The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

proeasdf said:

My understanding is that almost half of Americans now get all their news from Facebook ("FB")(information digitally targeted to align with that FB viewer's interests).  

 Took “all of” 20 seconds to find this:

https://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/

About four-in-ten Americans (43%) get news on Facebook.

you know, if a tribe exists (the deplorables) and you call them out for being a tribe, that is not increasing tribalism, nor does it make you a member of a tribe yourself.

The existence of the first tribe is what's doing that.

All evil cannot be explained away by Gollum's cultural relativism.  The members of NAMBLA are not just another tribe with quirky ways that seem alien to us, they hurt kids.  Likewise, the Deplorables and for exactly the same reason.

Well, at least one reason amongst many.

DaveSchmidt said:

proeasdf said:

My understanding is that almost half of Americans now get all their news from Facebook ("FB")(information digitally targeted to align with that FB viewer's interests).  

 Took “all of” 20 second to find this:
https://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/

About four-in-ten Americans (43%) get news on Facebook.

 Thanks for agreeing with my understanding of the facts.

drummerboy said:
you know, if a tribe exists (the deplorables) and you call them out for being a tribe, that is not increasing tribalism, nor does it make you a member of a tribe yourself.
The existence of the first tribe is what's doing that.

 Ok, so which came first, the chicken or the egg?

IMHO, where a major presidential nominee asserts a bad tribe exists in order to garner greater support from their tribe (my analysis of HRC's basket-of-deplorables comment) only helps to further polarize the entire country.  Sounds like, I am posing the wrong question.  Instead, perhaps we should discuss:  how much polarization is too much polarization?

Sometimes a deplorable is a deplorable.  HRC was wrong about a great many things but she hit the nail on the head with this one.

it's really hard not to go all Godwin's Law on the people creating false equivalencies between the hard core Trumpers and the people who criticize them.

Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to Trump's rallies should be able to discern that those particular people are in fact deplorable AND pretty scary.  And that those rallies do call to mind other such rallies from history.

  proeasdf said:

 Thanks for agreeing with my understanding of the facts.

   You slay me.

ml1 said:
it's really hard not to go all Godwin's Law on the people creating false equivalencies between the hard core Trumpers and the people who criticize them.

And only one of Einstein’s laws would be smart enough for the people (hi, DB!) creating equivalencies between the hard-core Trumpers and anyone who voted for him.

ml1 said:
it's really hard not to go all Godwin's Law on the people creating false equivalencies between the hard core Trumpers and the people who criticize them.
Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to Trump's rallies should be able to discern that those particular people are in fact deplorable AND pretty scary.  And that those rallies do call to mind other such rallies from history.

 I have made no hyperbolic comparisons (the essence of Godwin's law especially with respect to a certain mid twentieth century movement and leader).  Thus, Godwin's law is a reach in this instance.  

Democracy is messy.  IMHO, the alternative to not allowing people to be heard meaningfully because they are the other, the deplorables, basket-of-deplorables, etc. is generally even messier in the long run.

DaveSchmidt said:

  proeasdf said:

 Thanks for agreeing with my understanding of the facts.

   You slay me.

 Well good to hear.  

Why always so much (what appears to be) reflexive sarcasm and criticism?

proeasdf said:
 I have made no hyperbolic comparisons (the essence of Godwin's law especially with respect to a certain mid twentieth century movement and leader).  Thus, Godwin's law is a reach in this instance.  
Democracy is messy.  IMHO, the alternative to not allowing people to be heard meaningfully because they are the other, the deplorables, basket-of-deplorables, etc. is generally even messier in the long run.

 no, it's hard for ME not to make those comparisons when they are pretty obvious.  I think you need to pay more attention to what Trump is saying at those rallies, and how his audience is reacting.  Sure, there is value to trying to understand what motivates such anger and hatred.  But there isn't any value IMHO to justifying it, or excusing it, or explaining it away as just differences of opinion.

proeasdf said:

Why always so much (what appears to be) reflexive sarcasm and criticism?

Because, with a little humor, they beat reflexive obfuscation and misinterpretation.

ml1 said:

proeasdf said:
 I have made no hyperbolic comparisons (the essence of Godwin's law especially with respect to a certain mid twentieth century movement and leader).  Thus, Godwin's law is a reach in this instance.  
Democracy is messy.  IMHO, the alternative to not allowing people to be heard meaningfully because they are the other, the deplorables, basket-of-deplorables, etc. is generally even messier in the long run.

 no, it's hard for ME not to make those comparisons when they are pretty obvious.  I think you need to pay more attention to what Trump is saying at those rallies, and how his audience is reacting.  Sure, there is value to trying to understand what motivates such anger and hatred.  But there isn't any value IMHO to justifying it, or excusing it, or explaining it away as just differences of opinion.

 I agree on the NOT justifying or excusing hatred.  However, large portions of the rust belt and rural areas are beset with rising suicide rates and severe addiction problems.  These areas of the rust belt and the rural areas largely overlap with areas where those called basket-of-deplorables live.  Large areas of despair often result in people reaching for solutions (even when the solutions are not logical nor decent).  Effectively shunning and disparaging those in despair does not appear to be an effective long-term solution.  

DaveSchmidt said:

proeasdf said:

Why always so much (what appears to be) reflexive sarcasm and criticism?

Because, with a little humor, they beat reflexive obfuscation and misinterpretation.

 You may want to work on your funny bone (as it appears to be fractured).

when discussing the deplorables, it's important to define who we're exactly talking about. While I find the decision to vote for Trump deplorable in and of itself,  "deplorables" does not refer to all Trump voters. It refers to the people who go to his rallies and the people who share that same mindset. It doesn't really refer to your next door Republican neighbor who voted for Trump because he was the Republican, but found him to be an execrable human being. They just knew he would follow Republican principles.

The deplorables actually think that Trump is a great man.

drummerboy said:

when discussing the deplorables, it's important to define who we're exactly talking about. 

In one social encounter, you learn someone thinks Trump is a great man. In another social encounter, you learn someone voted for Trump despite finding him to be an execrable human being. In what ways would your thoughts and actions differ in response?

Klinker, you’re welcome to answer, too, if you’d like.

drummerboy said:
when discussing the deplorables, it's important to define who we're exactly talking about. While I find the decision to vote for Trump deplorable in and of itself,  "deplorables" does not refer to all Trump voters. It refers to the people who go to his rallies and the people who share that same mindset. It doesn't really refer to your next door Republican neighbor who voted for Trump because he was the Republican, but found him to be an execrable human being. They just knew he would follow Republican principles.

The deplorables actually think that Trump is a great man.

I hate to tell you this, but that's pretty much all republicans right now. Your neighbor probably left the GOP by now. It's the party of Trump. It's a large minority of US voters, but they are vocal and they do show up to vote for their supreme leader.

proeasdf said:
 I agree on the NOT justifying or excusing hatred.  However, large portions of the rust belt and rural areas are beset with rising suicide rates and severe addiction problems.  These areas of the rust belt and the rural areas largely overlap with areas where those called basket-of-deplorables live.  Large areas of despair often result in people reaching for solutions (even when the solutions are not logical nor decent).  Effectively shunning and disparaging those in despair does not appear to be an effective long-term solution.  

 you don't need to explain all this to me.  I've read and studied quite a lot about the folks you're describing.  The books "Dying of Whiteness" by Jonathan Metzl, "The Left Behind" by Robert Wuthnow and "America:  The Farewell Tour" by Chris Hedges are all very good depictions of the destruction wrought in "red" America by bipartisan neoliberal policies of the past 35 years.  I understand their despair and frustration, and I get how it has led the country to a place where Trump can become president.  And a lot of his supporters are likely well-meaning people who have been led astray by an orchestrated, decades long campaign of misinformation and disinformation.

But understanding it and empathizing with those people doesn't excuse the overt anger, hatred, bigotry, misogyny and xenophobia on display at Trump rallies.  There are lots of people in the same circumstances who have managed to retain their moral compasses and resist turning to Trump's neo-fascism for answers. 

ml1 said:
it's really hard not to go all Godwin's Law on the people creating false equivalencies between the hard core Trumpers and the people who criticize them.
Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to Trump's rallies should be able to discern that those particular people are in fact deplorable AND pretty scary.  And that those rallies do call to mind other such rallies from history.

 Godwin's Law, as I understand it is just an excuse to ignore history.

ml1 said:

But understanding it and empathizing with those people doesn't excuse the overt anger, hatred, bigotry, misogyny and xenophobia on display at Trump rallies.  There are lots of people in the same circumstances who have managed to retain their moral compasses and resist turning to Trump's neo-fascism for answers. 

 And when a poor person steals out of desperation those on the Right would point out all the poor people who don't steal.

Am I to empathize with those suffered from the reparations imposed on Germany after the First World War or who suffered from poverty and oppression in Eastern Europe and for those reason volunteered to help kill Jews?

What were the grievances of the Hutus or the Serbs who engaged in genocide?

proeasdf said:

ml1 said:

proeasdf said:
 I have made no hyperbolic comparisons (the essence of Godwin's law especially with respect to a certain mid twentieth century movement and leader).  Thus, Godwin's law is a reach in this instance.  
Democracy is messy.  IMHO, the alternative to not allowing people to be heard meaningfully because they are the other, the deplorables, basket-of-deplorables, etc. is generally even messier in the long run.

 no, it's hard for ME not to make those comparisons when they are pretty obvious.  I think you need to pay more attention to what Trump is saying at those rallies, and how his audience is reacting.  Sure, there is value to trying to understand what motivates such anger and hatred.  But there isn't any value IMHO to justifying it, or excusing it, or explaining it away as just differences of opinion.

 I agree on the NOT justifying or excusing hatred.  However, large portions of the rust belt and rural areas are beset with rising suicide rates and severe addiction problems.  These areas of the rust belt and the rural areas largely overlap with areas where those called basket-of-deplorables live.  Large areas of despair often result in people reaching for solutions (even when the solutions are not logical nor decent).  Effectively shunning and disparaging those in despair does not appear to be an effective long-term solution.  

 Some 40 posts have appeared here whilst I was planting my portulaca, I need some time to read.

But I do believe proeasdf is on target here. Brilliantly so, I might add.

Which leads to developments such as this story...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/20/us/politics/minnesota-refugees-trump.html

mtierney said:
 Some 40 posts have appeared here whilst I was planting my portulaca, I need some time to read.
But I do believe proeasdf is on target here. Brilliantly so, I might add.
Which leads to developments such as this story...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/20/us/politics/minnesota-refugees-trump.html

I'm going to bet you don't find any of what I wrote even worth responding to.

Of course you do.

ml1 said:
 no, it's hard for ME not to make those comparisons when they are pretty obvious.  I think you need to pay more attention to what Trump is saying at those rallies, and how his audience is reacting.  Sure, there is value to trying to understand what motivates such anger and hatred.  But there isn't any value IMHO to justifying it, or excusing it, or explaining it away as just differences of opinion.

 Apparently no value to understanding or respecting  other folks realities either.

mtierney said:
 Some 40 posts have appeared here whilst I was planting my portulaca, I need some time to read.
But I do believe proeasdf is on target here. Brilliantly so, I might add.
Which leads to developments such as this story...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/20/us/politics/minnesota-refugees-trump.html

Do you have any thoughts on that story?  You have a tendency to just drop a link without commentary.  But it would be good to get your POV on these issues.  

mtierney said:

 Apparently no value to understanding or respecting  other folks realities either.

 Can you explain what, exactly, it is about your reality that makes you support a married man who has unprotected sex with porn stars, locks kids in cages and gleefully announces his intent to accept any comfort our nation's enemies might offer in the upcoming election?

What is it about your day to day that make that sort of evil ok?

mtierney said:
 Apparently no value to understanding or respecting  other folks realities either.

 maybe you should read my response that followed that one.  I understand a lot more than you seem to think I do.

ml1 said:
he claims he called off a retaliatory strike because it was disproportional to shooting down an unmanned drone.  If that's true, Trump's refusal to go to war with Iran (at least at this time) will be the first thing I agree with him doing.

 This is also an opportunity for him to show all of us how much smarter he is than all the generals.