Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Rayosun

We CAN'T STOP TRUMP !

Recommended Posts

Donald Trump is not going to be stopped by people who haven't even figured out

WHY THEY LOST TO HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE !


If you've been waiting for some clarity and insight on that crucial matter, then check out

WWLbanner.jpg

W h y W e L o s t . o r g, where we don't only track down the CAUSE of our disastrous defeat,


but what we liberals and Democrats need to do to SUCCEED IN THE FUTURE !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We lost because our party is divided. The Republicans will line up behind whatever the GOP wants. They'll put their blindfolds on and do whatever their party tells them to. The party says "JUMP!" they say "How high?" They say "OFF A CLIFF!" and they run off like lemmings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the GOP pundits said we lost because we became strictly a party of "fringe groups" and "the disaffected". He said we lost the White working class vote. I think he's right. The question is... How do we get it back? Do we change tactics? Do we compromise with the GOP? Do we embrace the far Left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case you haven't noticed, there are currently several other opinions floating around the LO Rm as to why we lost, what we should do about it, and which organizations to join now that the unthinkable has happened.

 

The trouble isn't that liberal Democrats haven't been concerned about the economic well-being of middle and lower class Americans.

 

IMO, the trouble is BIG money in politics which is preventing too many Democratic lawmakers from voting in the interests of ordinary people. Large campaign contributions and legal bribery by lobbyists in Congress in return for tailored legislation, have cause many $$elitist$$ Democrats to vote progressive on social issues and plutocratic on economic ones.

 

As a result of legalized bribery and very large campaign contributions, we now need reforms from the damage they have caused. We need Campaign Finance Reform, ending large contributions and making the financing of campaigns, mostly public. We need an end to gerrymandering (in either party). And voting needs to get easier, not harder.

 

All of the above has crept into American politics since the Reagan administration and enables economic suppression of middle and lower class Americans. Fixing these problems would help bring back widespread prosperity to the USA.

 

The above would help make the system more fair, but there are more fundamental changes that need to be made .....

 

It's that they haven't figured out what to do about it.

 

It's very plain what should be done about it. Bernie Sanders knew. He advocated Social Democracy, practiced by a handful of very successful nations around the world. In the Social Democratic countries, there is high taxation with progressive scales; Cradle to grave social safety nets; Free Trade; Representative government with regular elections; Free Trade and heavily regulated and taxed private enterprise. In Sweden alone, eg, world leaders like Udderholm Steel, Volvo vehicles and heavy equipment and Saab, making some of the world's most advanced fighter jets.

 

We need higher taxation ... the closing of loopholes ... enforcement of existing laws against tax evasion by hoarding untold, vast fortunes in foreign banks ... Encouraging labor unions instead of trying to make them extinct. We desperately need Campaign Finance Reform ... A return to the fairness doctrine ... A repeal of Citizens United and the enactment of a modern version of Glass-Steagall.

 

In other words, a return to the Democratic Party of FDR and LBJ without the wars.

 

Most of FDR' Second Bill of Rights is still valid now:

 

 

It's got very little to do with religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's got very little to do with religion.

Lord4Trump-2.jpg

Really? As I wrote on my web site:

..." after having suffering stunning and humiliating defeats in recent years over gay marriage and Obamacare, and seeing the eminent threat of the loss of the Supreme Court as a result of the death of Justice Scalia, what drew the conservative white Christians and Roman Catholics to the polls to vote for Donald Trump wasn't that they actually believed that Trump could deliver on his many bombastic claims, summarized in his promise to make America great again, but they were sure, just as we are sure, that Donald Trump and his aggressively conservative white Christian and Roman Catholic vice-presidential partner Mike Pence will deliver on their promise to make America more conservative again, on gay marriage, on abortion, on white privilege, on Christian privilege, on immigration, on public education, on gun rights, on military policy, on policing, on voting rights, on tax cuts for the rich and service cuts for the needy, etc., etc. I believe that they voted in overwheling numbers for this greedy, lying, irreligious, lecherous, thrice-married, irrational, dangerous candidate because all of the causes that they have been told for years by their conservative Christian leaders are crucial to their "Christian" (i.e conservative) faith are now going to be propelled forwardby a Trump/Pence victory, while they would have been dashed by a Clinton/Kaine victory!"

 

 

I'd be willing to bet that if you could find a map of the United States with the sections that are most "Christian Conservative" the most appropriate colof for them would be red, because you could predict that those states will vote Republican MOST OF THE TIME, i.e. in local as well as national elections.

 

Presidential elections swing a lot because they get so much attention, they are much more likely to have an attention-getting charismatic figure, and the country has a stupid habit of going for one party for one or two terms, and then switching to the other party because it's sick of the former party, no matter how well they may have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thrice married, pussy-grabbing Trump is possibly the most secular presidents we have ever had. The religious right knows all this. They voted for him for his intolerance, perhaps hate, of gays and non-whites. White Evangelicals make up 25% of the American electorate and 80% voted for Trump. That means 80% of Evangelicals voted for Trump, making up just 20% of the electorate .... And the nation, as a whole is fast becoming more secular.

 

Abandoning ones principles to appeal to appeal to a shrinking 20% of the electorate is not only a high price to pay. it is foolish policy, not only if one wants to win now; but for the future.

 

The largest segment of Trump supporters were under-educated white men followed by white women of similar educational attainment, irregardless of religious affiliation. If one wants to win, this is one of the most important groups to target. Among the groups to which Bernie Sanders appealed the most, were under-educated, economically victimized Americans. IMO, Sanders would have beat Trump handily

 

Clinton did not make nearly enough outreach to ordinary working people and so, Trump was able to clinch the Electoral College win.

 

Photos of Evangelicals in a state of deranged ecstasy going wild for Trump might be sensational but not representative of the majority of his base. All factors considered, religion has very little to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If liberal Christanity was the winning ticket, it is difficult to think of a pair who genuinely fit the bill as much as Tim Kaine and Hilllary Clinton.

 

Kaine is a devout Roman Catholic (who takes his licks for that at times) who is moved by the social gospel message of liberal Catholicism. Including his time spent on mission in Honduras.

 

HRC seems to me to be genuinely motivated by her liberal Methodist faith. She too went on a mission (of sorts) post-law school to aid America's poorest children rather than cashing in on her Yale Law degree.

 

Did this walking the faith help them so-called evangelicals? No. They voted in droves for the pussy-grabber. The most profane person to run for president in any of our lifetimes.

 

I agree with BD that we can not (should not) abandon liberal principles to appeal to a dying and unprincipled segment of the electorate.

 

I don't agree with the idea that Democrats should manipulate those who are angry and uneducated into becoming even angrier, fearful, and more politically irrational, as that's the road to populist demagoguery. People who are hurting should be met with positive programs that will help them have a better future. Real progress.

 

We should follow the example of people like FDR, not populist demagogues like Huey Long. Optimism not pessimism. Rationality not extremist ideology.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thrice married, pussy-grabbing Trump is possibly the most secular presidents we have ever had. The religious right knows all this. They voted for him for his intolerance, perhaps hate, of gays and non-whites. White Evangelicals make up 25% of the American electorate and 80% voted for Trump. That means 80% of Evangelicals voted for Trump, making up just 20% of the electorate .... And the nation, as a whole is fast becoming more secular.

 

Abandoning ones principles to appeal to appeal to a shrinking 20% of the electorate is not only a high price to pay. it is foolish policy, not only if one wants to win now; but for the future.

 

The largest segment of Trump supporters were under-educated white men followed by white women of similar educational attainment, irregardless of religious affiliation. If one wants to win, this is one of the most important groups to target. Among the groups to which Bernie Sanders appealed the most, were under-educated, economically victimized Americans. IMO, Sanders would have beat Trump handily

 

Clinton did not make nearly enough outreach to ordinary working people and so, Trump was able to clinch the Electoral College win.

 

Photos of Evangelicals in a state of deranged ecstasy going wild for Trump might be sensational but not representative of the majority of his base. All factors considered, religion has very little to do with it.

 

Not to poke you too much but... You talk about "undereducated" white men and then in the same sentence you use the word "irregardless". Jus' sayin'. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abandoning ones principles to appeal to appeal to a shrinking 20% of the electorate is not only a high price to pay. it is foolish policy, not only if one wants to win now; but for the future.

Knowing you, Bluedog, I'm sure that you are not intenionally misrepresenting my views,

but the truth is that my position on http://www.WhyWeLost.org the very opposite of what you are accusing me of saying !!!

There are other indications in your arguments that you haven't read my site very carefully.

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We lost because our party is divided. The Republicans will line up behind whatever the GOP wants. They'll put their blindfolds on and do whatever their party tells them to. The party says "JUMP!" they say "How high?" They say "OFF A CLIFF!" and they run off like lemmings.

I fail to see that lemming factor as a good thing.

 

What we truly need is a candidate that will stand behind and fight for the working class. We need someone who will shun establishment politics and will TRULY address healthcare, income inequality, higher education, and work to create a robust, thriving middle class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Abandoning ones principles to appeal to appeal to a shrinking 20% of the electorate is not only a high price to pay. it is foolish policy, not only if one wants to win now; but for the future.

 

The largest segment of Trump supporters were under-educated white men followed by white women of similar educational attainment, irregardless of religious affiliation. If one wants to win, this is one of the most important groups to target. Among the groups to which Bernie Sanders appealed the most, were under-educated, economically victimized Americans. IMO, Sanders would have beat Trump handily

 

Clinton did not make nearly enough outreach to ordinary working people and so, Trump was able to clinch the Electoral College win.

 

Photos of Evangelicals in a state of deranged ecstasy going wild for Trump might be sensational but not representative of the majority of his base. All factors considered, religion has very little to do with it.

 

Knowing you, Bluedog, I'm sure that you are not intenionally misrepresenting my views,

but the truth is that my position on http://www.WhyWeLost.org the very opposite of what you are accusing me of saying !!!

There are other indications in your arguments that you haven't read my site very carefully.

 

.White Evangelicals make up 25% of the American electorate and 80% voted for Trump. That means 80% of Evangelicals voted for Trump, making up just 20% of the electorate .... And the nation, as a whole is fast becoming more secular.

 

White Evangelicals make up 25% of the American electorate and 80% voted for Trump. That means 80% of Evangelicals voted for Trump, making up just 20% of the electorate .... And the nation, as a whole is fast becoming more secular.

 

BD, we liberals WISH that "the nation, as a whole is fast becoming more secular." Now isn't the truth that it is GRADUALLY becoming more secular in areas where we already dominate, but NOT THAT MUCH where it would help us politically?

 

The largest segment of Trump supporters were under-educated white men followed by white women of similar educational attainment, irregardless of religious affiliation. If one wants to win, this is one of the most important groups to target.

 

BD, the whole point of my site is that "this is one of the most important groups to target.", BUT where liberals like you want to treat these people as though their religious beliefs have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WAY THEY VOTE, I want to wake liberals and Democrats up to the fact that it has EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE WAY THEY VOTE.

The very reason that they "were under-educated white men followed by white women of similar educational attainment" is why they became "the largest segment of Trump supporters". The G.O.P. , conservative talk radio and FOX has targeted these people for decades precisely because they could fill their ignorance with "faith". These people are so ignorant that what they imagine is "Christianity" have little to do with belief in GOD, but everything to do with belief in whatever their G.O.P. talking heads tell them. [ more to come ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to poke you too much but... You talk about "undereducated" white men and then in the same sentence you use the word "irregardless". Jus' sayin'. :)

 

 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/irregardless

irregardless
[ir-i-gahrd-lis]
adverb, Nonstandard.
Origin of irregardless
1910-1915
1910-15; ir-2(probably after irrespective) + regardless
Can be confused
irregardless, regardless (see usage note at the current entry)
Usage note

Irregardless is considered nonstandard because of the two negative elements ir- and -less. It was probably formed on the analogy of such words as irrespective, irrelevant, and irreparable. Those who use it, including on occasion educated speakers, may do so from a desire to add emphasis. Irregardless first appeared in the early 20th century

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rayosun, how about posting some views here instead of advertising your site? We are HAVING the discussion here. Come join the discussion instead of telling us what we should read.

 

We didn't lose because of religion. And, increasingly on the left, if you run a campaign to attract those conservative religious voters, you will lose your base. What we need is a message and a campaign that can resonate regardless of religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rayosun: Please tell us how you would appeal to Christian Fundamentalists, from a Liberal point of view. Please try to be concise and specific.

 

IMO, The majority of Christian Fundamentalists/Evangelicals are too immersed in the uglier parts of the First Testament to ever come around to a Progressive point of view. They are among the farthest right of the Far Right. Trying to get them to vote Democratic would be like trying to appeal to White Supremacists, from a Liberal point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm planning responses to many of your posts, my friends,


but until then, I'm off to participate in our state's Women's Protest March .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When a "descriptive" dictionary (one that describes common usage) notes that a word is "non-standard" it clearly indicates the same message that a "prescriptive" dictionary (one that prescribes correct usage) does when it says the usage is wrong.

 

Irreguardess is improper usage.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a goog march Ray.

 

Please accept it as well-intended criticism that one reading the linked article in a spirit of good-will could be completely baffled as to your intended point. I was.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When a "descriptive" dictionary (one that describes common usage) notes that a word is "non-standard" it clearly indicates the same message that a "prescriptive" dictionary (one that prescribes correct usage) does when it says the usage is wrong.

 

Irreguardess is improper usage.

 

Bill

 

Did you know what I meant? I don't give a rat's ass what is "proper" or "improper" usage.

 

Have a goog march Ray.

 

Please accept it as well-intended criticism that one reading the linked article in a spirit of good-will could be completely baffled as to your intended point. I was.

 

Bill

 

Ditto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When a "descriptive" dictionary (one that describes common usage) notes that a word is "non-standard" it clearly indicates the same message that a "prescriptive" dictionary (one that prescribes correct usage) does when it says the usage is wrong.

 

Irreguardess is improper usage.

 

Bill

 

Actually, we're both equally correct (and equally incorrect). Although "irregardless" is technically incorrect, enough people are using it these days that it's actually becoming proper English. Go figure. Maybe if Trump starts using this word Bludog will cease and desist! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Actually, we're both equally correct (and equally incorrect). Although "irregardless" is technically incorrect, enough people are using it these days that it's actually becoming proper English. Go figure. Maybe if Trump starts using this word Bludog will cease and desist! :)

 

I don't agree the that widespread misuse of a word transforms the error into proper usage.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Actually, we're both equally correct (and equally incorrect). Although "irregardless" is technically incorrect, enough people are using it these days that it's actually becoming proper English. Go figure. Maybe if Trump starts using this word Bludog will cease and desist! :)

 

Let it be officially recorded here. If Der Trumpfkopfk is ever caught using the word "irregardless", I will switch to the slightly less emphatic word "regardless", having been thus stung.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Did you know what I meant? I don't give a rat's ass what is "proper" or "improper" usage.

 

 

Yes. I actually think you are very eloquent and express yourself clearly, despite any antipathy I might have for the word "irregardless."

 

I'm not much for spelling "good" as "goog" either, but it happens :P

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes. I actually think you are very eloquent and express yourself clearly, despite any antipathy I might have for the word "irregardless."

 

I'm not much for spelling "good" as "goog" either, but it happens :P

 

Bill

 

Why thank you Bill.

 

I refrained from mentioning the typo "goog" because I really don't care. Everyone knows what you meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...