Author Topic: VP Kamala Harris / The Democratic Convention  (Read 24083 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #390 on: August 13, 2020, 08:03:36 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7658
  • Tommy Points: 210
A quick reply RR:   First, my view of Obama is mixed.  Good decent guy, smart and presidential in comportment and temperament.  But as I’ve said a number of times, I don’t think he was a great leader and I don’t think he was a unifying president.  I was very aware that conservatives and Obama were relentlessly at odds and it frustrated me that he didn’t have the skill to create a productive working relationship with his adversaries.

That said, I have to say that I remember the 60s and 70s very well.  There was emotion and division on a pretty large scale.  We had young people just a couple years older than me dying for a cause no one seemed to understand.  The term “generation gap” was coined and used rather euphemistically to describe generations that were not just different but on a seemingly different planet.  Media was not like it is today but there was a heck of a lot of anger and division and violence. 1968 was ugly.  Bussing in the 70s was ugly.  War demonstrations pit generations against one another.

I’m not convinced we haven’t been this divided before.  But I’ll admit news media and social media are phenomena that make things different today.  But not insurmountable imo.

Thanks for the reply, I appreciate that, NG. I was just a young kid in the '70s, so I have no firsthand experience of the tension of that time period, but I know I can take your word for it.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #391 on: August 13, 2020, 11:48:34 PM »

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Kemba Walker
  • Posts: 879
  • Tommy Points: 169
A quick reply RR:   First, my view of Obama is mixed.  Good decent guy, smart and presidential in comportment and temperament.  But as I’ve said a number of times, I don’t think he was a great leader and I don’t think he was a unifying president.  I was very aware that conservatives and Obama were relentlessly at odds and it frustrated me that he didn’t have the skill to create a productive working relationship with his adversaries.

That said, I have to say that I remember the 60s and 70s very well.  There was emotion and division on a pretty large scale.  We had young people just a couple years older than me dying for a cause no one seemed to understand.  The term “generation gap” was coined and used rather euphemistically to describe generations that were not just different but on a seemingly different planet.  Media was not like it is today but there was a heck of a lot of anger and division and violence. 1968 was ugly.  Bussing in the 70s was ugly.  War demonstrations pit generations against one another.

I’m not convinced we haven’t been this divided before.  But I’ll admit news media and social media are phenomena that make things different today.  But not insurmountable imo.

Thanks for the reply, I appreciate that, NG. I was just a young kid in the '70s, so I have no firsthand experience of the tension of that time period, but I know I can take your word for it.
RR, I pretty much agree with NG regarding President Obama. He seemed like a good guy, was bright, well-spoken but was unable to unify us as a country. It seemed to me that at some point he kind of punted on trying to work with the right. I think it was a combination of arrogance and that he tired of the obstructionism. The Obama presidency certainly did not help the divide. I believe, as another poster mentioned, that the country has gradually become more and more divided over the years. My point regarding President Trump is that it went from gradual to quick with his presidency. He is a flamethrower that is always on the attack. The constant name calling, referring to the Democrats as "the radical left", branding the media as "the enemy of the people" etc etc etc has inspired deep hatred from both the left and the right. In my opinion he has managed to bring out the worst in everyone and has sowed division in our country like nothing I have seen in my 48 years. To me it seems that we are far, far more divided now than we were 4 years ago.
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #392 on: August 14, 2020, 01:31:42 AM »

Offline wiley

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4249
  • Tommy Points: 330
Are you really comparing Obama to Sarah Palin?

Palin is not disliked, she just was not qualified for president.

I think Palin is strongly disliked by many liberals, at least in my experience. Why else would she be mocked as much as she was (and still is)?

And yes, I'm comparing them, obviously. Namely, I'm comparing their qualifications (at that time). The fact that you're questioning my act of comparing just proves (in my view) the blind spot many people have when it comes to the Great and Powerful Obama, as though he's some mighty oracle, one whose enchanting speeches could sway even the most ardent opponents, and who is miles above everyone else in intelligence.

You also seem to have missed my main point: that Palin was heavily criticized and deemed unqualified as a candidate for vice president (one who only might end up as president) while the unqualified Obama was deemed fit to actually be president. He'd never been a mayor a governor (both of which Palin was, but I guess Alaska is a dumb hick state that doesn't count), nor was he ever an ambassador or a cabinet-level official, never ran a big company, never was in the military. He was an absentee senator (judging by his senate voting record), and an absentee professor (judging by comments from one of his colleagues at the time). Yet he was qualified to be leader of the free world? Based on what?

To debate you is to give your argument credence. Not even the passage of time will erase how extremely unqualifed Palin was. She said her foreign affairs credentials included the fact that she could see Russia from her back yard? She could not name a book or magazine she had read? She mumbled words together incoherently to answer questions. You know who agrees that Palin was not qualified? Palin, everything she has done since she was nominated proves she was not qualifed. You should not be knocking Alaska you should be asking how the heck did she become a governor of any State. She should never have been elected as dog catcher. The fact that you would compare her to Barak Obama is downright shocking. I am not Obama's biggest defender, but please I will not allow this one to go without opposition.

Easy, there. I'm not trying to start WWIII. The only point I've been trying to make is that liberals were being hypocritical by, on one hand, saying Palin was unqualified, while on the other hand saying that Obama was qualified (and even more than that, actually, basically making him out to be one of the greatest individuals to ever tread this planet ... which I guess is why he got a Nobel prize before he did anything?)

But we can just agree to disagree.


There are a lot of examples where you can make strong arguments about Liberal bias. Comparing Palin's lack of qualifications to Obama's is one of the worst options you can choose though. Pretty much everyone from both parties agrees that Palin was one of the least qualified VP candidates in recent history. She completely sunk McCaine , he would have been president and a darn good one too if he had chosen Joe Lieberman.
I would have voted for McCain and been happy with him as President. He sunk his chances by picking a dimwit as his VP. It was an unmitigated disaster.
As far as credentials...whatever... the proof is in the pudding. One went on to fail as a reality TV star and the other served two terms as President and was inspirational to millions (including non-Americans).

Palin wasn’t really McCain’s problem.  His bigger issues were:

1. Running against an eloquent speaker the media elevated into a superstar;

2.  The economic crisis and Bush’s unpopularity;

3.  Suspending his campaign to go back to DC made him look inept;

4.  He refused to use Obama’s weaknesses against him (Jeremiah Wright, associations with far left terrorists);

5.  He was simply not the John McCain of 2000.  Age and perhaps ego caught up with him.

That Palin was underwhelming didn’t help, but he would have lost no matter who the running mate.
I don't agree with this take.  When choosing between Mccain and Obama, the choice for me was between someone who inspired hope in a better America vs someone who'd voted almost lockstep with the Bush administration which I (and many voters in the country) had had enough of.  it was Mccain's voting record that sunk him -- he couldn't believably make the case that he wouldn't continue down the same wrong direction as Bush

2008 Obama was the first and only Presidential candidate I actually voted FOR as opposed to every other year when I picked the option that I thought would be better (or less worse) than the other option in terms of what the country needed.

Obama was more than just an eloquent guy who stumbled into the presidency via the media.  He got there on smarts and talent and overcame a historic race barrier, despite not growing up with a silver spoon in his mouth like Trump and like Bush.  He was an excellent president who hired people from across the aisle for very high positions...Chuck Hagel, and others. 
The most important vote of the Bush years--Iraq war vote.  Obama got it right, Bush/McCain got it wrong.  Obama faced more opposition to his legitamacy than maybe any president in history....no wonder he got crabby with Republicans like Mitch McConnell.  He inherited the worst economic disaster since the Depression, and though I don't agree with all of his decisions as far as bailouts...he guided the country out of that mess.  Took out Bin Laden... etc....guy deserves respect as an excellent president.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2020, 02:15:26 AM by wiley »

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #393 on: August 14, 2020, 01:44:19 AM »

Offline wiley

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4249
  • Tommy Points: 330
On Twitter, Trump’s son Eric favourited a tweet that referred to Harris as a “Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ndous pick”; the tweet was later deleted.

This is the son of a man who has been President for four years.  When is the meanspiritedness going to be punished, and who will punish it?

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #394 on: August 14, 2020, 07:26:50 AM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16737
  • Tommy Points: 1827
On Twitter, Trump’s son Eric favourited a tweet that referred to Harris as a “Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ndous pick”; the tweet was later deleted.

This is the son of a man who has been President for four years.  When is the meanspiritedness going to be punished, and who will punish it?

The behavior that we’ve come to expect from the president, his family, and some of his supporters, is behavior we’ve all seen before from children, bullies, bigots, abusers and zealots.   It also is behavior that emanates from ‘us’ (typical folks) in times of anger, futility and stress when impulses are triggered.  The remarkable thing is that First Family are adults, they are consistent in their behavior, and deliver their messages calmly and often in a measured way as a calculated or strategic and planned reaction.  Since the behavior has been reinforced and rewarded with likes, retweets, praise, admiration, votes, worship and power, the bottom line is, it has worked.

The damage is incalculable and as we see from some soon to be elected congressional candidates is a formula that will be tested for replication.  The 50’s gave us McCarthyism which threatened tge fabric of the country and eventually was squashed (not eliminated, but incapacitated).

To those 2016 Trump voters who are struggling with the behavior of the first family and yet ideologically reject the thought of voting for Biden, please consider that 4 years passes quickly. In 2 years there’ll be mid-term elections and in about 2.5 years candidates will be emerging for 2024.  Putting an end to Trumpism doesn’t need to be seen as the ascendency of a profoundly progressive America.  It can be seen as a necessary awakening of America in rejection of the politics of chaos and division, and  hopefully an awakening of Republicans to reclaim their party from this reprehensible leadership.   Remember that Dems could have nominated Bernie, Liz or a number of ideologues on the left - but they didn’t.  They nominated a man who has not always been correct in his judgments but has been moderate, temperate, pragmatic and has a long history of friendship and camaraderie with those across the aisle. 

If this isn’t a ‘message’ election and if Biden doesn’t get the message that this is the rejection of Donald Trump, the division and anger will continue to brew.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #395 on: August 14, 2020, 09:17:29 AM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5083
  • Tommy Points: 831
On Twitter, Trump’s son Eric favourited a tweet that referred to Harris as a “Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ndous pick”; the tweet was later deleted.

This is the son of a man who has been President for four years.  When is the meanspiritedness going to be punished, and who will punish it?

The behavior that we’ve come to expect from the president, his family, and some of his supporters, is behavior we’ve all seen before from children, bullies, bigots, abusers and zealots.   It also is behavior that emanates from ‘us’ (typical folks) in times of anger, futility and stress when impulses are triggered.  The remarkable thing is that First Family are adults, they are consistent in their behavior, and deliver their messages calmly and often in a measured way as a calculated or strategic and planned reaction.  Since the behavior has been reinforced and rewarded with likes, retweets, praise, admiration, votes, worship and power, the bottom line is, it has worked.

The damage is incalculable and as we see from some soon to be elected congressional candidates is a formula that will be tested for replication.  The 50’s gave us McCarthyism which threatened tge fabric of the country and eventually was squashed (not eliminated, but incapacitated).

There is a deep connection here, as Donald Trump's main mentor, the guy who taught him his life strategy of always attacking, always blaming, being willing to lie and never, ever apologizing for anything was none other than Roy Cohn, who was McCarthy's bulldog strategist.

Quote

To those 2016 Trump voters who are struggling with the behavior of the first family and yet ideologically reject the thought of voting for Biden, please consider that 4 years passes quickly. In 2 years there’ll be mid-term elections and in about 2.5 years candidates will be emerging for 2024.  Putting an end to Trumpism doesn’t need to be seen as the ascendency of a profoundly progressive America.  It can be seen as a necessary awakening of America in rejection of the politics of chaos and division, and  hopefully an awakening of Republicans to reclaim their party from this reprehensible leadership.   Remember that Dems could have nominated Bernie, Liz or a number of ideologues on the left - but they didn’t.  They nominated a man who has not always been correct in his judgments but has been moderate, temperate, pragmatic and has a long history of friendship and camaraderie with those across the aisle. 

If this isn’t a ‘message’ election and if Biden doesn’t get the message that this is the rejection of Donald Trump, the division and anger will continue to brew.

Well, folks can tell themselves that, I suppose.

But the 'message' is in polling numbers and popular vote numbers that have been consistent for decades now:  The American populace IS a progressive populace.  They overwhelmingly support progressive policies when polled on explicit policy questions.   Nationally, the electorate has voted for the Democratic candidate in 6 of the last 7 national presidential elections.   And the trending is that the country is growing more progressive as it grows more diverse.

What is still regressive against that trend is our government, which is structurally NOT representative of the populace because the Senate is designed to represent land, not people and the Electoral College is just a giant, horrid mistake.   And of course the Senate has rubber-stamped the conservative white-washing of the courts.

It will take some time, because the forces of regression, determined to protect structural privilege, are entrenched in this government and will fight change as long as they can.   But the popular trending is definitely and inevitably towards a more progressive, diverse American populace and that trending eventually will show up in the Senate as well.

The conservative leadership knows this and thus all the efforts to disenfranchise segments of the populace.  To fight, tooth & nail, against representative elections.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #396 on: August 14, 2020, 10:31:38 AM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12463
  • Tommy Points: 1524
On Twitter, Trump’s son Eric favourited a tweet that referred to Harris as a “Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ndous pick”; the tweet was later deleted.

This is the son of a man who has been President for four years.  When is the meanspiritedness going to be punished, and who will punish it?

The behavior that we’ve come to expect from the president, his family, and some of his supporters, is behavior we’ve all seen before from children, bullies, bigots, abusers and zealots.   It also is behavior that emanates from ‘us’ (typical folks) in times of anger, futility and stress when impulses are triggered.  The remarkable thing is that First Family are adults, they are consistent in their behavior, and deliver their messages calmly and often in a measured way as a calculated or strategic and planned reaction.  Since the behavior has been reinforced and rewarded with likes, retweets, praise, admiration, votes, worship and power, the bottom line is, it has worked.

The damage is incalculable and as we see from some soon to be elected congressional candidates is a formula that will be tested for replication.  The 50’s gave us McCarthyism which threatened tge fabric of the country and eventually was squashed (not eliminated, but incapacitated).

There is a deep connection here, as Donald Trump's main mentor, the guy who taught him his life strategy of always attacking, always blaming, being willing to lie and never, ever apologizing for anything was none other than Roy Cohn, who was McCarthy's bulldog strategist.

Quote

To those 2016 Trump voters who are struggling with the behavior of the first family and yet ideologically reject the thought of voting for Biden, please consider that 4 years passes quickly. In 2 years there’ll be mid-term elections and in about 2.5 years candidates will be emerging for 2024.  Putting an end to Trumpism doesn’t need to be seen as the ascendency of a profoundly progressive America.  It can be seen as a necessary awakening of America in rejection of the politics of chaos and division, and  hopefully an awakening of Republicans to reclaim their party from this reprehensible leadership.   Remember that Dems could have nominated Bernie, Liz or a number of ideologues on the left - but they didn’t.  They nominated a man who has not always been correct in his judgments but has been moderate, temperate, pragmatic and has a long history of friendship and camaraderie with those across the aisle. 

If this isn’t a ‘message’ election and if Biden doesn’t get the message that this is the rejection of Donald Trump, the division and anger will continue to brew.

Well, folks can tell themselves that, I suppose.

But the 'message' is in polling numbers and popular vote numbers that have been consistent for decades now:  The American populace IS a progressive populace.  They overwhelmingly support progressive policies when polled on explicit policy questions.   Nationally, the electorate has voted for the Democratic candidate in 6 of the last 7 national presidential elections.   And the trending is that the country is growing more progressive as it grows more diverse.

What is still regressive against that trend is our government, which is structurally NOT representative of the populace because the Senate is designed to represent land, not people and the Electoral College is just a giant, horrid mistake.   And of course the Senate has rubber-stamped the conservative white-washing of the courts.

It will take some time, because the forces of regression, determined to protect structural privilege, are entrenched in this government and will fight change as long as they can.   But the popular trending is definitely and inevitably towards a more progressive, diverse American populace and that trending eventually will show up in the Senate as well.

The conservative leadership knows this and thus all the efforts to disenfranchise segments of the populace.  To fight, tooth & nail, against representative elections.

I'd like to thank you for the laugh this morning.

But, let's be clear here, urban progressives do not represent the whole of the country. I realize authoritarian marxists like yourself would love to be able to force everyone to have to live under your thumb, and it's impossible for you to accept that people that live in different states have different ideas on how to govern themselves, but that's your problem. Those of us in more rural states will just continue living our lives.

Do as you please where you live, though, I couldn't care less, as it's not my concern. My only concern is ensuring I have the freedom to govern myself where I live free from the influence of authoritarians like yourself.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #397 on: August 14, 2020, 11:40:07 AM »

Offline Ogaju

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13078
  • Tommy Points: 1375
A lot of interesting revisionist history in the last couple of posts about the divisions in our country. Nothing I have seen went to the extent of the vitriol against the Obama victory in 2008. Just visit youtube for some relief from any situational amnesia that you have on this issue. I mean, you had people lined up some with suffed monkeys on their back to represent Obama. After the election I guess you guys have forgotten people coming out in broad daylight with assault weapons. Then you had a movement that denied Obama's right to the office he had won. You really want to blame Obama for divisions.   The Senate Leader said he would work hard, work hard, to make sure Obama failed. That same Senate Leader accompanied by his acolytes denied the president a nominee to the Supreme Court effectively robbing him of his mandate. You had a congressman call the President a liar during the State of Union speech.

As the first black president dealing with the economic disaster he inherited, and then having to deal with a hostile opposition that seemed race based (how else do you describe birtherism) I think Obama handled this as well as he could . He definitely did not go to the people to start a civil war against those who attacked him on such personal bases.

Obama was so easy on the Republicans I think he cost Hillary the election by not exposing Russian interference because he did not want to tip the scales. He left in place a FBI director that pulled an October surprise on Hillary. And to reward all that was done to Obama, the opposition not only nominated his #! antagonist, the country elected him. No, you cannot blame Obama for the problems at all. He was more of a victim, and he did his best not to escalate. He is still doing that.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #398 on: August 14, 2020, 12:46:41 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16737
  • Tommy Points: 1827
A lot of interesting revisionist history in the last couple of posts about the divisions in our country. Nothing I have seen went to the extent of the vitriol against the Obama victory in 2008. Just visit youtube for some relief from any situational amnesia that you have on this issue. I mean, you had people lined up some with suffed monkeys on their back to represent Obama. After the election I guess you guys have forgotten people coming out in broad daylight with assault weapons. Then you had a movement that denied Obama's right to the office he had won. You really want to blame Obama for divisions.   The Senate Leader said he would work hard, work hard, to make sure Obama failed. That same Senate Leader accompanied by his acolytes denied the president a nominee to the Supreme Court effectively robbing him of his mandate. You had a congressman call the President a liar during the State of Union speech.

As the first black president dealing with the economic disaster he inherited, and then having to deal with a hostile opposition that seemed race based (how else do you describe birtherism) I think Obama handled this as well as he could . He definitely did not go to the people to start a civil war against those who attacked him on such personal bases.

Obama was so easy on the Republicans I think he cost Hillary the election by not exposing Russian interference because he did not want to tip the scales. He left in place a FBI director that pulled an October surprise on Hillary. And to reward all that was done to Obama, the opposition not only nominated his #! antagonist, the country elected him. No, you cannot blame Obama for the problems at all. He was more of a victim, and he did his best not to escalate. He is still doing that.

Great post.   I do have this idealized notion of leadership that the true greatness of leaders is measured by their ability to take adversity and turn it around under any circumstances.  Maybe unfair to lay that expectation on Obama given your points above, but sometimes I can't help thinking that he couldn't make it happen.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #399 on: August 14, 2020, 12:55:40 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16737
  • Tommy Points: 1827
On Twitter, Trump’s son Eric favourited a tweet that referred to Harris as a “Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ndous pick”; the tweet was later deleted.

This is the son of a man who has been President for four years.  When is the meanspiritedness going to be punished, and who will punish it?

The behavior that we’ve come to expect from the president, his family, and some of his supporters, is behavior we’ve all seen before from children, bullies, bigots, abusers and zealots.   It also is behavior that emanates from ‘us’ (typical folks) in times of anger, futility and stress when impulses are triggered.  The remarkable thing is that First Family are adults, they are consistent in their behavior, and deliver their messages calmly and often in a measured way as a calculated or strategic and planned reaction.  Since the behavior has been reinforced and rewarded with likes, retweets, praise, admiration, votes, worship and power, the bottom line is, it has worked.

The damage is incalculable and as we see from some soon to be elected congressional candidates is a formula that will be tested for replication.  The 50’s gave us McCarthyism which threatened tge fabric of the country and eventually was squashed (not eliminated, but incapacitated).

There is a deep connection here, as Donald Trump's main mentor, the guy who taught him his life strategy of always attacking, always blaming, being willing to lie and never, ever apologizing for anything was none other than Roy Cohn, who was McCarthy's bulldog strategist.

Quote

To those 2016 Trump voters who are struggling with the behavior of the first family and yet ideologically reject the thought of voting for Biden, please consider that 4 years passes quickly. In 2 years there’ll be mid-term elections and in about 2.5 years candidates will be emerging for 2024.  Putting an end to Trumpism doesn’t need to be seen as the ascendency of a profoundly progressive America.  It can be seen as a necessary awakening of America in rejection of the politics of chaos and division, and  hopefully an awakening of Republicans to reclaim their party from this reprehensible leadership.   Remember that Dems could have nominated Bernie, Liz or a number of ideologues on the left - but they didn’t.  They nominated a man who has not always been correct in his judgments but has been moderate, temperate, pragmatic and has a long history of friendship and camaraderie with those across the aisle. 

If this isn’t a ‘message’ election and if Biden doesn’t get the message that this is the rejection of Donald Trump, the division and anger will continue to brew.

Well, folks can tell themselves that, I suppose.

But the 'message' is in polling numbers and popular vote numbers that have been consistent for decades now:  The American populace IS a progressive populace.  They overwhelmingly support progressive policies when polled on explicit policy questions.   Nationally, the electorate has voted for the Democratic candidate in 6 of the last 7 national presidential elections.   And the trending is that the country is growing more progressive as it grows more diverse.

What is still regressive against that trend is our government, which is structurally NOT representative of the populace because the Senate is designed to represent land, not people and the Electoral College is just a giant, horrid mistake.   And of course the Senate has rubber-stamped the conservative white-washing of the courts.

It will take some time, because the forces of regression, determined to protect structural privilege, are entrenched in this government and will fight change as long as they can.   But the popular trending is definitely and inevitably towards a more progressive, diverse American populace and that trending eventually will show up in the Senate as well.

The conservative leadership knows this and thus all the efforts to disenfranchise segments of the populace.  To fight, tooth & nail, against representative elections.

Thanks for this post.    A couple responses:

1. While I understand our country has a lot of progressive sentiment, I can't help but think that 46% of voters chose Trump, 60% of states chose Trump, and currently about 40% if the people still have a favorable opinion of Trump.

2. My use of the term "profoundly progressive" was really to avoid using the term "socialist" which is an improper branding of the left.  I am comfortable saying that the Biden-Harris ticket doesn't go as far left as Dems could have, and my hope is that right-leaning moderates will see this as an olive branch for some collaboration followed by what I hope is a direct repudiation of the politics of Trump within the republican party.  Wishful thinking.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2020, 02:40:05 PM by Neurotic Guy »

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #400 on: August 14, 2020, 01:00:24 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12463
  • Tommy Points: 1524
I'm not sure why people feel compelled to constantly rehash Obama's Presidency. Let the past be the past.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #401 on: August 14, 2020, 01:34:23 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13078
  • Tommy Points: 1375
I'm not sure why people feel compelled to constantly rehash Obama's Presidency. Let the past be the past.

It was a compelling presidency in many ways. People tend to rehash compelling events in history.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #402 on: August 14, 2020, 01:37:12 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5083
  • Tommy Points: 831
On Twitter, Trump’s son Eric favourited a tweet that referred to Harris as a “Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ndous pick”; the tweet was later deleted.

This is the son of a man who has been President for four years.  When is the meanspiritedness going to be punished, and who will punish it?

The behavior that we’ve come to expect from the president, his family, and some of his supporters, is behavior we’ve all seen before from children, bullies, bigots, abusers and zealots.   It also is behavior that emanates from ‘us’ (typical folks) in times of anger, futility and stress when impulses are triggered.  The remarkable thing is that First Family are adults, they are consistent in their behavior, and deliver their messages calmly and often in a measured way as a calculated or strategic and planned reaction.  Since the behavior has been reinforced and rewarded with likes, retweets, praise, admiration, votes, worship and power, the bottom line is, it has worked.

The damage is incalculable and as we see from some soon to be elected congressional candidates is a formula that will be tested for replication.  The 50’s gave us McCarthyism which threatened tge fabric of the country and eventually was squashed (not eliminated, but incapacitated).

There is a deep connection here, as Donald Trump's main mentor, the guy who taught him his life strategy of always attacking, always blaming, being willing to lie and never, ever apologizing for anything was none other than Roy Cohn, who was McCarthy's bulldog strategist.

Quote

To those 2016 Trump voters who are struggling with the behavior of the first family and yet ideologically reject the thought of voting for Biden, please consider that 4 years passes quickly. In 2 years there’ll be mid-term elections and in about 2.5 years candidates will be emerging for 2024.  Putting an end to Trumpism doesn’t need to be seen as the ascendency of a profoundly progressive America.  It can be seen as a necessary awakening of America in rejection of the politics of chaos and division, and  hopefully an awakening of Republicans to reclaim their party from this reprehensible leadership.   Remember that Dems could have nominated Bernie, Liz or a number of ideologues on the left - but they didn’t.  They nominated a man who has not always been correct in his judgments but has been moderate, temperate, pragmatic and has a long history of friendship and camaraderie with those across the aisle. 

If this isn’t a ‘message’ election and if Biden doesn’t get the message that this is the rejection of Donald Trump, the division and anger will continue to brew.

Well, folks can tell themselves that, I suppose.

But the 'message' is in polling numbers and popular vote numbers that have been consistent for decades now:  The American populace IS a progressive populace.  They overwhelmingly support progressive policies when polled on explicit policy questions.   Nationally, the electorate has voted for the Democratic candidate in 6 of the last 7 national presidential elections.   And the trending is that the country is growing more progressive as it grows more diverse.

What is still regressive against that trend is our government, which is structurally NOT representative of the populace because the Senate is designed to represent land, not people and the Electoral College is just a giant, horrid mistake.   And of course the Senate has rubber-stamped the conservative white-washing of the courts.

It will take some time, because the forces of regression, determined to protect structural privilege, are entrenched in this government and will fight change as long as they can.   But the popular trending is definitely and inevitably towards a more progressive, diverse American populace and that trending eventually will show up in the Senate as well.

The conservative leadership knows this and thus all the efforts to disenfranchise segments of the populace.  To fight, tooth & nail, against representative elections.

I'd like to thank you for the laugh this morning.

But, let's be clear here, urban progressives do not represent the whole of the country. I realize authoritarian marxists like yourself would love to be able to force everyone to have to live under your thumb, and it's impossible for you to accept that people that live in different states have different ideas on how to govern themselves, but that's your problem. Those of us in more rural states will just continue living our lives.

Do as you please where you live, though, I couldn't care less, as it's not my concern. My only concern is ensuring I have the freedom to govern myself where I live free from the influence of authoritarians like yourself.

I'm glad you had a good laugh, but my reference has nothing to do with "urban progressives" and please do not label me an "authoritarian marxist" just because I'm relaying information about our country that you don't like to hear.  Nowhere in my comment did I advocate for anything other than that our government should better represent the actual views of it's people.

The policy support trends I noted are broad-based and are not at all isolated to 'urban progressives'.  They are what the _majority_ of Americans reveal when polled on discrete questions, without the wrappings of party and celebrity.

There are literally hundreds of articles one can find that support my point.  These are just a tiny, tiny slice:

https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publication/on-the-money
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/27/majority-of-americans-support-progressive-policies-such-as-paid-maternity-leave-free-college.html
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/poll-marijuana-legalization-data-for-progress-radical-ideas-popular-aoc.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/us/politics/bernie-sanders-progressives-elizabeth-warren.html
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/07/14/as-the-u-s-copes-with-multiple-crises-partisans-disagree-sharply-on-severity-of-problems-facing-the-nation/
https://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/reports/2020/01/29/175720/working-class-americans-states-support-progressive-economic-policies/

Even among 'republicans', when polled on discrete policy questions, the majority of progressive policies get strong or even majority support.   Even more so when you separate between low and high income republicans.  There is a huge difference in how those two groups view progressive policies.  Lower income republicans tend to be far more supportive of progressive policies than wealthier republicans.

The demographic diversity trends I noted also are well supported by numerous studies.  Again, these are just a tiny slice:

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED358179
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/05/08/americans-see-advantages-and-challenges-in-countrys-growing-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2010.00322.x?casa_token=dhjvnCAR5j0AAAAA%3AZhnbv04kimX0jdoUj2ZkZICLZ0tjV5Qz4j2V7lDBs558_bPuqbKbIncsEYB_bXlDq1Bas1OIB9dZa6w

It is a factual trend:  America is growing more and more ethnically and racially diverse and as that happens, eventually, inevitably, that needs to be reflected in the representation of the people in government.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #403 on: August 14, 2020, 01:49:35 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12463
  • Tommy Points: 1524
I'm not sure why people feel compelled to constantly rehash Obama's Presidency. Let the past be the past.

It was a compelling presidency in many ways. People tend to rehash compelling events in history.

I was never impressed with him.  He made a lot of empty promises, like most politicians.  He also was much more of a partisan and divider than uniter or coalition builder.  Again, pretty much just like every other politician.  His only real accomplishment was being the first to break the color barrier. Certainly a significant accomplishment, no doubt, but other than that he was run-of-the-mill.

If people want to rehash that forever and ever and ever, good for them, I guess.  I find it unnecessary and rather impertinent to current events.

Re: Kamala Harris VEEP Running Mate for Biden
« Reply #404 on: August 14, 2020, 02:42:18 PM »

Offline gift

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2575
  • Tommy Points: 214
On Twitter, Trump’s son Eric favourited a tweet that referred to Harris as a “Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ndous pick”; the tweet was later deleted.

This is the son of a man who has been President for four years.  When is the meanspiritedness going to be punished, and who will punish it?

The behavior that we’ve come to expect from the president, his family, and some of his supporters, is behavior we’ve all seen before from children, bullies, bigots, abusers and zealots.   It also is behavior that emanates from ‘us’ (typical folks) in times of anger, futility and stress when impulses are triggered.  The remarkable thing is that First Family are adults, they are consistent in their behavior, and deliver their messages calmly and often in a measured way as a calculated or strategic and planned reaction.  Since the behavior has been reinforced and rewarded with likes, retweets, praise, admiration, votes, worship and power, the bottom line is, it has worked.

The damage is incalculable and as we see from some soon to be elected congressional candidates is a formula that will be tested for replication.  The 50’s gave us McCarthyism which threatened tge fabric of the country and eventually was squashed (not eliminated, but incapacitated).

There is a deep connection here, as Donald Trump's main mentor, the guy who taught him his life strategy of always attacking, always blaming, being willing to lie and never, ever apologizing for anything was none other than Roy Cohn, who was McCarthy's bulldog strategist.

Quote

To those 2016 Trump voters who are struggling with the behavior of the first family and yet ideologically reject the thought of voting for Biden, please consider that 4 years passes quickly. In 2 years there’ll be mid-term elections and in about 2.5 years candidates will be emerging for 2024.  Putting an end to Trumpism doesn’t need to be seen as the ascendency of a profoundly progressive America.  It can be seen as a necessary awakening of America in rejection of the politics of chaos and division, and  hopefully an awakening of Republicans to reclaim their party from this reprehensible leadership.   Remember that Dems could have nominated Bernie, Liz or a number of ideologues on the left - but they didn’t.  They nominated a man who has not always been correct in his judgments but has been moderate, temperate, pragmatic and has a long history of friendship and camaraderie with those across the aisle. 

If this isn’t a ‘message’ election and if Biden doesn’t get the message that this is the rejection of Donald Trump, the division and anger will continue to brew.

Well, folks can tell themselves that, I suppose.

But the 'message' is in polling numbers and popular vote numbers that have been consistent for decades now:  The American populace IS a progressive populace.  They overwhelmingly support progressive policies when polled on explicit policy questions.   Nationally, the electorate has voted for the Democratic candidate in 6 of the last 7 national presidential elections.   And the trending is that the country is growing more progressive as it grows more diverse.

What is still regressive against that trend is our government, which is structurally NOT representative of the populace because the Senate is designed to represent land, not people and the Electoral College is just a giant, horrid mistake.   And of course the Senate has rubber-stamped the conservative white-washing of the courts.

It will take some time, because the forces of regression, determined to protect structural privilege, are entrenched in this government and will fight change as long as they can.   But the popular trending is definitely and inevitably towards a more progressive, diverse American populace and that trending eventually will show up in the Senate as well.

The conservative leadership knows this and thus all the efforts to disenfranchise segments of the populace.  To fight, tooth & nail, against representative elections.

I'd like to thank you for the laugh this morning.

But, let's be clear here, urban progressives do not represent the whole of the country. I realize authoritarian marxists like yourself would love to be able to force everyone to have to live under your thumb, and it's impossible for you to accept that people that live in different states have different ideas on how to govern themselves, but that's your problem. Those of us in more rural states will just continue living our lives.

Do as you please where you live, though, I couldn't care less, as it's not my concern. My only concern is ensuring I have the freedom to govern myself where I live free from the influence of authoritarians like yourself.

I'm glad you had a good laugh, but my reference has nothing to do with "urban progressives" and please do not label me an "authoritarian marxist" just because I'm relaying information about our country that you don't like to hear.  Nowhere in my comment did I advocate for anything other than that our government should better represent the actual views of it's people.

The policy support trends I noted are broad-based and are not at all isolated to 'urban progressives'.  They are what the _majority_ of Americans reveal when polled on discrete questions, without the wrappings of party and celebrity.

There are literally hundreds of articles one can find that support my point.  These are just a tiny, tiny slice:

https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publication/on-the-money
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/27/majority-of-americans-support-progressive-policies-such-as-paid-maternity-leave-free-college.html
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/poll-marijuana-legalization-data-for-progress-radical-ideas-popular-aoc.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/us/politics/bernie-sanders-progressives-elizabeth-warren.html
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/07/14/as-the-u-s-copes-with-multiple-crises-partisans-disagree-sharply-on-severity-of-problems-facing-the-nation/
https://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/reports/2020/01/29/175720/working-class-americans-states-support-progressive-economic-policies/

Even among 'republicans', when polled on discrete policy questions, the majority of progressive policies get strong or even majority support.   Even more so when you separate between low and high income republicans.  There is a huge difference in how those two groups view progressive policies.  Lower income republicans tend to be far more supportive of progressive policies than wealthier republicans.

The demographic diversity trends I noted also are well supported by numerous studies.  Again, these are just a tiny slice:

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED358179
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/05/08/americans-see-advantages-and-challenges-in-countrys-growing-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2010.00322.x?casa_token=dhjvnCAR5j0AAAAA%3AZhnbv04kimX0jdoUj2ZkZICLZ0tjV5Qz4j2V7lDBs558_bPuqbKbIncsEYB_bXlDq1Bas1OIB9dZa6w

It is a factual trend:  America is growing more and more ethnically and racially diverse and as that happens, eventually, inevitably, that needs to be reflected in the representation of the people in government.

It's interesting that the structure of government you criticize is explicitly set up to avoid swings in populist opinion that might put at risk long-term national health and/or the interest of the member-states.