Support NeoGAF

[metalslimer]

I don't understand this string of responses, are these attacks on her?

Yes and she deserves it. She'll find out soon enough though.

 

[Dan]

Has he ever tweeted about Cliven Bundy or the office occupation?

He said this about the Oregon standoff:

"I think what I'd do, as president, is I would make a phone call to whoever, to the group," he said, adding later, "I'd talk to the leader. I would talk to him and I would say, 'You gotta get out — come see me, but you gotta get out.'"

"You cannot let people take over federal property," Mr. Trump said. "You can't, because once you do that, you don't have a government anymore. I think, frankly, they've been there too long."

Mr. Trump said he wasn't necessarily suggesting a large-scale military action, but that "at a certain point you have to do something and you have to be firm and you have to be strong, you have to be a government."

Regarding the ranching situation with Cliven Bundy, Trump had said he liked and respected him at the time, and suggested Cliven Bundy should have somehow leveraged the whole thing for a good deal with the government.

This is really stupid. If we ever have a situation where we can only pick Russia or China, why would you pick the country that is failing economically.

Yeah, but Russia is majority white, they persecute gays, and they 'demonstrate power' on the world stage.

 

[Pixieking]

We saw it this campaign-when you have 30ish% of hispanics voting for trump, you have to realize that just appealing to mainly/just minorities wont win you the election.

That 30ish% shouldn't be relied upon, since it's Exit Polls immediately after Election Day. The WaPo estimates it was close to 18-20%.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

That 30ish% shouldn't be relied upon, since it's Exit Polls immediately after Election Day. The WaPo estimates it was close to 18-20%.

20% is still sizable.

After the shit he said about Mexicans, and his dog whistle racism, that any number of minorities voting for hin is disheartening.

 

[NobleXenon]

I don't believe Hillary's message was on point at all. She catered to minorities which is good, but she made no reason uneducated white heterosexual's to vote for her over Trump. All they wanted was change because their lives were getting worse and all they see is minorities being catered to while they were ignored. Unfortunately critical thinking is not something they value.

Yeah. There's some weird dissonance in rural America between the welfare of minorities that also helps whites, and then thinking whites need to be the only one's coddled to feel represented. I know the default response is, "Well they vote against their interests," but what happens when cities realize that voting for themselves makes the people in the cities much better off than constantly subsidizing rural life through social security, farm payments, and other tax redistribution projects?

If Trump and the Republican's cut federal taxes for the wealthy while simultaneously cut government spending, then cities will raise their taxes and get more for themselves.

I've been noticing this here in Nevada. We don't get much federal money compared to most states, and we have no state income tax aside from consumption. Reno in Washoe County and Las Vegas in Clark County will only spend what tax is collected for themselves and nothing will go to rural areas because that is where most of the money is made and where most of the tax is collected.

I really have no idea how to communicate this to rural America.

 

[Balphon]

So all you have to do to get an audience with President Trump is take up arms and seize some federal property?

 

[Pixieking]

20% is still sizable.

After the shit he said about Mexicans, and his dog whistle racism, that any number of minorities voting for hin is disheartening.

Yeah, no doubt - Hispanics aren't as solid a Dem voting block as African Americans, though I do wonder how much of it is them not believing what he was saying, and how much was "I've got mine, screw you" as the legal hispanics voting against the illegals. Both those mindsets are very Republican.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

That 30ish% shouldn't be relied upon, since it's Exit Polls immediately after Election Day. The WaPo estimates it was close to 18-20%.

Only read this briefly, but they reminded about the King paper, which is really interesting reading if you have some spare time (http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/nazivp.pdf).

In contrast, we find that those w
ho were hurt most by the depression
and wound up supporting the Nazis were
those at little risk of being un-
employed. These include two groups that together we refer to as
the
working poor
, which is a phrase used in the field of American politics
within political science and within
sociology, but has not previously
been used to describe Weimar Germany.
31
We use it because the groups
described this way were indeed wo
rking and they were poor, despite
having other important characteristics.
The group that fits this descrip-
tion most directly ar
e the self-employed (
Selbständige
), the independent
artisans, shopkeepers, small farmers, lawyers, etc.
32
Most accounts as-
sume the self-employed were fervent supporters of the Nazis.
33
These
individuals were hurt economically
by the depression, but because they
owned their firms they were at rela
tively low risk of unemployment. In-
stead, bad economic times would mere
ly mean that they would make
less money, often a lot less. Indeed
, the crushing economic depression
hit shop owners especially
hard. It is true that this
group also feared that
they would lose the independence th
at their self-owned businesses pro-
vided and that their low earnings woul
d force them to take regular jobs
with a large firm; however, their main concern appears not to have been
unemployment. As such, they were not moved by the social welfare
policies of the government or t
hose promised by the Communists.

compare and contrast with:

However, there is a further point also not previously noted. Not only is UKIP attracting, primarily, disaffected former Labour voters from the Conservatives and elsewhere, but the working class basis of UKIP has been markedly over-stated. Working class voters are a little more likely to support UKIP than other classes, but there is stronger support among the self-employed and business owners, who were Mrs Thatcher’s hard-core supporters, not Labour’s.[2] Even within the working class, the strongest UKIPers are the lower supervisory category, who are not the disadvantaged semi- and unskilled workers that have been thought to provide the core of UKIP support.However, there is a further point also not previously noted. Not only is UKIP attracting, primarily, disaffected former Labour voters from the Conservatives and elsewhere, but the working class basis of UKIP has been markedly over-stated. Working class voters are a little more likely to support UKIP than other classes, but there is stronger support among the self-employed and small business owners, who were Mrs Thatcher’s hard-core supporters, not Labour’s.[2] Even within the working class, the strongest UKIPers are the lower supervisory category, who are not the disadvantaged semi- and unskilled workers that have been thought to provide the core of UKIP support.

It's not the people right at the bottom who lash out - they need help too much. It's the people who fear that they might be at the bottom if things continue as they are.

 

[Crocodile]

So .... a general for SecDef, a general for head of DHS, and a general for national security advisor. Isn't this how military coups happen?

Maddow had a good segment last night about why Democracies usually make a concerted effort to exclude the military from government roles for pretty much the reason you cited.

The issue here being that it was about messaging

Hillarys campaign message was majorly about helping out minorities, and how bad Trump was

Trumps message was mainly about the economy and bringing back jobs, and how great a business man he was.

Yes we should help the poor and needy. But that doesnt just mean minorities. If Hillary lost, was because she didnt try to appeal to those white americans who felt ignored.

Yes, she had the better plans. Yes, she would help them out. But she did not get that across in her messaging, since her messaging was focused on lifting up minorities and pointing out all the bad things Trump said. If she had better messaging in middle America, we would be singing a different tune.

It was the Lefts campaign to lose, and they lost. Messaging was a huge reason for that. And when the end result is, after hearing opinions of people who voted Trump, to call them White Mannequins, then we will continue losing. Because these so-called Mannequins make up the majority of the country. And you have to tailor your messaging as such.

We saw it this campaign-when you have 30ish% of hispanics voting for trump, you have to realize that just appealing to mainly/just minorities wont win you the election.

I honestly don't know how you could have listened or watched the campaign and thought Clinton never addressed issues important to white voters. This isn't saying she couldn't have done it, or anything else, better but only voters with blinders on would think they weren't being spoken too if they were white. The real issue, and I think we touched upon it before, is that even mentioning issues important to minority voters ticks off some number of white voters. Remember that quote from a while back from that woman who said she voted for Obama but then felt "betrayed" when he "took sides" in the Trayvon Martin episode? Coming back to the voter that sparked this conversation, like am I just supposed to be ok with a woman who denies my very existence and thinks I'm not an "everyday American"?

I think there is an issue too about how reliable data and polling was this election. "This man is literally too stupid and erratic for this job" should have been a compelling argument (and there was never any embellishment but rather his won words against him) and their data seemed to suggest it was working and most public polling data seemed to suggest to was working too. There was a good number of positive ads and positive messaging from the Clinton camp too but even by their own admission, the Comey letter forced them to go negative for most of the final stretch. Too many voters fell into the "both sides" trap or lacked the ability to compare things objectively and Clinton "baggage" sunk her.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I knew she was addressing points important to white voters and thats because I was absorbing the microcosms of her campaign this year. But I also realize that the average voter who watches fox or gets the cliffnotes wouldnt get the same impression from her campaign. Minority issues were at the forefront of her campaign, not the economic issues.

Putting the blame on people who dont absorb everything that isnt spelled out to them isnt the way to go. Trump happened to have a louder, message that simply appealed to more people in the rust belt.

 

[pigeon]

It's not about blame, it's about moral responsibility. The difference is important.

 

[Pixieking]

Only read this briefly, but they reminded about the King paper, which is really interesting reading if you have some spare time (http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/nazivp.pdf).

Whoop! Light reading ahead!

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Whoop! Light reading ahead!

Honestly, one of the most depressing things about studying statistical analysis of voting patterns based on secret ballot electoral results is that a third of the literature is about the Nazis. I mean, I get why, it's the most important case, but it really was a downer when that's your next eight weeks sorted.

 

[Teggy]

So all you have to do to get an audience with President Trump is take up arms and seize some federal property?

His solution to everything is "I will do it myself". It's going to be ridiculous.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

It's not about blame, it's about moral responsibility. The difference is important.

Moral responsibility isnt a monolith. What is morally right for one person, is not for another.

If moral responsibilty was the law of the land, the world would be a utopia. But it isnt. There are wars. Violence is prevalent. Saying "moral responsibility" is ignoring the fact that the world is and will continue to be a tumultuous place.(and telling people its their moral responsibilty to vote one way is a quick way for them to stop listening to you)

 

[Totakeke]

From Pew:

This is funny.

 

[Hindl]

From Pew:

This is funny.

They could be right. Depending on what policies they put forth the bottom may not fall out till 2018 or 2019 and 2017 has short term growth. Of course they expect it to just go up and up forever

 

[Teggy]

From Pew:

This is funny.

They'll probably say it's good regardless of how it actually is. We know objectively that the economy is in pretty great shape, especially compared to 8 years ago, but Republicans find ways to claim that it's bad. "It's not growing fast enough" "The unemployment rate isn't accurate." They'll just do the opposite.

 

[Totakeke]

Yeah I'm not saying they're wrong, just that it's funny there's such a huge discrepancy.

 

[whyamihere]

@khinman
.@TulsiGabbard tells @jaketapper concerns about too many generals in Trump's cabinet is "discrimination against veterans"

lol

 

[B-Dubs]

lol

Gillibrand needs to smack her in the face.

I imagine it'll sound something like:

This column is absurd and incoherent: http://bit.ly/2h8v7Hv I respect, value and fight for our veterans every day.

She is my girl. No fucks given.

 

[Sirpopopop]

lol

I'll donate to the person running a primary campaign against her. $100+...

 

[metalslimer]

lol

Dear lord go away.

 

[Crocodile]

Moral responsibility isnt a monolith. What is morally right for one person, is not for another.

If moral responsibility was the law of the land, the world would be a utopia. But it isnt. There are wars. Violence is prevalent. Saying "moral responsibility" is ignoring the fact that the world is and will continue to be a tumultuous place.(and telling people its their moral responsibilty to vote one way is a quick way for them to stop listening to you)

So are we arguing for moral relativism here? You know how slippery a slope that is? Not every decision we make as individuals is going to be moral and sometimes we are forced into corners and have to make tough choices but that doesn't mean that when we do immoral things that we aren't deserving of criticism. I mean if we can't all agree that being ok with (or actively supporting) racism/sexism/homophobia/fascism/ignorance is wrong in support of false/empty promises then we might as well pack it up and call the human race a failure.

lol

I legit don't think I've ever heard or seen this woman say or do anything worthy of praise or celebration :/

 

[dramatis]

I'm reading the synopsis of one of Eleanor Roosevelt's books, The Moral Basis of Democracy.

With the threat of the Third Reich looming, Eleanor Roosevelt employs the history of human rights to establish the idea that at the core of democracy is a spiritual responsibility to other citizens. Roosevelt then calls on all Americans, especially the youth, to prioritize the well-being of others and have faith that their fellow citizens will protect them in return. She defines this trust between people as a trait of true democracy.

Roosevelt advances an optimistic model for the democracy of the future, and although we’ve taken some steps in the direction of her vision, it’s still a long way from reality. The issues first addressed in this 1940 essay—namely financial inequality and racial discrimination—are sadly still relevant today, as bigotry continues to undermine our national unity.

Her first publication as first lady, The Moral Basis of Democracy is an honest and heartfelt call for all Americans to choose love and faith over hatred and fear. Roosevelt takes an inspiring stance in defense of democracy, progress, and morality; the wisdom imparted here is timeless, and a must-read for every American.

If she could see the youth of today, I wonder if Eleanor would be immensely disappointed.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

From Pew:

This is funny.

The GOP was more confident in the economy after Obama got elected than Democrats were? Opinion didn't tank until Obamacare

 

[B-Dubs]

I'm reading the synopsis of one of Eleanor Roosevelt's books, The Moral Basis of Democracy.

If she could see the youth of today, I wonder if Eleanor would be immensely disappointed.

She'd probably be used to the disappointment. If there was justice in this world she'd have been president.

 

[dramatis]

She'd probably be used to the disappointment. If there was justice in this world she'd have been president.

I'm not too sure about whether or not she really wanted that.

Right now there is a bit of justice in this world, in duckroll's Japan where FF15 sold half of what FF13 sold for launch week lol

Won't expect justice in Trump's America

 

[BreezyLimbo]

So are we arguing for moral relativism here? You know how slippery a slope that is? Not every decision we make as individuals is going to be moral and sometimes we are forced into corners and have to make tough choices but that doesn't mean that when we do immoral things that we aren't deserving of criticism. I mean if we can't all agree that being ok with (or actively supporting) racism/sexism/homophobia/fascism/ignorance is wrong in support of false/empty promises then we might as well pack it up and call the human race a failure.

The human race is a failure though, because the whole world doesnt follow your line of morality? Even when we criticize places that lack basic human rights, that doesnt right the immorality happening and make the human race not into a failure?

What is a successful human race? If we're going to be absolutist with proclaiming that the human race is a failure for not always criticizing what we deem wrong, then show me the human race that is a success.

At the end of this, the reality is that humanity will always be flawed. It always will be. If you think the human race is a failure because of that, then you will never think otherwise.

Im not saying we shouldnt be against the isms. Im saying that not everyone has the same values, nor should they because thats an unrealistic expectation of humans. And because of that fact, the messaging in a campaign should be more inclusive of those you deem to be the failures of humanity. Like it is said, actions speak louder than words, so having the words be misleading is ok if it means that you can get your actions can come to pass.

If Hillary told the rust belt she would whisk away all their problems and focused on them, that would be fine because shes not betraying minorities by doing so. And it wouldve gotten her in the white house.

Instead we have trump who DID lie about being allies of hispanics and black people and whoever, and look where he is now.

The point is, arguing for moral responsibilty and telling people its morally right to vote for X is a quick way to shut down dialogue because not everyone has the same morals.

 

[Veritigo_X]

lol

Can anyone explain to me what progressives like about her? All she's been doing since the election is playing ball with Trump's transition team.

Like I get she backed Bernie in the primary and that's great and all, but providing cover for fascists doesn't seem very progressive to me.

 

[Grexeno]

Can anyone explain to me what progressives like about her?

she backed Bernie in the primary

That's it. That's literally the whole reason.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

lol

What an idiot. It is about keeping military and civilian oversight of military separate.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

 

[whyamihere]

hot

 

[Got the Shakes]

Breaking News ‏@BreakingNews 4m4 minutes ago
Donald Trump to remain an executive producer on NBC's 'Celebrity Apprentice,' MGM confirms - Variety

 

[Randolph Freelander]

Breaking News ‏@BreakingNews 4m4 minutes ago
Donald Trump to remain an executive producer on NBC's 'Celebrity Apprentice,' MGM confirms - Variety

Ridiculous

 

[kirblar]

Not campaigning on the Heroin/opium stuff (given that it's straight up her alley) was a huge mistake on Hillary's part- she conceded that to Donald and it's clearly a way bigger issue than suburban/urban people (like me) realized.

The next nom cannot make that mistake.

 

[Dan]

Variety:

In October, Burnett distanced himself from Trump’s political campaign with a statement asserting that he disavowed “the hatred, division and misogyny that has been a very unfortunate part of his campaign.” Burnett has been a supporter of Democratic candidates, including President Obama, in the past.

However, Burnett met with Trump in New York this week, and a knowledgeable source said he is contributing to the Trump inauguration planning effort led by Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, the veteran New York event maven known for presiding over the glitzy Met Ball for a decade.

Hadas Gold ‏@Hadas_Gold 6m6 minutes ago
Asked about Apprentice royalties, Hope Hicks says ‘Additional details regarding his business interests will be shared December 15th’ 2/2

 

[Rebel Leader]

I actually had this thought earlier while listening to a podcast, but what do you think Trump would do with the sovereign citizen fools act up again?

Or is it likely that they won't act up because the pres is going to be white again

I don't think there will be alot.

I know for sure they would have risen in popularity if Clinton won

 

[Beer Monkey]

From Pew:

This is funny.

You don't even want to know how much time I've spent thinking lately of shifting my retirement to a largely cash position in the near future, to buy back in after the next major correction.

 

[Odrion]

What I get from these posts is, once again, that progressivism has lost its moral imperative. People apparently forgot that the reason we advocate for progressive policies is not because they might help us, but because we have a responsibility to help the poor and needy, because we were all strangers.

This is something we need to work on. All successes for progressive policies in America have come as a result of building a sense of moral responsibility. If we have forgotten that, it's going to be a problem.

+1

 

[shinra-bansho]

Not campaigning on the Heroin/opium stuff (given that it's straight up her alley) was a huge mistake on Hillary's part- she conceded that to Donald and it's clearly a way bigger issue than suburban/urban people (like me) realized.

The next nom cannot make that mistake.

Yes. Drug dependency is a problem worth addressing now that it affects white people.

This is only half snark.

 

[Odrion]

also i keep getting confused at people treating social justice and economic justice as two individual and clashing concepts that you must leave one for the other

you can do both. in fact, i'd say they're quite connected

edit: and again another reminder that what really went wrong is that hillary's campaign was mismanaged and we all bought into what turned out to be inaccurate polling. if hillary tried to secure the rust belt over trying to win over red states we'd be saying that her campaign that was based in social justice was a good one, great even. but instead hillary tried to play a game of chicken in michigan and red states are fucking stupid, so now people want to shit on minorities to suck up to white folks. ugh.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

also i keep getting confused at people treating social justice and economic justice as two individual and clashing concepts that you must leave one for the other

you can do both. in fact, i'd say they're quite connected

edit: and again another reminder that what really went wrong is that hillary's campaign was mismanaged and we all bought into what turned out to be inaccurate polling. if hillary tried to secure the rust belt over trying to win over red states we'd be saying that her campaign based in social justice was a good one, great even.

you can do both

it's just that her messaging was heavily slanted towards one. if she had spent time in the rust belt and won that, it would be a damn well run campaign. Instead she got cocky and tried to go for red states.

 

[dramatis]

You can do both.

But historically, social justice has been left behind.

 

[kirblar]

Yes. Drug dependency is a problem worth addressing now that it affects white people.

This is only half snark.

Yeah, it sucks that it takes this to actually have a conversation and make progress here, but passing up the opportunity to outreach and get policy brought into the modern age is something we can't afford to do.

Also, Warren/Bernie voting against that bill that passed yesterday makes them electoral poison in 2020. Like, it's so bad. (Thankfully, I don't think either will run, both will be super old)

 

[Balphon]

@khinman
.@TulsiGabbard tells @jaketapper concerns about too many generals in Trump's cabinet is "discrimination against veterans"

lol

Good Lord is that argument stupid. Civilian control of the military and clear lines of division between the military and civilian government aren't just some quaint things we invented because we don't like generals. They shield against very obvious vulnerabilities in democratic government.

And if anything those principles should speak more strongly when you have someone as impressionable as Trump in the WH.

 

[Diablos]

Is Tulsi Gabbard stupid or crazy?

 

[Officerrob]

Is Tulsi Gabbard stupid or crazy?

Yes

 

[faisal233]

https://variety.com/2016/tv/news/do...ity-apprentice-executive-producer-1201937420/

Donald Trump will remain an exec producer on NBC’s “Celebrity Apprentice,” which is returning Jan. 2 after a two-year hiatus with new host Arnold Schwarzenegger.

LOL