The Official "Making America Great Again" Thread

[JohnStOnge]

My Sister in Law and her husband came over tonight and it was an eye opener. She's a big Trump supporter. We kept things pretty civil but it is clear that she lives in an alternate reality. She thinks, for instance, that about 80% of the people support Trump's wall idea. The truth is that a majority has always opposed it. She said he won an Electoral landslide. His percent edge in Electoral votes ranks 46th of 58 Presidents. My wife said something about the stock market and she said it's because there's a conspiracy within the government to undermine Trump. At one point when she kept insisting the majority support a border wall I said "Google it" and she went into the paranoia about Google being rigged.

It became apparent that all of her information is from the conservative media echo chamber. I don't know what can be done when people out there are just out of touch with reality because of that.

[UNI88]

I think what Trip may favor along with politicians like Bernie Sanders is the Nordic Model (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/i ... d-cons.asp). That, I think is what they are talking about when they use terminology like "Democratic Socialism." Conservatives call it "Socialism" too until it comes time to make the argument that socialism has never worked. That's because the Nordic model has worked well. It's no for me. I don't want the United States to adopt it. But in material terms it's worked well.

Also I think we're getting to a point where China is an example of a successful Socialist country. It's not a good place as far as human rights and freedom of expression go. But it's pretty darned successful in economic terms.

Sucker! Uncle Bernie has you fooled. His PR people might spin him as a democratic socialist but you need to dig a little deeper to find the real Bernie. He's a cranky, arrogant, old-school Soviet socialist who looks up the Che Guevara and thinks that government wonks like him are better suited to make economic decisions than capitalist entities.

[css75]

I think what Trip may favor along with politicians like Bernie Sanders is the Nordic Model (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/i ... d-cons.asp). That, I think is what they are talking about when they use terminology like "Democratic Socialism." Conservatives call it "Socialism" too until it comes time to make the argument that socialism has never worked. That's because the Nordic model has worked well. It's no for me. I don't want the United States to adopt it. But in material terms it's worked well.

Also I think we're getting to a point where China is an example of a successful Socialist country. It's not a good place as far as human rights and freedom of expression go. But it's pretty darned successful in economic terms.

Sucker! Uncle Bernie has you fooled. His PR people might spin him as a democratic socialist but you need to dig a little deeper to find the real Bernie. He's a cranky, arrogant, old-school Soviet socialist who looks up the Che Guevara and thinks that government wonks like him are better suited to make economic decisions than capitalist entities.

Also, he has never worked a real job in his life, waiting porn being his occupation until politics.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[∞∞∞]

My Sister in Law and her husband came over tonight and it was an eye opener. She's a big Trump supporter. We kept things pretty civil but it is clear that she lives in an alternate reality. She thinks, for instance, that about 80% of the people support Trump's wall idea. The truth is that a majority has always opposed it. She said he won an Electoral landslide. His percent edge in Electoral votes ranks 46th of 58 Presidents. My wife said something about the stock market and she said it's because there's a conspiracy within the government to undermine Trump. At one point when she kept insisting the majority support a border wall I said "Google it" and she went into the paranoia about Google being rigged.

It became apparent that all of her information is from the conservative media echo chamber. I don't know what can be done when people out there are just out of touch with reality because of that.

You get this sentiment when Trump supporters call into C-SPAN.

They think the overwhelming majority of Americans want a wall when it's the opposite.

Today's right-wing propaganda effort is going to be a lesson in future American history books.

[kalm]

I think what Trip may favor along with politicians like Bernie Sanders is the Nordic Model (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/i ... d-cons.asp). That, I think is what they are talking about when they use terminology like "Democratic Socialism." Conservatives call it "Socialism" too until it comes time to make the argument that socialism has never worked. That's because the Nordic model has worked well. It's no for me. I don't want the United States to adopt it. But in material terms it's worked well.

Also I think we're getting to a point where China is an example of a successful Socialist country. It's not a good place as far as human rights and freedom of expression go. But it's pretty darned successful in economic terms.

Sucker! Uncle Bernie has you fooled. His PR people might spin him as a democratic socialist but you need to dig a little deeper to find the real Bernie. He's a cranky, arrogant, old-school Soviet socialist who looks up the Che Guevara and thinks that government wonks like him are better suited to make economic decisions than capitalist entities.

Capitalist entities? I thought the market was supposed to make decisions?

[∞∞∞]

I think what Trip may favor along with politicians like Bernie Sanders is the Nordic Model (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/i ... d-cons.asp). That, I think is what they are talking about when they use terminology like "Democratic Socialism." Conservatives call it "Socialism" too until it comes time to make the argument that socialism has never worked. That's because the Nordic model has worked well. It's no for me. I don't want the United States to adopt it. But in material terms it's worked well.

Also I think we're getting to a point where China is an example of a successful Socialist country. It's not a good place as far as human rights and freedom of expression go. But it's pretty darned successful in economic terms.

Sucker! Uncle Bernie has you fooled. His PR people might spin him as a democratic socialist but you need to dig a little deeper to find the real Bernie. He's a cranky, arrogant, old-school Soviet socialist who looks up the Che Guevara and thinks that government wonks like him are better suited to make economic decisions than capitalist entities.

I personally know his campaign manager - Jeff Weaver - for 10+ years now. The man is basically Sanders' ultimate PR machine. Everything you said is far from the truth, but believe what you will because reality clearly doesn't matter anymore; people just live in their fantasy internetz worlds.

ps. I voted for Clinton in the primary but I should have voted Sanders. Although she's fine and I don't hate her brand of progressiveness, I thought she had the best shot at winning.

[kalm]

Sucker! Uncle Bernie has you fooled. His PR people might spin him as a democratic socialist but you need to dig a little deeper to find the real Bernie. He's a cranky, arrogant, old-school Soviet socialist who looks up the Che Guevara and thinks that government wonks like him are better suited to make economic decisions than capitalist entities.

I personally know his campaign manager - Jeff Weaver - for 10+ years now. The man is basically Sanders' ultimate PR machine. Everything you said is far from the truth, but believe what you will because reality clearly doesn't matter anymore; people just live in their fantasy internetz worlds.

ps. I voted for Clinton in the primary but I should have voted Sanders. Although she's fine and I don't hate her brand of progressiveness, I thought she had the best shot at winning.

1). I think UNI was being tongue in cheek but your greater point stands.

2). Clinton is not progressive. She is status quo with a slight veneer of populism that shouldn’t have been believed. You supported a moderate Republican.

[∞∞∞]

I personally know his campaign manager - Jeff Weaver - for 10+ years now. The man is basically Sanders' ultimate PR machine. Everything you said is far from the truth, but believe what you will because reality clearly doesn't matter anymore; people just live in their fantasy internetz worlds.

ps. I voted for Clinton in the primary but I should have voted Sanders. Although she's fine and I don't hate her brand of progressiveness, I thought she had the best shot at winning.

1). I think UNI was being tongue in cheek but your greater point stands.

2). Clinton is not progressive. She is status quo with a slight veneer of populism that shouldn’t have been believed. You supported a moderate Republican.

She's definitely not a moderate Republican; her policies and voting record clearly reflect that (she was one of the most liberal Senators during her term). That said I regret voting for her and I won't ever vote for someone again just because I think they can win. I understand no one candidate will align with all my views, but I'll vote for someone that aligns the closest (which Sanders did).

I'd vote for her again in a heartbeat during the general election though. No regret there.

[CID1990]

Hillary Clinton is loyal to one political ideology and one only.... and that’s whatever political ideology advances Hillary Clinton

That’s why she can “evolve” so easily and be on both sides of so many issues over the years.. immigration, criminal justice, warmaking, race relations, trade, etc etc etc

Anyone who sees Hillary Clinton as anything other than a charlatan is no different than someone who sees Donald Trump as anything other than a charlatan

[∞∞∞]

Hillary Clinton is loyal to one political ideology and one only.... and that’s whatever political ideology advances Hillary Clinton

That’s why she can “evolve” so easily and be on both sides of so many issues over the years.. immigration, criminal justice, warmaking, race relations, trade, etc etc etc

Anyone who sees Hillary Clinton as anything other than a charlatan is no different than someone who sees Donald Trump as anything other than a charlatan

I mean isn't that the definition of a good politician? Someone who evolves over time to represent the views of their constituency? The worst politicians are the ones that don't change with the demographics.

[kalm]

Hillary Clinton is loyal to one political ideology and one only.... and that’s whatever political ideology advances Hillary Clinton

That’s why she can “evolve” so easily and be on both sides of so many issues over the years.. immigration, criminal justice, warmaking, race relations, trade, etc etc etc

Anyone who sees Hillary Clinton as anything other than a charlatan is no different than someone who sees Donald Trump as anything other than a charlatan

I mean isn't that the definition of a good politician? Someone who evolves over time to represent the views of their constituency? The worst politicians are the ones that don't change with the demographics.

Not necessarily. Core values and principles shouldn't really change all that much. Bernie has basically been saying and pushing the same shit since the 60's. Money and power too often cause the evolution. Democrats have swung to the right as unions have lost influence.

There's also the difference between rhetoric and action. See Obama.

[CID1990]

Hillary Clinton is loyal to one political ideology and one only.... and that’s whatever political ideology advances Hillary Clinton

That’s why she can “evolve” so easily and be on both sides of so many issues over the years.. immigration, criminal justice, warmaking, race relations, trade, etc etc etc

Anyone who sees Hillary Clinton as anything other than a charlatan is no different than someone who sees Donald Trump as anything other than a charlatan

I mean isn't that the definition of a good politician? Someone who evolves over time to represent the views of their constituency? The worst politicians are the ones that don't change with the demographics.

That would be all fine and good in practice

But in Hillary’s case it was just to get herself elected

Fortunately, enough people saw through her in both of her attempts

[∞∞∞]

I mean isn't that the definition of a good politician? Someone who evolves over time to represent the views of their constituency? The worst politicians are the ones that don't change with the demographics.

Not necessarily. Core values and principles shouldn't really change all that much. Bernie has basically been saying and pushing the same **** since the 60's. Money and power too often cause the evolution. Democrats have swung to the right as unions have lost influence.

There's also the difference between rhetoric and action. See Obama.

That's a fair point.

[mainejeff]

My Sister in Law and her husband came over tonight and it was an eye opener. She's a big Trump supporter. We kept things pretty civil but it is clear that she lives in an alternate reality. She thinks, for instance, that about 80% of the people support Trump's wall idea. The truth is that a majority has always opposed it. She said he won an Electoral landslide. His percent edge in Electoral votes ranks 46th of 58 Presidents. My wife said something about the stock market and she said it's because there's a conspiracy within the government to undermine Trump. At one point when she kept insisting the majority support a border wall I said "Google it" and she went into the paranoia about Google being rigged.

It became apparent that all of her information is from the conservative media echo chamber. I don't know what can be done when people out there are just out of touch with reality because of that.

Unfortunately all we can do is wait for them to die.

[mainejeff]

Hillary Clinton is loyal to one political ideology and one only.... and that’s whatever political ideology advances Hillary Clinton

That’s why she can “evolve” so easily and be on both sides of so many issues over the years.. immigration, criminal justice, warmaking, race relations, trade, etc etc etc

Anyone who sees Hillary Clinton as anything other than a charlatan is no different than someone who sees Donald Trump as anything other than a charlatan

I mean isn't that the definition of a good politician? Someone who evolves over time to represent the views of their constituency? The worst politicians are the ones that don't change with the demographics.

Don't tell that to all the angry white Republican men on here! They all think that we should live by all things written by white men throughout the history of humankind including the Bible, U.S. Constitution and Sean Hannity's collection of books.

[CID1990]

I mean isn't that the definition of a good politician? Someone who evolves over time to represent the views of their constituency? The worst politicians are the ones that don't change with the demographics.

Don't tell that to all the angry white Republican men on here! They all think that we should live by all things written by white men throughout the history of humankind including the Bible, U.S. Constitution and Sean Hannity's collection of books.

Yeah

Being for war, before you were against it, until you were for it again...

Very principled

[JohnStOnge]

Hillary Clinton is loyal to one political ideology and one only.... and that’s whatever political ideology advances Hillary Clinton

That’s why she can “evolve” so easily and be on both sides of so many issues over the years.. immigration, criminal justice, warmaking, race relations, trade, etc etc etc

Anyone who sees Hillary Clinton as anything other than a charlatan is no different than someone who sees Donald Trump as anything other than a charlatan

I don't think the two are comparable. I think HIllary really does have core beliefs with respect to the role of government, etc. I don't think Trump has any of that at all.

For example: I think Hillary really does believe in abortion rights. She really does believe in upholding Roe v. Wade. I don't think Trump gives a shit one way or another. I think he is completely transactional. Right now he sees appointing Conservative Justices as to his advantage since he has cast his lot with White Evangelical Christians and knows he has to have around 80% support from them along with turnout in order to win. So he appoints Justices he thinks will make them happy. If Trump woke up tomorrow and thought it'd help him to flip to appointing liberal Justices he'd do it in a heartbeat.

If Hillary Clinton was appointing Justices she would really care about their Judicial philosophy. One might not agree with her outlook on what the Judicial philosophy should be. But she would care.

[CID1990]

Hillary Clinton is loyal to one political ideology and one only.... and that’s whatever political ideology advances Hillary Clinton

That’s why she can “evolve” so easily and be on both sides of so many issues over the years.. immigration, criminal justice, warmaking, race relations, trade, etc etc etc

Anyone who sees Hillary Clinton as anything other than a charlatan is no different than someone who sees Donald Trump as anything other than a charlatan

I don't think the two are comparable. I think HIllary really does have core beliefs with respect to the role of government, etc. I don't think Trump has any of that at all.

For example: I think Hillary really does believe in abortion rights. She really does believe in upholding Roe v. Wade. I don't think Trump gives a **** one way or another. I think he is completely transactional. Right now he sees appointing Conservative Justices as to his advantage since he has cast his lot with White Evangelical Christians and knows he has to have around 80% support from them along with turnout in order to win. So he appoints Justices he thinks will make them happy. If Trump woke up tomorrow and thought it'd help him to flip to appointing liberal Justices he'd do it in a heartbeat.

If Hillary Clinton was appointing Justices she would really care about their Judicial philosophy. One might not agree with her outlook on what the Judicial philosophy should be. But she would care.

John

We've been through this before

We all know, in excruciating detail, what your opinion is on Trump v Hillary

We'll just take you as read (over and over) on this

It's just like, your opinion, man

All that said, they ARE very different. You just have a hard time understanding that right now, people like me take some solace in thinking, "At least we don't have Hillary"

And if Hillary had won, the consolation would be that "at least we don't have Trump"

I think the two are a wash, albeit for different reasons. You don't. We get it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZGrizFan]

I mean isn't that the definition of a good politician? Someone who evolves over time to represent the views of their constituency? The worst politicians are the ones that don't change with the demographics.

Don't tell that to all the angry white Republican men on here! They all think that we should live by all things written by white men throughout the history of humankind including the Bible, U.S. Constitution and Sean Hannity's collection of books.

And all gay men make the choice to be gay.

See how easy it is to sound stupid? You sound stupid.

[mainejeff]

Don't tell that to all the angry white Republican men on here! They all think that we should live by all things written by white men throughout the history of humankind including the Bible, U.S. Constitution and Sean Hannity's collection of books.

And all gay men make the choice to be gay.

See how easy it is to sound stupid? You sound stupid.

Nah....2018 years of history tells us that white men write the books that make the whole world sing....and fall in line. It is amazing how much power their written words....from the Bible to Sean Hannity.....have had over those many centuries.

[AZGrizFan]

And all gay men make the choice to be gay.

See how easy it is to sound stupid? You sound stupid.

Nah....2018 years of history tells us that white men write the books that make the whole world sing....and fall in line. It is amazing how much power their written words....from the Bible to Sean Hannity.....have had over those many centuries.

Way to double down, dipshit.

[css75]

I personally know his campaign manager - Jeff Weaver - for 10+ years now. The man is basically Sanders' ultimate PR machine. Everything you said is far from the truth, but believe what you will because reality clearly doesn't matter anymore; people just live in their fantasy internetz worlds.

ps. I voted for Clinton in the primary but I should have voted Sanders. Although she's fine and I don't hate her brand of progressiveness, I thought she had the best shot at winning.

1). I think UNI was being tongue in cheek but your greater point stands.

2). Clinton is not progressive. She is status quo with a slight veneer of populism that shouldn’t have been believed. You supported a moderate Republican.

Credibility for Kalm just cratered. Hillary a moderate Republican, .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kalm]

1). I think UNI was being tongue in cheek but your greater point stands.

2). Clinton is not progressive. She is status quo with a slight veneer of populism that shouldn’t have been believed. You supported a moderate Republican.

Credibility for Kalm just cratered. Hillary a moderate Republican, .

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You can make a case that Obama was too. I’m the most credible and post partisan force on here. It’s an undisputable fact.

[∞∞∞]

Obama was definitely more moderate in action than words. He was center-left at best.

[CID1990]

That is also like, just your opinion, man