You're calling everyone who thinks Trump is a moron an elitist. The majority of the country voted against him, and he has a 37% approval rating. You're likely calling the majority of Americans elitists. Not a very elite group there.

No. I said "not intellectually curious" is an elitist word for idiot.

I don't think all the people that voted against Trump are either elite or stupid. However, I do believe that all the people that think Trump is stupid are either stupid themselves, or are incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed by the media.

Nah, Trump is definitely stupid, and thinking he's a tactical genius, as I said in my other post, is obviously wrong for many reasons.

He could have just pivoted and been a moderate Republican and easily won vs Hillary. He was too stupid to realize his antics in the primary weren't benefiting him in the general. Just a moron pushing buttons. He still, today, can't adjust, and his twitter rants are disliked by 2/3 of Americans.

He has no clue what he's doing, but he serves as an awesome Rorschach painting for all of his acolytes who choose to see whatever they want in him. For example, you, Nate, think he's some next level genius who is playing everyone brilliantly even though there are mountains of evidence proving the opposite.

[gtn130]

You misunderstand. My point was that the only score that matters is the electoral college. Winning the popular vote is about as useful as losing the Super Bowl but outgaining the opponent in total yardage.

Ok, I guess you misunderstood my point then?

You're calling everyone who thinks Trump is a moron an elitist. The majority of the country voted against him, and he has a 37% approval rating. You're likely calling the majority of Americans elitists. Not a very elite group there.

No. I said "not intellectually curious" is an elitist word for idiot.

I don't think all the people that voted against Trump are either elite or stupid. However, I do believe that all the people that think Trump is stupid are either stupid themselves, or are incapable of independent thought and have been brainwashed by the media.

And "not intellectually curious" means he's unwilling to learn - not that he's an idiot. People have criticized him regularly for being unwilling to read up on policy and foreign relations. He is demonstrably intellectually lazy.

[FAH1223]

Very glad to see the Washington Post editorial board accurately describe civil rights giant and American hero MLK Jr. as a true conservative.


The Post's View
Martin Luther King Jr. was a true conservative

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., conservative. ….

…But in his way, Dr. King did a lot to preserve, protect and defend the best of our principles and values.…

…..Dr. King worked to turn back extremism, violence and racial nationalism at the height of the civil rights movement, and to keep the cause of essential and long-overdue change in the American mainstream…..

….This is a part of American “exceptionalism,” but through much of our history, a greater part of it could be found in the kind of biblical message that Dr. King carried to the pulpit and the nation. “There is something wrong with our world, something fundamentally and basically wrong,” he told a Detroit congregation in 1954. “The great problem facing modern man,” he said, “is that . . . the means by which we live have outdistanced the spiritual ends for which we live. . . . The problem is with man himself and man’s soul.”……

…“My friends,” Dr. King said in his Detroit sermon, “all I’m trying to say is that if we are to go forward today, we’ve got to go back and rediscover some mighty precious values that we’ve left behind. That’s the only way that we would be able to make of our world a better world, and to make of this world what God wants it to be. . . .”

Spoken like a true conservative, and a truly great one.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/martin-luther-king-jr-was-a-true-conservative/2017/01/15/b0f465e4-d9c6-11e6-9a36-1d296534b31e_story.html?utm_term=.0cf7c20f077f

Dr. King would fit in with the modern progressive movement in the US. He talked about class warfare, redistribution of wealth to poor and working people, along with his calls for racial equality, and his opposition to war. He even described himself as a democratic socialist.

Read on Twitter

[dckingsfan]

No. I said "not intellectually curious" is an elitist word for idiot.

I think that is a statement worth challenging. First, it is a phrase not a word - but that is a nit-picking.

There are people on both sides of the aisle and the middle that aren't intellectually curious. They don't care enough about the details of a proposal to really take a deep dive on the subject. The opposite would be a policy wonk (since we are talking politics).

But not being intellectually curious doesn't connote idiocy (extremely stupid behavior). It also doesn't connote a lack of intelligence. For example a physicist could dive deep into quantum mechanics but might not be intellectually curious about the best way to weave a basket.

I think the same applies with Trump. I think he knows a lot about real estate and real estate transactions and was (at least at some point) intellectually curious about their mechanics.

I would say the same is not true on many policy decisions. Hence, intellectually un-curious in that respect. But not an elitist (or in this case someone who thinks about policy) view - more of a physiological view of the man. I would say another psychological view of Trump would be one of a Narcissist. Again, more psychological (and accurate) than political.

Now, you could counter that he is intuitive. That would be hard to rebut with his election results (whereas Hillary was a policy wonk but not so intuitive).

[AFM]

This country is one team - the USA. When we forget that or choose not to care about that, everyone loses.

Not me. I'm a Russian sleeper cell, bred by the FSB. They got videos of me getting peed on, man, what's a brother to do?

[popper]

This country is one team - the USA. When we forget that or choose not to care about that, everyone loses.

I couldn't agree more Ruzious. That's why I think the D party's dependence upon identity politics is so dangerous. It is the opposite of what MLK Jr. was trying to teach Americans. I pray we are able to receive, comprehend and practice his message before it is too late.

[gtn130]

This country is one team - the USA. When we forget that or choose not to care about that, everyone loses.

I couldn't agree more Ruzious. That's why I think the D party's dependence upon identity politics is so dangerous. It is the opposite of what MLK Jr. was trying to teach Americans. I pray we are able to receive, comprehend and practice his message before it is too late.

LOL! Eight years of open obstructionism in congress, but blame the dems and identity politics! Strong memes

[popper]

Very glad to see the Washington Post editorial board accurately describe civil rights giant and American hero MLK Jr. as a true conservative.


The Post's View
Martin Luther King Jr. was a true conservative

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., conservative. ….

…But in his way, Dr. King did a lot to preserve, protect and defend the best of our principles and values.…

…..Dr. King worked to turn back extremism, violence and racial nationalism at the height of the civil rights movement, and to keep the cause of essential and long-overdue change in the American mainstream…..

….This is a part of American “exceptionalism,” but through much of our history, a greater part of it could be found in the kind of biblical message that Dr. King carried to the pulpit and the nation. “There is something wrong with our world, something fundamentally and basically wrong,” he told a Detroit congregation in 1954. “The great problem facing modern man,” he said, “is that . . . the means by which we live have outdistanced the spiritual ends for which we live. . . . The problem is with man himself and man’s soul.”……

…“My friends,” Dr. King said in his Detroit sermon, “all I’m trying to say is that if we are to go forward today, we’ve got to go back and rediscover some mighty precious values that we’ve left behind. That’s the only way that we would be able to make of our world a better world, and to make of this world what God wants it to be. . . .”

Spoken like a true conservative, and a truly great one.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/martin-luther-king-jr-was-a-true-conservative/2017/01/15/b0f465e4-d9c6-11e6-9a36-1d296534b31e_story.html?utm_term=.0cf7c20f077f

Dr. King would fit in with the modern progressive movement in the US. He talked about class warfare, redistribution of wealth to poor and working people, along with his calls for racial equality, and his opposition to war. He even described himself as a democratic socialist.

Read on Twitter

I disagree FAH that he would fit in with the modern progressive movement. I do acknowledge however that he was a complex man who's philosophy can be interpreted in a variety of ways.

Martin Luther King's Conservative Legacy

By Carolyn Garris
Coordinator
B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics

It is time for conservatives to lay claim to the legacy of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. King was no stalwart Conservative, yet his core beliefs, such as the power and necessity of faith-based association and self-government based on absolute truth and moral law, are profoundly conservative. Modern liberalism rejects these ideas, while conservatives place them at the center of their philosophy. Despite decades of its appropriation by liberals, King's message was fundamentally conservative…….

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/01/martin-luther-kings-conservative-legacy

[popper]

This country is one team - the USA. When we forget that or choose not to care about that, everyone loses.

I couldn't agree more Ruzious. That's why I think the D party's dependence upon identity politics is so dangerous. It is the opposite of what MLK Jr. was trying to teach Americans. I pray we are able to receive, comprehend and practice his message before it is too late.

LOL! Eight years of open obstructionism in congress, but blame the dems and identity politics! Strong memes

Thank God MLK was a world class obstructionist too gtn. Have you been reading the numerous articles and debates among D's regarding the efficacy of identity politics. If you had, you wouldn't have responded in the way you did.

edit: Oh, I forgot, LOL

[gtn130]

I couldn't agree more Ruzious. That's why I think the D party's dependence upon identity politics is so dangerous. It is the opposite of what MLK Jr. was trying to teach Americans. I pray we are able to receive, comprehend and practice his message before it is too late.

LOL! Eight years of open obstructionism in congress, but blame the dems and identity politics! Strong memes

Thank God MLK was a world class obstructionist too gtn. Have you been reading the numerous articles and debates among D's regarding the efficacy of identity politics. If you had, you wouldn't have responded in the way you did.

edit: Oh, I forgot, LOL

Popper, my man, these are some hot takes. Problem is reality isn't on your side.



Polarization today in American politics is asymmetrical, and republicans are far more conservative than democrats are liberal - it's a fact.

And be real for a minute - there isn't an analog to the Tea Party on the left. The closest thing anyone can try to argue is the Occupy shenanigans which had zero political capital, let alone organizational structure. The point, though, is that there is an identifiable extremist group pulling the republicans farther right.

Blaming political polarization on "identity politics" is hilarious, though.

[DCZards]

Popper, conservatives might try to claim MLK Jr. as a kindred spirit, but there's no doubt that King, if he were alive today, would have much more in common politically and socially with progressives like Rep. John Lewis, President Obama and Hillary Clinton than he would with conservatives like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan.

[popper]

LOL! Eight years of open obstructionism in congress, but blame the dems and identity politics! Strong memes

Thank God MLK was a world class obstructionist too gtn. Have you been reading the numerous articles and debates among D's regarding the efficacy of identity politics. If you had, you wouldn't have responded in the way you did.

edit: Oh, I forgot, LOL

Popper, my man, these are some hot takes. Problem is reality isn't on your side.



Polarization today in American politics is asymmetrical, and republicans are far more conservative than democrats are liberal - it's a fact.

And be real for a minute - there isn't an analog to the Tea Party on the left. The closest thing anyone can try to argue is the Occupy shenanigans which had zero political capital, let alone organizational structure. The point, though, is that there is an identifiable extremist group pulling the republicans farther right.

Blaming political polarization on "identity politics" is hilarious, though.

Gtn – there have been many D debates going on since the election regarding the party’s dependence upon identity politics. I can cite dozens but have to make a run to the liquor store so here are two in case you’re interested.

SundayReview | OPINION

The End of Identity Liberalism
By MARK LILLA NOV. 18, 2016

….But how should this diversity shape our politics? The standard liberal answer for nearly a generation now has been that we should become aware of and “celebrate” our differences. Which is a splendid principle of moral pedagogy — but disastrous as a foundation for democratic politics in our ideological age. In recent years American liberalism has slipped into a kind of moral panic about racial, gender and sexual identity that has distorted liberalism’s message and prevented it from becoming a unifying force capable of governing.

One of the many lessons of the recent presidential election campaign and its repugnant outcome is that the age of identity liberalism must be brought to an end……

… But the fixation on diversity in our schools and in the press has produced a generation of liberals and progressives narcissistically unaware of conditions outside their self-defined groups, and indifferent to the task of reaching out to Americans in every walk of life….

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html?_r=0


Sanders slams identity politics as Democrats figure out their future
By BRENT GRIFFITHS
11/21/16 02:19 PM EST

Bernie Sanders said Monday that the path to success for Democrats has to be through more than just identity politics, adding that it’s simply not enough for the party to base its appeals on diversity.....

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/bernie-sanders-democrats-identity-politics-231710

[popper]

Popper, conservatives might try to claim MLK Jr. as a kindred spirit, but there's no doubt that King, if he were alive today, would have much more in common politically and socially with progressives like Rep. John Lewis, President Obama and Hillary Clinton than he would with conservatives like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan.

I hear you DCZ. I didn't post those references to take credit for MLK's accomplishments (as a conservative). He was a complex man with multi-layered beliefs. IMO he had a deeply religious approach to the pursuit of racial equality, informed by the New Testament, and dependent upon an appeal to Christian values. He succeeded in this dangerous endeavor and America is better off for it. Edit - like Jesus it cost him his life.

I posted because I worry the D party has lost it's way and, judging by the "God in the Platform" reaction to the 2012 Democratic Convention vote, I believe MLK would not recognize the modern day party.

[nate33]

Polarization today in American politics is asymmetrical, and republicans are far more conservative than democrats are liberal - it's a fact.

How in the hell is that a "fact"? A pretty graph doesn't make it a fact. How are they defining conservative and liberal? How did they define it in 1948. This is utter nonsense. John F Kennedy would have been a conservative in today's world. He was a tax cutter and a war hawk. Donald Trump's political positions are almost indistinguishable from Dick Gephardt in 1992.

[dckingsfan]

I have to agree with Nate on this one, especially after this election cycle. The Graph can't be two dimensional. You have social liberal and social conservation; fiscal liberal and fiscal conservative; and nationalist vs. globalist. And at least the last two have individuals in both parties.

I think it would need to be a multi-dimensional figure to be representative.

Add to that, there are now more Americans that aren't associated with either party and it is difficult to represent.

[gtn130]

Polarization today in American politics is asymmetrical, and republicans are far more conservative than democrats are liberal - it's a fact.

How in the hell is that a "fact"? A pretty graph doesn't make it a fact. How are they defining conservative and liberal? How did they define it in 1948. This is utter nonsense. John F Kennedy would have been a conservative in today's world. He was a tax cutter and a war hawk. Donald Trump's political positions are almost indistinguishable from Dick Gephardt in 1992.

you got any actual data that refutes what I'm saying?