2016 Election Thread

[TheLeviathan]

 

And FTR, saying that someone is tired of white men in context of this election, is not at all saying the same thing as all white men are contemptible.   It's simply the case that a great majority of the people saying contemptible things are white men.  

No one's actually implying that you, or Levi, or me, or any other white guy here is the problem, but white men are the problem.  Not all white men, but white men make up the people that are absolutely awful to listen to in this election. 

 

I am totally ok with this.  I agree completely.

 

Where it gets hard for me is to hear someone with left-leaning ideology say something like this.  Because if that sort of generalization is used in a way your ideology isn't comfortable with, then the conversation goes full scale nuclear.  So it starts to become a tad irksome to hear the same kind of argument used when it would otherwise not be accepted.  I think that's the problem, it's a "it's good for the goose, but not the gander"

 

Personally, I'm always good with it.  Generalizing is something we sort of have to do.  And this generalization is not false, IMO.

[gunnarthor]

Hey Everybody, look!  Conan O'Brien can sing!

 

 

 

 

(and now let's calm down a bit)

[stringer bell]

Back to the divide. I also believe the gap between liberal and conservative needs to be bridged and that would mean between Democratic and Republican as well. I don't think there is equivalency between compromise proposed by liberals (Democrats) and conservatives (Republicans) and until there is, we are stuck in this partisan muck.

 

There should be some agreement on what is wrong and some measures should be passed to deal with what is wrong. However, one party has spent the last eight years opposing everything that the administration has proposed. The Republican party is moving away from even attempting to govern. It is my opinion that those in the legislative branch are satisfied with gumming up the works and then saying government is broken.

 

For the record, Democrats aren't blameless and their leadership in the Senate  (Reid and Shumer) are two of the most partisan. I can name two Republicans to every Democrat that have no intention of governing, though. These characters keep getting elected! Further, redistricting has made so many bad Congressmen bulletproof, they can feel free to screw up the country, knowing that with a few platitudes they will be re-elected in two years.

 

Yes, I'm sick of it too.

[jimmer]

 

I am totally ok with this.  I agree completely.

 

Where it gets hard for me is to hear someone with left-leaning ideology say something like this.  Because if that sort of generalization is used in a way your ideology isn't comfortable with, then the conversation goes full scale nuclear.  So it starts to become a tad irksome to hear the same kind of argument used when it would otherwise not be accepted.  I think that's the problem, it's a "it's good for the goose, but not the gander"

 

Personally, I'm always good with it.  Generalizing is something we sort of have to do.  And this generalization is not false, IMO.

About 75% or so of this country is made up of white people with about half of those being men.  Makes sense that, by sheer numbers, the majority of azzhats are white and are part of the problem.  

 

It's also likely that the quality changes that are being brought about (and have been brought about) in this country, however slowly these changes happen, are also being fueled, at least in part, by the same demographic.  Plenty of white people are part of the problem AND plenty of white people (men included) are part of the solution as well, since 75% or so of the country is white.

 

So while it's horrible a good chunk of people have had bad experiences with white people (and maybe white males specifically), it still doesn't make it right to blanket thee whole demographic as a problem that one is tired of. The vast majority of MY bad experiences have also come from white males, but I just take those as individual experiences with individuals not indicative of everyone who falls under the demographic.  And, I guarantee, if a poster in here had said they were tied of black people or black males  (and they 'supported' that statement basing it on having bad experiences with black males in their past), this whole site erupts and the person likely gets banished.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Back to the divide. I also believe the gap between liberal and conservative needs to be bridged and that would mean between Democratic and Republican as well. I don't think there is equivalency between compromise proposed by liberals (Democrats) and conservatives (Republicans) and until there is, we are stuck in this partisan muck.

 

There should be some agreement on what is wrong and some measures should be passed to deal with what is wrong. However, one party has spent the last eight years opposing everything that the administration has proposed. The Republican party is moving away from even attempting to govern. It is my opinion that those in the legislative branch are satisfied with gumming up the works and then saying government is broken.

 

For the record, Democrats aren't blameless and their leadership in the Senate  (Reid and Shumer) are two of the most partisan. I can name two Republicans to every Democrat that have no intention of governing, though. These characters keep getting elected! Further, redistricting has made so many bad Congressmen bulletproof, they can feel free to screw up the country, knowing that with a few platitudes they will be re-elected in two years.

 

Yes, I'm sick of it too.

 

It's a good post, one hopeful item i have out of this election is that it's possible one party gets routed thoroughly enough that they really look within and see what they can do to improve.  Both parties are to blame, but the Republicans hold a significant edge in that category.  Most of what is wrong stems from how badly that side has lost their way.

 

The realist in me believes they will only go deeper down the wrong path. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

About 75% or so of this country is white with about half of those being men.  Makes sense that, by sure numbers, the majority of azzhats are white and are part of the problem.

 

It's also likely that the quality changes that are being brought about (and have been brought about) in this country, however slowly these changes happen, are also being fueled, at least in part, by the same demographic.  Plenty of white people are part of the problem AND plenty of white people (men included) are part of the solution as well since 75% or so of the country is white.

 

Absolutely.  Part of the advantage of being comfortable talking in generalizations is you can also point out the positive flip side of such a thing.  It can both be true that many of the problems in our country stem from the beliefs and actions of white men and that many of our solutions will come through changes in white men.  

 

I think we'd have more productive political conversations if both sides were more willing to see the strengths of generalizing rather than constantly getting stuck in the weeds.  Conservatives are quick to tell people of color to pull themselves up by the boot straps, but they throw a tizzy when you generalize about the oppression faced by those same people.  Liberals are quick to play the same game about religion.  Both sides can't figure out how they are completely broken on generalizations about the issues of race and policing.

 

We like to use those sorts of generalizations to get our own crowd to say "rabble rabble", but as soon as the same tactic gets flipped we cry foul.  We may want to reach out and see the truth that goes both ways.

 

For me, Chi is right to be frustrated by white men and there are generalizations to be made there that are critical and constructive.  Likewise, she (like the rest of us) falls into many groups that deserve some of the same criticism.  I just wonder how many of us are willing to play by those rules both ways.

 

It sure doesn't seem like many of us do. (Speaking, of course, generally.  Not of the posters in this particular thread.  Most here do, though there are other threads on this forum where we start to see those tolerances for generalizations suddenly evaporate)

[biggentleben]

You know what sucks? Being in the middle. Because right now not a damned person cares about my vote, and I know that there are plenty more that feel similarly. Socially liberal (pro-LGBT rights, pro-welfare/assistance, pro-social work in general), religiously devout, fiscally conservative, pro defense - though not at the ungodly spending levels present currently, pro individual gun rights with registration, etc....

 

If you aren't completely adapted to an entire party's platform, you're not worthy of discussion, and it's frustrating. The expectation is that you, as the voter, bend your values to the party platform, not the other way around, and that is absolutely not acceptable to me. I'll gladly have a "-I" behind my name in my voter registration until one party (any party!) figures that part out.

[jimmer]

 

You know what sucks? Being in the middle. Because right now not a damned person cares about my vote, and I know that there are plenty more that feel similarly. Socially liberal (pro-LGBT rights, pro-welfare/assistance, pro-social work in general), religiously devout, fiscally conservative, pro defense - though not at the ungodly spending levels present currently, pro individual gun rights with registration, etc....

 

If you aren't completely adapted to an entire party's platform, you're not worthy of discussion, and it's frustrating. The expectation is that you, as the voter, bend your values to the party platform, not the other way around, and that is absolutely not acceptable to me. I'll gladly have a "-I" behind my name in my voter registration until one party (any party!) figures that part out.

yeah, the middle is completely ignored.  it's a battle of extremes.

[Mike Sixel]

You know what sucks? Being in the middle. Because right now not a damned person cares about my vote, and I know that there are plenty more that feel similarly. Socially liberal (pro-LGBT rights, pro-welfare/assistance, pro-social work in general), religiously devout, fiscally conservative, pro defense - though not at the ungodly spending levels present currently, pro individual gun rights with registration, etc....

 

If you aren't completely adapted to an entire party's platform, you're not worthy of discussion, and it's frustrating. The expectation is that you, as the voter, bend your values to the party platform, not the other way around, and that is absolutely not acceptable to me. I'll gladly have a "-I" behind my name in my voter registration until one party (any party!) figures that part out.

That's basically Clinton....

[biggentleben]

 

That's basically Clinton....

 

No, not on a lot of issues. Like I said, I have plenty of individual thought on issues, not a party platform. I listed a short handful of them, but my list is lengthy and I certainly don't have a candidate that hits on even 3/4 of them.

[TheLeviathan]

No, not on a lot of issues. Like I said, I have plenty of individual thought on issues, not a party platform. I listed a short handful of them, but my list is lengthy and I certainly don't have a candidate that hits on even 3/4 of them.

Clinton is fairly centered. Its impossible for a candidate to hit on 3/4 of a large swath of voters, especially those of moderate views. So while I'd like to see more moderate candidates in general, Hillary is the closest in awhile. (Romney could have been, but chose to go whacko)

[biggentleben]

 

Clinton is fairly centered. Its impossible for a candidate to hit on 3/4 of a large swath of voters, especially those of moderate views. So while I'd like to see more moderate candidates in general, Hillary is the closest in awhile. (Romney could have been, but chose to go whacko)

 

Yes, I agree. She's off on a lot of my personal stuff, but still definitely the best choice this year, which is like saying that eating gravel is the best style of dirt to eat.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Brock,

 

Your patience has run out with white people in this country? Really?

I will say that, yes, as a white man I'm deeply disappointed with the direction the white male populace has taken in the past decade. They're powering the most destructive political movement of my lifetime and it's only getting worse.

 

And I'm tired of them desperately holding on to whatever power they have and actually trying to take the country backwards, at the expense of *everyone else*.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Man, America needs to pull its head out in regards to Clinton's position on the political scale.

 

Fun fact: Hillary Clinton is further right on policy than many western countries' CONSERVATIVE PARTIES.

 

See Merkel, Angela.

 

We've let the GOP so completely skew our perceptions that we can't even identify a centrist candidate anymore.

[Brock Beauchamp]

This isn't really who's voting for Trump, though. This article was pretty good even if it was on a humor site. We liberals aren't helping ourselves by painting Trump supporters as racist whites and therefore we can ignore their issues. They are mostly poor and rural who have been abandoned (or feel abandoned) by our society. Rural areas have not recovered from the economic downturn that Wall St caused but see that neither party is rushing to punish Wall St. Why shouldn't they support a crazy outsider?

 

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

I'm sorry but man, people are really twisting my words in what was a pretty simple statement. I said I was tired of white people. I didn't call them names, I didn't affix a label onto them, I said I was tired.

 

Are there racist traits within the white community? Of course. But I think the far bigger problem is selfishness and a lack of empathy. Either way, we end up in a ****ty situation where we have people with eighth grade educations telling scientists they're wrong about their conclusions. We have people telling others their life experiences are invalid because they're not the accepted "norm". We have people voting in more radical political elements every election. We have people supporting obvious voter suppression tactics (if you can't win by the rules, change the rules).

 

And all of these regressive ideas are coming from a single party that is almost exclusively supported by one race of people and, more specifically, one gender of that race. Not coincidentally, that gender/race also holds a disproportionate amount of power. In no way am I suggesting #NotAllWhitePeople isn't a thing but when the majority of this country's regressive policy and non-governance is coming from a single demographic, we should call out that demographic for its bad behavior. This isn't a case where we're punching down at a marginalized population. We're clearly punching up at those who wish to keep the status quo (and in many cases, actually go backwards) so they can keep their disproportionate power over society.

 

And that's the difference. Being "tired" of black people implies hostile intent toward a marginalized people. As a voting bloc, black people aren't trying to get a leg up over white people. Neither are hispanics, Muslims, women as a whole, or pretty much anyone that isn't white male. Those groups are fighting for equality. On the other hand, as a voting bloc, white people are clearly trying to keep a leg up over everybody else.

 

Again, I'm surprised by the response to my comment. Why aren't more of you frustrated with and tired of white people in this country?

 

This map pretty much says it all:

 

[Craig Arko]

I'll just be glad when the damn thing is over and I can figure out what to do next.

[gunnarthor]

 

And all of these regressive ideas are coming from a single party that is almost exclusively supported by one race of people and, more specifically, one gender of that race. 

 

This is giving the Democrats far too much credit.  Dems have supported some pretty damn hostile plans on many social issues* - our flagbearer opposed same sex marriage until she was 66 years old.  Our Democratic president has deported more people than every other President combined and set up internment camps for asylum seekers.  His DHS is arguing that 3 year old children are capable of defending themselves in immigration court.  Democratic politicians all over the south, west and midwest have opposed trans rights, same sex rights and failed to adequately even begin to address the very real problem of racial profiling.  Democrats - not Republicans - were the ones who have attempted to keep refugees out of the country.  And we're a long way from saying that Democratic voters support trans-rights, for example (although more dems support them than republicans, of course).  The Dems say they support the environment but have allowed a lot of bad things to happen to the environment if its in their economic interest to do so.  

 

* And this assumes you think social issues should be what determines this election.  Voters who care about economic inequality, poverty, govt surveillance, war, the first amendment, Wall St, internet access might have very different feelings about what issues are important or which party cares about those issues - or if either party cares about those issues.  They might be tired of hearing social issues discussed while they can't figure out how to support their children.

[Brock Beauchamp]

This is giving the Democrats far too much credit. Dems have supported some pretty damn hostile plans on many social issues* - our flagbearer opposed same sex marriage until she was 66 years old. Our Democratic president has deported more people than every other President combined and set up internment camps for asylum seekers. His DHS is arguing that 3 year old children are capable of defending themselves in immigration court. Democratic politicians all over the south, west and midwest have opposed trans rights, same sex rights and failed to adequately even begin to address the very real problem of racial profiling. Democrats - not Republicans - were the ones who have attempted to keep refugees out of the country. And we're a long way from saying that Democratic voters support trans-rights, for example (although more dems support them than republicans, of course). The Dems say they support the environment but have allowed a lot of bad things to happen to the environment if its in their economic interest to do so.

 

* And this assumes you think social issues should be what determines this election. Voters who care about economic inequality, poverty, govt surveillance, war, the first amendment, Wall St, internet access might have very different feelings about what issues are important or which party cares about those issues - or if either party cares about those issues. They might be tired of hearing social issues discussed while they can't figure out how to support their children.

I agree and in no way do I intend to give the Democrats a pass on their own failings.

 

But what you just described is what happens when you have a centrist party and a far right party controlling the national conversation. There isn't a legitimate leftist party in this country and there hasn't been one in decades.

 

Both parties defend the status quo most of the time but only one of them makes even a token gesture of inclusion. The other has turned exclusive and almost violently so.

[Craig Arko]

When I think 'leftist' I think George McGovern, Gene Mccarthy, Jerry Brown, Bobby Kennedy. Not many of those types left; Bernie, maybe Warren. We could use a few good rabble-rousers.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I agree and in no way do I intend to give the Democrats a pass on their own failings.

But what you just described is what happens when you have a centrist party and a far right party controlling the national conversation. There isn't a legitimate leftist party in this country and there hasn't been one in decades.

Both parties defend the status quo most of the time but only one of them makes even a token gesture of inclusion. The other has turned exclusive and almost violently so.

 

There's another angle I'm partial to as well in this discussion.  We need leftist ideas, they are what drive us forward in genuinely positive ways.  The weakness, however, seems to be in the execution.  Many well meaning leftist policies have caused tremendous damage to society.  From low income housing, to the student loan program, social programs often keep people from working full time jobs, etc.

 

We need a sane end of the spectrum that supports fiscal conservative to keep these good ideas focused on actually working rather than just making us feel good.  In that respect both parties are failing us.  Leftists continue to spout well meaning ideas with terrible plans to enact them (See: Sanders, Bernie) and the right continues to stand for basically nothing.  They can't even manage to be on top of fiscal conservatism anymore.  They're just running around shouting "argh!" at things hoping enough voters feel "argh!" as well and vote for them.

 

From my perspective, that's a harsh double whammy.

[Mike Sixel]

There won't be many jobs in a generation or two....robots and computers will do almost all the work. Hell, we'll have self driving cars soon......Foxconn just replaced thousands of workers with bots. How long until computers are programming computers? this isn't going away.....Dune looks prescient....

 

Work, frankly, is an outdated concept, that we need to examine. Which party would even be willing to think about this here? Which would be willing to talk about it?

 

This nation is in serious trouble, due to its obsession that work is the meaning of life, and how we should pay for everything.

[Craig Arko]

 

 How long until computers are programming computers?

 

 

https://www.wired.com/2016/05/the-end-of-code/

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

There's another angle I'm partial to as well in this discussion.  We need leftist ideas, they are what drive us forward in genuinely positive ways.  The weakness, however, seems to be in the execution.  Many well meaning leftist policies have caused tremendous damage to society.  From low income housing, to the student loan program, social programs often keep people from working full time jobs, etc.

 

We need a sane end of the spectrum that supports fiscal conservative to keep these good ideas focused on actually working rather than just making us feel good.  In that respect both parties are failing us.  Leftists continue to spout well meaning ideas with terrible plans to enact them (See: Sanders, Bernie) and the right continues to stand for basically nothing.  They can't even manage to be on top of fiscal conservatism anymore.  They're just running around shouting "argh!" at things hoping enough voters feel "argh!" as well and vote for them.

 

From my perspective, that's a harsh double whammy.

Yep. I'm not convinced many leftist ideas are good to implement... But they should be on the table because you can't push forward if one side doesn't have a voice. We've spent the past few decades bouncing around in an increasingly conservative and right-drifting political landscape.

 

It was startling when I was speaking to a German friend a few weeks ago and he said "Your political spectrum is pretty ****ed up. Clinton stands to the right of our conservative chancellor and Bernie Sanders is a mainstream candidate over here."

It was a wake-up call just how far the US's conversation on social policy and economic policy have stagnated since Jimmy Carter.

 

And it's not as if Germany is floundering under these increasingly socialistic principles.

[gunnarthor]

 

There won't be many jobs in a generation or two....robots and computers will do almost all the work. Hell, we'll have self driving cars soon......Foxconn just replaced thousands of workers with bots. How long until computers are programming computers? this isn't going away.....Dune looks prescient....

.

This terrifies me.  I suspect part of that is me just growing older and not being able to recognize the society that will be there but part of it is just wondering if my kids will be able to function.  

[Craig Arko]

 

This terrifies me.  I suspect part of that is me just growing older and not being able to recognize the society that will be there but part of it is just wondering if my kids will be able to function.  

I'm sure your elected officials will continue to look out for you best interests. :D

 

 

P.S. - this is why I harp on candidates appreciation of Science and Technology.

[Mike Sixel]

We've known for 30 years jobs would go overseas, and that we should plan for a changing world. We did nothing at all to help in the transition, other than blame the victims (workers), cut education spending, and cut taxes on the wealthy.

 

The answer from one party is: quit being lazy, trust us cutting taxes on the wealthy will create jobs

 

The answer from the other party is, um, I have no idea what the dems "plans" are, frankly.

 

And I should think we can transition to this new world coming our way? 

[Willihammer]

We have plenty of lefties in this country, and Europe has plenty of its own problems. Hell Switzerland didn't give women the right to vote until the 70s. Europe gets 2 million mideast immigrants and throws a fit. Brexit was passed by majority vote. Quitaly and Grexit are on the table in Italy and Greece. We got 40 million illegals in the 00s and our reactions was, far from perfect, but not any worse I'd say.

The argument that our politics are any worse than theirs would be a lot more compelling if Europe were doing demonstrably better. They aren't.

[Willihammer]

I really think we do pretty good. We have problems, but we have too many good people in this country. I'll never leave, never even consider it.

[Mike Sixel]

Admittedly, my potential leaving is about weather and culture and things... about 10000 things before politics on the list....

[Mike Sixel]

 

I really think we do pretty good. We have problems, but we have too many good people in this country. I'll never leave, never even consider it.

 

I do think, generally, we do well. But, LOTS of people are left behind while a larger group move forward. I'd like us to do a lot better job helping those left behind, and planning for a new future.