I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

Progress. Now if we could get you to come to a slightly broader understanding of racism that takes into consideration that the past matters and has an ongoing effect on inequality today, you'd be that much closer to being a former conservative too.

Wow is this condescending. Must one leave any group that has objectionable people in it?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

But, honestly, Trump was blaming Russian mob-fixer Manafort for all of his recent missteps, and reports were that Manafort had given up on trying to make Trump act, well, like not an insane person and was just cashing his checks.

Yes, this. I think Trump didn't like the stories coming out in the last few days that said that people in the campaign were going to get him under control. No one gets him under control. He is the alpha male. One of the jobs of a campaign manager is to spin the media with an off-the-record narrative that guides their coverage. But Trump controls his own message, and won't tolerate a campaign manager who thinks they're actually running something. The new guy can be counted until to shill for him, until he can't, and then he can be canned too.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

You realize that this person will not get elected, right?

Some would. Some wouldn't.

If voters are remotely rational (arguable), they will know that you can't hand someone power and then expect them not to use it because they promised.

That'd be a cynical rather than rational voter.

A rational voter would likely also realize that their fellow voters are not sufficiently informed to be the best way to decide.

Any more than their representatives are well informed, or voting without undue influence from lobbyists, or based on self-interest? A rational voter would realize it's much easier for a single vote to be corrupted than a mass of them.

If voter are irrational (also arguable), this person gives then next to zero emotional appeal.

The appeal is to honesty and transparency. "I'm not 'with you,' and you don't have to be 'with me.' I am you. Literally. You vote through me!" There's a huge emotional argument there about giving democracy back to the people.

And then there's the logistical problem that you don't know about lots of votes - e.g., amendments - three days in advance.

Nothing's perfect. Where a vote couldn't be held in advance, the candidate would promise to abstain.

It can and will be done. All processes will be hacked inevitably. Whether it'll be good or bad for us is another matter.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Wow is this condescending.

Okay.

Must one leave any group that has objectionable people in it?

Huh? I think one probably wants to leave any group that they disagree with.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The appeal is to honesty and transparency. "I'm not 'with you,' and you don't have to be 'with me.' I am you. Literally. You vote through me!" There's a huge emotional argument there about giving democracy back to the people.

I don't think you have any understanding at all of politics.

[SEC_Chick]

Originally Posted by Adder

Progress. Now if we could get you to come to a slightly broader understanding of racism that takes into consideration that the past matters and has an ongoing effect on inequality today, you'd be that much closer to being a former conservative too.

No thanks. I still sincerely believe that conservative solutions like school choice would do more for underserved communities than the Dems have in the last 40 years.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Wow is this condescending. Must one leave any group that has objectionable people in it?

Read that first link I cited in response to you above. The "do as I say, you troglodyte" attitude is a huge cause of elitist hatred.

You can't talk down to or ignore a person without creating deep responsive hatred. We've done that to roughly half the country. And we're only making it worse calling them all bigots and racists.

Yes, Gallup showed a lot of Trump voters aren't voting solely because they're economically screwed. But other polls have shown a different picture. And even if we accept Gallup's recent poll as more than "noise" - as some breakthrough poll that finally shows us the "real" Trump voter... Still, it is not a basis to discard these people exclusively as racists and xenophobes. It simply states that these people do not live in areas with a lot of different races and ethnicities. To jump to exclusively "racist" and "xenophobe" is lazy and reckless.

Seriously, read that piece. It predicted exactly what's happening... What occurs when those of us who know better tell half the country to fuck off, or ignore them. The less enlightened tend to still live in "honor culture." Their essential currency, more than actual currency, is respect. And they aren't going to simply accept us derisively telling them how to think and live any more than the honor cultures of fundamentalist Islam abroad have done.

They demand respect, and a seat at the table. We're making it a zero sum game. This is understandable, of course, as a lot of what they believe is regressive and unscientific, and we feel they need to be forced to think differently. But they won't, and they aren't going away any time soon, and we need to find a more effective way to deal with them than broad brush name-calling.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I don't think you have any understanding at all of politics.

This is making me laugh on so many levels.

[SEC_Chick]

In the spirit of bipartisanship, you will be glad to know that Paul Manafort shared his Ukrainian cash with John Podesta, Clinton money man, in a way so as to circumvent disclosure of the foreign influence.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...bbyists-227101

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Read that first link I cited in response to you above. The "do as I say, you troglodyte" attitude is a huge cause of elitist hatred.

Non-elites, whoever they are, are just as likely to be dismissive of views they don't share. You're describe the effects of elitist hatred, not the cause.

You can't talk down to or ignore a person without creating deep responsive hatred. We've done that to roughly half the country. And we're only making it worse calling them all bigots and racists.

I don't know who your "we" is, but I prefer not to talk down to or ignore people, and I have met plenty of people in flyover country who talk down or ignore me, and yet I don't hate them.

Also, there are many bigots and racists out there.

Yes, Gallup showed a lot of Trump voters aren't voting solely because they're economically screwed. But other polls have shown a different picture.

Uh, false. Plenty of blacks and Hispanics, for example, have been economically screwed and yet they aren't Trump voters. The word "solely" is doing a lot of work in what you just said.

Seriously, read that piece.

If you read what I linked, I'll read what you linked.

They demand respect, and a seat at the table.

Who can argue with that?

We're making it a zero sum game.

What?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Here's why: http://spectator.org/39326_americas-...ls-revolution/

I would just like to note the absurdity and lack of self-awareness in this paragraph:

While Europeans are accustomed to being ruled by presumed betters whom they distrust, the American people’s realization of being ruled like Europeans shocked this country into well nigh revolutionary attitudes. But only the realization was new. The ruling class had sunk deep roots in America over decades before 2008. Machiavelli compares serious political diseases to the Aetolian fevers — easy to treat early on while they are difficult to discern, but virtually untreatable by the time they become obvious.

eta: I tried to read it, but I give up. That is a load of twaddle. I can't believe you think it's insightful or well written. I suppose it is amazing that the man can write prose with such a massive chip on his shoulder, but that's no reason to go and read it.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

This is making me laugh on so many levels.

It is rather amusing to read you talking about the fee fees of the poor bigots, and how that makes them Trumpists, immediately after arguing that people would give that all up for honesty and transparency.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

In the spirit of bipartisanship, you will be glad to know that Paul Manafort shared his Ukrainian cash with John Podesta, Clinton money man, in a way so as to circumvent disclosure of the foreign influence.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...bbyists-227101

Or at least to John Podesta's brother's lobbying firm.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

No thanks. I still sincerely believe that conservative solutions like school choice would do more for underserved communities than the Dems have in the last 40 years.

I could put together and implement a school choice program that would do a ton, but have never seen such a policy proposed by Rs. Instead, their proposals usually serve a few special constituencies of theirs, like Christian home schoolers and private schools with a segregationist past being the most objectionable of them.

I was a kid who escaped from deeply crappy public schools (triple sessions, anybody?) thanks to the generosity of rich Yankees who funded a private school scholarship. Yes, they took smart poor kids like me in to burnish the reputation of a school that served mostly dumb rich druggies, but it worked for both of us.

I think there could be bipartisan solutions to education that cut through a lot of the crap on all sides.

Except for the fact that there isn't a constituency to support those solutions anywhere. Especially among conservatives. Bush really drove that home when he worked with Kennedy on no-child-left-behind and then gutted its funding after passage.

Someday, if we ever meet IRL, I will tell you about my youthful discussions on the topic with James Buckley, brother of Bill.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

WTF? Have you lost your goddamned mind?

I have more, and he deserves it.

But I don't think my wife intended to give him as big a gift as she did.