WrestlingClassics.com Message Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» WrestlingClassics.com Message Board » Political Discussion » More racism from Trump (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: More racism from Trump
K. Fabian McClinch
Member
Member # 6275

Icon 1 posted      Profile for K. Fabian McClinch     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dragonstone:
Again... she is perceived to be the face of the party among WHITE VOTERS WITHOUT COLLEGE DEGREES. Basically, Trump's base. The Democrats aren't going to win over Trump's base, so why does it matter if they view her negatively?

I honestly think that the "dog whistle" effect of maneuvering things so that the most publicly visible face of anti-T-Rump resistance is four young, righteously angry, unabashedly militant (by U.S. standards) women of color, one wearing a hijab, is enough to bring a lot of erstwhile "moderates" (the "I'm not a racist but . . ." crowd) over to the Republican side in a perversion of the "lesser of two evils" gambit.

Hope I'm wrong, but scratching that itch worked for Richard "Southern Strategy" Nixon years ago; it helped Reagan, with his "Welfare Queen" routines; it helped G.H.W. Bush get in, in the wake of the Willie Horton scam . . .

--------------------
"Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Four shots ripped into my groin, and I was off on one of the strangest adventures of my life." (Max Shulman)

IP: Logged
Travlr
Administrator
Member # 4304

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Travlr     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dragonstone:
Incidentally, the Axios reporting on this anonymous unsourced poll without any comprehensive supporting data being made available is getting absolutely shredded by the political punditry and polling analysts.

Yeah, seeing that.

Which makes me wonder who among the Polling companies will be asking those very same questions this coming week, and releasing their findings.

Which makes me wonder if that was the point of the exercise (especially since this was supposedly given to Axios by someone in the Democratic Party).

--------------------
The Traveller
a fan since '68....

"Reputation is what others think about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The friction tends to arise when the two are not the same.... Guard your honor; let your reputation fall where it may."

IP: Logged
Travlr
Administrator
Member # 4304

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Travlr     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dragonstone:
Again... she is perceived to be the face of the party among WHITE VOTERS WITHOUT COLLEGE DEGREES.

Is she though? Is that the only voting demographic that is seeing her in that light? For sure? The term used in the article was "swing voter", which is a much broader, albeit more amorphous, term. After all, if ever there was a swing voter last general election, it was the Obama-Trump voter. And that demographic is far more varied than just "white voters without college degrees".


But regardless of that, I still maintain that it's both ends of the political spectrum that are trying to make her that face. And to what purpose is easily figured out by both sides: One wants her to be the standard bearer and the other the boogey-man.

And neither are doing her -- nor you -- any good at all.

--------------------
The Traveller
a fan since '68....

"Reputation is what others think about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The friction tends to arise when the two are not the same.... Guard your honor; let your reputation fall where it may."

IP: Logged
Liz Hunter's Boyfriend
Member
Member # 7919

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Liz Hunter's Boyfriend     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Travlr:
It's herself, her message and the way both are played by both ends of the stick. And that poll suggests that it's not necessarily going over as well in areas that the Dems need to do their best at.

As I noted twice now, it doesn't have anything to do with reality: It has to do with perception. And if she is perceived as the standard-bearer for the Party instead of Schumer or Pelosi (or whomever get the nomination), then the Dems could have some real problems in States that they don't need any additional ones (i.e., Arizona, Wisconsin, Iowa).

In fact, now that I think on it some more, if she is viewed as the standard-bearer for the Democrats instead of whomever gets the Nom, then the Dems have a much bigger problem than just this one public PoV.


And I've never made any bones about her being too far to the Left for me. Bottom line, I probably wouldn't vote for her if she was in my Riding (and I've voted Green Party here before, so keep that in mind, too).

I like that she's shaking things up in the Dem Caucus: They need it, especially at the Leadership level. But then I turn around and remember that Mark Meadows did the very same thing across the hall, and we all know how that's been working out, right.....?

Democrats lost the last presidential election because they were doing a corporate & Republican Lite gimmick. That's why voters didn't show up for HRC. Everybody knows this.

You cite whatever **** polls, and MSM articles you can find to pick gnat **** out of the pepper.

You're just a sophist. And your energetic & heated animus toward AOC is a lot like the fellows one finds on Fox.

IP: Logged
Travlr
Administrator
Member # 4304

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Travlr     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Liz Hunter's Boyfriend:
Democrats lost the last presidential election because they were doing a corporate & Republican Lite gimmick. That's why voters didn't show up for HRC. Everybody knows this.

No, actually. Everybody does NOT know this.

You had people voting for Trump when 4 years earlier they voted for Obama because they thought they saw the change they wished for with Obama in Trump (more fools they, but that's what they told us afterward).

The Dems lost Wisconsin because Hillary didn't even bother showing up to say "hi" during the whole campaign, taking it for granted that their part of "The Blue Wall" would automatically go her way. And that was just the tip of iceberg in what is often discussed as the worst Democratic campaign since Dukakis (and ranking right up there with McCain/Palin in the view of many). There are a number of points that can be made about Team Clinton's screwing the pitch on topics like the economy (i.e., "jobs") and unions (Obama got 18% of the union vote; Clinton 9%).

You had the drop-off of one of the Democrat's biggest voting blocks -- African-Americans -- from 4 years previous. In fact, it was the first decline in 20 years of US elections. And in a State like Michigan, that is going to hurt the Democrats badly. And did.

And don't think for one minute that the rise in the ACA premiums that year didn't hurt her chances, either; they certainly did, and the GOP made sure that little tidbit got high-lighted in regions of the country where it would do the most good for them.

Let's not forget Jame Comey's timely letter to Congress in the last week of the election -- an "October Surprise" for the ages.

And this all goes without even touching on the entire topic of Russia's interference in the proceedings....


A "corporate & Republican Lite gimmick" as the sole reason that the Democrats lost in 2016? That's as thread-bare as saying Perot cost Bush in 1992, or it was just the 800-odd votes for Bush in Florida that cost Gore the 2000 election (yeah, it was the bell-ringer, but there was a lot of other things that hampered Gore that, like Hillary 3 years ago, should not have happened).

And my minor dislike of AOC is as nothing to my intense disdain toward Clinton (which is as nothing toward my feeling about Trump). I actually hope she hangs around Congress for a goodly long time, much as I do for Bernie, as I think she will do the US a seriously good turn as a member of Congress (I'm fairly certain she will end up in the Senate in six or eight years -- maybe even taking Schumer's seat).


And I also get a chuckle of how the modern usage of "sophist" is so ass-backward from it's original meaning of "skilled" or "wise". I'll take it though; I get as many kudos as ki-boshes talking politics that, in the end, it all pretty much evens out....

--------------------
The Traveller
a fan since '68....

"Reputation is what others think about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The friction tends to arise when the two are not the same.... Guard your honor; let your reputation fall where it may."

IP: Logged
Cory
Member
Member # 6097

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Cory     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The crowd shouted "Send her back" last night and today, after it backfired, Trump has denounced it saying he tried to stop it (he didn't. He walked away from the mic to let it keep being yelled), and said he did not like it.

This is his MO. He throws things at a wall to see what sticks and when it backfires, he walks it back.

IP: Logged
The Fake J.D. McKay
Member
Member # 24269

Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Fake J.D. McKay     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Trump is in yuge trouble with the inner circle now. Da Mooch, who is sounding more reasonable all the time, is pretty livid about this mess. I don't blame him, either. He notes that there will be a glacier of support that will leave Trump if he does this again. We shall see.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/07/18/scaramucci-reacts-to-trump-tweets-congresswomen-camerota-intv-newday-vpx.cnn

IP: Logged
Liz Hunter's Boyfriend
Member
Member # 7919

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Liz Hunter's Boyfriend     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Travlr:
quote:
Originally posted by Liz Hunter's Boyfriend:
Democrats lost the last presidential election because they were doing a corporate & Republican Lite gimmick. That's why voters didn't show up for HRC. Everybody knows this.

No, actually. Everybody does NOT know this.

You had people voting for Trump when 4 years earlier they voted for Obama because they thought they saw the change they wished for with Obama in Trump (more fools they, but that's what they told us afterward).

The Dems lost Wisconsin because Hillary didn't even bother showing up to say "hi" during the whole campaign, taking it for granted that their part of "The Blue Wall" would automatically go her way. And that was just the tip of iceberg in what is often discussed as the worst Democratic campaign since Dukakis (and ranking right up there with McCain/Palin in the view of many). There are a number of points that can be made about Team Clinton's screwing the pitch on topics like the economy (i.e., "jobs") and unions (Obama got 18% of the union vote; Clinton 9%).

You had the drop-off of one of the Democrat's biggest voting blocks -- African-Americans -- from 4 years previous. In fact, it was the first decline in 20 years of US elections. And in a State like Michigan, that is going to hurt the Democrats badly. And did.

And don't think for one minute that the rise in the ACA premiums that year didn't hurt her chances, either; they certainly did, and the GOP made sure that little tidbit got high-lighted in regions of the country where it would do the most good for them.

Let's not forget Jame Comey's timely letter to Congress in the last week of the election -- an "October Surprise" for the ages.

And this all goes without even touching on the entire topic of Russia's interference in the proceedings....


A "corporate & Republican Lite gimmick" as the sole reason that the Democrats lost in 2016? That's as thread-bare as saying Perot cost Bush in 1992, or it was just the 800-odd votes for Bush in Florida that cost Gore the 2000 election (yeah, it was the bell-ringer, but there was a lot of other things that hampered Gore that, like Hillary 3 years ago, should not have happened).

And my minor dislike of AOC is as nothing to my intense disdain toward Clinton (which is as nothing toward my feeling about Trump). I actually hope she hangs around Congress for a goodly long time, much as I do for Bernie, as I think she will do the US a seriously good turn as a member of Congress (I'm fairly certain she will end up in the Senate in six or eight years -- maybe even taking Schumer's seat).


And I also get a chuckle of how the modern usage of "sophist" is so ass-backward from it's original meaning of "skilled" or "wise". I'll take it though; I get as many kudos as ki-boshes talking politics that, in the end, it all pretty much evens out....

I'm amazed you strayed from your gimmick by not linking to some s*htty clickbait articles from Politico or wherever.
IP: Logged
Travlr
Administrator
Member # 4304

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Travlr     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Liz Hunter's Boyfriend:
I'm amazed you strayed from your gimmick by not linking to some s*htty clickbait articles from Politico or wherever.

Wah wah wah.

We've discussed why Clinton lost so much around here, the points should have been self-evident to anyone who has been paying the least amount of attention either here in forum or out there in the "Real World™".

But that obviously doesn't include you.

--------------------
The Traveller
a fan since '68....

"Reputation is what others think about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The friction tends to arise when the two are not the same.... Guard your honor; let your reputation fall where it may."

IP: Logged
King Francis
Member
Member # 24068

Icon 1 posted      Profile for King Francis     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cory:
The crowd shouted "Send her back" last night and today, after it backfired, Trump has denounced it saying he tried to stop it (he didn't. He walked away from the mic to let it keep being yelled), and said he did not like it.

This is his MO. He throws things at a wall to see what sticks and when it backfires, he walks it back.

watched the video. he sat there with a smug look and let it rock. made no attempt to talk or stop it..

now he disagrees with that statement.. WHO THE FRANK said it? amazing at that

--------------------
When I said that was the most ignorant thing I ever heard, I didn't realize you were still talking.

IP: Logged
King Francis
Member
Member # 24068

Icon 1 posted      Profile for King Francis     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-fumes-over-media-coverage-of-omars-welcome-home-134635880.html

well you know they all look alike... Trump is confusing one FURRENER for another..

--------------------
When I said that was the most ignorant thing I ever heard, I didn't realize you were still talking.

IP: Logged
Travlr
Administrator
Member # 4304

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Travlr     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
From the "Don't Say I Didn't Warn Ya" Dept. (Via The Washington Examiner):
quote:
Democrats scoff at House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky for insisting Democrats in Congress are a bunch of socialists led by "the squad," four liberal firebrands in the House frequently at odds with Speaker Nancy Pelosi. But the message is paying dividends, literally, with Republican donors writing five, six and seven figure checks to the party’s congressional campaign committees and affiliated super PACs.
The NRCC is running behind where they were 2 years ago, but their Senate sibling is racking up the donations at a record clip. And then there are all those pesky Super PACs who are seeing their best year ever (Congressional Leadership Fund, American Action Network, Senate Leadership Fund, One Nation, etc.)

The Dems' Congressional re-election committees are also doing very well, as are their aligned Super PACs. But the spike in the GOP's fundraising should be a bit more alarming than it so far seems to be.

And it all seems to be because the Republicans are using "socialist" like a hammer, and linking it to the high-profile "Squad" and painting them as the leaders of the Democratic Party.

And so far, all I've heard is "no they aren't" and "socialism isn't a bad thing though!" when what is needed is "this is how we combat this move by the GOP.

This isn't a personal "I don't like whomever" thing; this is a "what are you going to do about it?" thing. Because it is going to continue, and given the boogey-man that "socialism" has been used as for the last 100 years, the public is getting primed to refute the Dems on this single point unless steps are taken.

And right now, I don't even see the Democrats as having their shoes on....

--------------------
The Traveller
a fan since '68....

"Reputation is what others think about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The friction tends to arise when the two are not the same.... Guard your honor; let your reputation fall where it may."

IP: Logged
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | WrestlingClassics.com Home Page

Click here to see the WCMB Rules and Regulations

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3