Discussion»Questions»Politics» Will the sore loser Democrats ever stop being butt hurt about losing the Presidency to President Trump? Or will they always be jerks?
I did chuckle at that question, good-naturally I may add :) But now, now my lovely one, this is a little unbecoming for you. I appreciate why you did it, and I can imagine it's sorely tempting sometimes to do what others do, but in opposition.. but I just felt that it was a little unbecoming? I am used to it from others, but not so much you? Perhaps that's my genteel sensibilities getting in the way :P
I was interested in the words ,'butt hurt' 'sore loser' and 'jerks' - those were a tad inflammatory and closed I felt :P
Ahh but I held you aloft on a pedestal :) And in actual fact I DO, I promise you. I tend to prefer moderate and unbiased language.. I think that when people engage in communication that shows clear bias and present it as fact - then it devalues what they said.. Just personal opinion. I will confess there is one I can think of who I wouldn't correct.. and that's probably because it's that person's style and they are known for that so there wouldn't be any point. However, pretty much anyone else I DO take issue with. I hope this post leaves you smiling :)
You weren't addressing me---and I'm not a Democrat, I'm an independent because stupidity exists everywhere---but I'm not smiling.
A presidential election in the US is not like a polo match where one side wins and the other loses and the implications---except to those who like the game and follow it---are hardly life-changing.
It seems to me that politeness assumes that atrocities are acceptable as long as the language used to refer to them is inoffensive to those hearing about them---according to the listener's standards.
Perhaps if life ever becomes more meaningful than just having differences of opinion about reality, but with no downsides to such opinions, then politeness may become an independent rather than contingent virtue.
I agree with you about being independent, but be honest - how have our lives changed significantly since President Trump took office? Seems to me that what you refer to as life-changing is mostly speculation.
I value your opinion and you are always welcome to chip in, whether I am addressing you or not :) I was surprised to hear you say that none of what Strumpet is up to is life changing. I am no expert, of course but I know that in the UK the government is important and very much do make decisions and take actions that affect people's lives.. Surely things like cuts in benefits, increases in taxes, reductions in healthcare, increases in premiums for insurances, new rules etc. etc. .. SO isn't that the same in the US? I think in Strumpet's case the man is ineffective and couldn't work his way out of a wet paper bag but if he were in any way a man of action instead of wasting most of his time tweeting like a twit then I cannot imagine people won't suffer. Ultimately too, I think his decisions and impulsive loud-mouthing will have an impact upon America and on the economy.. that would affect people surely? Or have I entirely misunderstood - that's possible I admit as sometimes the subtleties of the differences in language can get me a bit lost, just as others sometimes have difficulty understanding me
The elite of them sure can't seem to. Hillary is still going on about it. And now Obama is, he said he came along about 10 or 20 yrs to early making people resort back to tribalism.
They just can't seem to get that it is not about race, gender or any other identity politics they want to drag in. It is about policy. Policies that protect this country both physically and economically.
Interestingly, and as an aside, I was reading in the Times that a US economist was saying that the tariff war thing could well have strongly negative consequences for the US economy. As you know I have mixed feelings on the tariff thing, I can understand and have sympathy with the ethos of protecting jobs but I am watching and waiting re the implication of tariffs.
I believe we are already getting the short end of the trade so I am fine with the tariffs....we have more imports than exports with most of these countries so it will hurt them as well.
That's what I feel about when countries threaten the UK - we import way more than we export. Like with the US, we must be one of the few countries, from what you say, who import more from the US than we export. As I understand it UK isn't one of those threatening to retaliate - presumably for that reason amongst others.
I am not sure though that in reality even if a country, like the UK imports more than exports - that what little we do export isn't still VERY important for the economy? For instance some businesses may well rely totally on exports and if those businesses were to fail this would harm the economy... So that was my thinking... maybe it's really not that simple.. and what the economist was saying wasn't whether the tariffs are justified or right in terms of protecting jobs etc.. but that overall the implications of that particular measure, particularly if they do result in a trade war - may ultimately harm the economy MORE than not imposing tariffs - that seemed to be what he was saying.
Everything has consequences and some maybe tough while things get corrected. I googled the import/export for UK v USA and looks like UK has slight advantage in 2016...anyway (that maybe something that swings back in forth) The top export destinations of the United Kingdom are the United States ($61.6B), Germany ($43.8B), France($26.5B), the Netherlands($25.5B) and Ireland ($22.9B). The top import origins are Germany ($94.1B), China($55.7B), the United States($55.3B), the Netherlands($40B)
Some I guess will always be jerks and sore losers by which I mean their response is to dismiss half the population by calling us all kinds of nasty names and inventing all manner of evil and fantastic motives for us.
But lets face it - Democratic idealism, much of which is based upon the notion of more and more government control and government redistribution of wealth, did take a hit in the 2016 election. And many Democrats are unwilling to give up that particular idealism so really their only recourse is to just dismiss all who happen not to share it. Because if they really listened to those who do not share it they might just see its limits and consider swapping it for a more realistic and practical idealism. Which many do not want to do so much easier to just name-call the opposition and pretend they don't exist. Or are somehow unworthy of them of beneath them.
President Trump, whatever else he is or is not, is the embodiment of successful rugged individualism. Of self-determination and the notion (which many of us Democrats and Republicans or whatever, grew up with) that you take what you have and by vision, hard work, and sacrifice make something of and for yourself and those around you. In other words it all come down to individual responsibility and individual effort. So our responsibility and NOT that of the government or anyone else. The opportunity is there - which is what this country is about - so its up to us (NOT the government) to make something of it. We rise or fall by our own effort and responsibilities. The notion that somehow everybody has to be the same and have the same things and believe the same things for there to be "equality" is anathema to this point of view. The notion of equality comes from Judeo=Christian religion with an overlay of Classical politics. We are equal in that we are all creations of God so God loves each and every one of us. Which we extend by trying to see to it that all have equal opportunities. Beyond those it is up to us.
Does bother me that Democrats have so often bent over backward to create and exacerbate differences between people for the sake of making political capital. Vote for us and we'll take care of you is their message to so many people. Which is order to accomplish they have to stir up and magnify differences, jealousies, and inequalities and play one off against another. So many people who buy into that notion end up blaming and hating and demonizing someone else or some other people rather than realizing that the answer lies within themselves and their own energies and abilities. But instead they just think OK lets have the government get rid of these people and those people and everything will be alright for us. Which of course it won't be and they will still have to face themselves. But they would rather play the victim by placing the blame outside of themselves.
President Trump, it must be remembered, was a Democrat who, like many of us who once considered ourselves as such, tired of a party idealism which depended so much on negativity and divisiveness and destruction of individual responsibility and effort in the name of collectivism. He realized that most people just want to live their own lives and do not wish to be told what to do and how to think or indeed what to think. So he tapped into this.
You make some very interesting points, in that it was interesting to read your thoughts and thinking on this. Just a tiny correction, or two though I am sure no one will thank me for it, but as I understand it, it wasn't half the population, it wasn't even, technically speaking half the voters. Just a technical point there.
Trump wasn't a self-made man - he was from a very rich father, was given a good deal of money to start with and had a privileged upbringing, attending very good schools that most could not even dream of attending. I would guess there's something in there about how while we can all dream of making good, some start the game with impossible odds against them, which are very difficult to overcome or fight against. Trump also has a track record of taking on businesses, often successful businesses and then making them go bankrupt - he's borrowed more than most business are worth and he's continually overestimated their worth; often leading to aforementioned bankruptcy. He's lost many law-suits.. made a lot of bad business decisions.. So while I respect your opinion is otherwise, I am not sure how successful and an object of inspiration he is.
I am thinking too. .that while I share your view that we can and should work hard.. I can't help thinking that sometimes, often even, working hard, while admirable, often just isn't enough - the US and the world's full of people who work harder than we can even imagine, but they are still dirt poor and cannot find a way out of that trap. And the government DO have an impact there.. if they have policies that make it harder for ordinary people to thrive, remain healthy etc.. then this really is going to be a big factor.
I remembered that Trump and his whole family were Democrats... perhaps they still are.. My thinking is that quite a few of his policies seem pretty divisive in terms of who can get medical care etc.. education and so on...
As you know I am no democrat - it will be interesting to watch what happens and to see what lessons can be learned and which faction ultimately is proven right
One of various points that was missed is that Trump once said that if he ever ran for president, he would do so as a Republican because the Republicans would be the only ones stupid enough to accept him as a candidate.
After considering running but declining to do so as the nominee of the Reform Party (who brought us Ross Perot and other minor wingnut candidates), what he actually said was that he wouldn't run unless he thought he could win, and to have any chance at winning, one must run as a Republican or a Democrat.
Yes half the voters - thank you. As far as the "self-made" is concerned I did not use that phrase but rather used "rugged individualism". Certainly Pres. Trump's life and doings have been both rugged and individualist. Nothing guaranteed success for him. He grew up privileged but he did not just play it safe with that but rather took many chances - some of them quite foolish and ill-advised.
And perhaps you have never thought that many of us who grew up comfortably as part of our upbringing and from what we imbibed from our culture our very much under the strain of feeling we need to be successful ourselves. OK being a girl when I was growing up that meant marrying well which I felt I never had any chance to do and was unwilling to do what I was told I must do to achieve that. So I left home and dropped out. And only slowly was I able to make a life for myself which eventually included a good job so I was able to consider I was successful by say around age 40. I never received a penny from my parents until they both had died which was 13, 14 years ago. My father, who came from a successful family, started a company which became successful and still exists today though under another name. Both my brothers became highly successful I really believe because they felt they had no choice. Now their children are becoming successful. I never had children of my own and did not marry until I was 53. But anyway my main point is that those of us who grew up comfortably and had some advantages should not be so lightly dismissed and many of us are as well to a greater or lesser extent, "self-made".
As far as considering what you term the "dirt poor" as being in some kind of a "trap" I would point out that many of them lead happier lives because they have chosen that, and that many of them who wish to get out of that do so and go from poor to wealthy in a single generation. Because in spite of what those who would divide us tell us to think we live in a classless society. Where you can go from rich to poor just as easily in a single generation if you are not careful. Which is the beauty but also the challenge of this country.
Working hard is its own reward but you are correct in saying that nothing guarantees success. Still there is nothing like trying. If we don't work hard then that is rather like admitting defeat. Not trying at all but just rolling over and playing dead and expecting others to take care of us is presumptuous. How do we want to live our lives? We have choices. Not choosing or just going along with the path of least resistance is putting our fate into the hands of others.
My husband and I supported more traditional conservative candidates for president in 2016. We did not care for Trump and thought he would not be a good public servant. However as he was willing to defend and protect at least some conservative values more so than say Clinton - we did end up voting for him. If some people find inspiration in his life so much the better. We get our inspiration where we can find it.
"And perhaps you have never thought that many of us who grew up comfortably as part of our upbringing and from what we imbibed from our culture our very much under the strain of feeling we need to be successful ourselves. " - It's really not about me. I never said I have, or have not considered those who were comfortably off.. I am, by nature, a sociologist, psychologist and people watcher - so, yea I consider all angles. What's not often considered by those who are comfortably off, regardless of whether they are self-made, is just how impossible a trap it is when you have poor education, (you had most likely a reasonable education even though you ultimately dropped out) and who come from a background where there is no support, monetary or emotionally and where there are no expectations of succeeding. Regardless of what we might think of that - those in that situation really have no breaks and are often doomed, no matter how hard they work to low paid jobs and poverty. That was all I was trying to say.
When you say these people have a choice.. that really does demonstrate a lack of appreciation of how it really is for these people, entrapped, trapped, with crime all around, their influences are bad, their expectations and career paths are usually very poor.. You would have to be there, to live that, to truly understand.. People who are comfortable can barely ever understand the influences and expectations that cannot be overcome other than by superhuman efforts and accepting being shunned by those you love.. To say it's a choice, really it to not understand exactly how it is and how many pressures there are working against them.. I could go on and on about this.. but those who have lead a comfortable life just cannot usually imagine those who do not have those advantages of choice and freedom.
We get that here.. politicians who say, 'it's not so bad living on a low wage..'Yea but they wouldn't know, they cannot even imagine.. And what I am saying is.. to be able to escape poverty and go from poor to rich, well the odds are so badly stacked against them.. it's not impossible but it's very rare..
You and I are probably similar in many ways, in terms of making our own success and I did appreciate your honesty in sharing how you got where you are.
I think my point too is that voting for a man, supporting a man who has messed up so many times, who lies constantly and is boarish and ill-mannered, with NO class whatsoever - seems a very precarious and dangerous position to be in. I truly wouldn't want that. PS class is not just about money.. Trump has money, but he has NO class, none and money cannot buy class..
I truly cannot imagine anything positive in terms of inspiration emanating from Trump; a liar, ruined so many businesses,NO class, very lacking in ability to communicate, clearly can barely read, can barely string a sentence together, tweets like a rabid loony, contradicts himself on a daily basis, less than zero diplomatic skills - i could go on but I am sure we get the picture.. If *anyone* finds that inspiring then seriously they must have a very lowly starting point regarding literacy, morality etc..
Actually, it was close enough to half the electorate such that any argument that it wasn't is basically splitting hairs. Trump received roughly 63 million of 135 million votes, or 46.67%, while Clinton received about 66 million, or 48.9%. With that large a sample size, anything over 45% is virtually half.
Electorate? Isn't that defined as the number of people eligible to vote? Whereas the number of people who actually voted, (voters) is different to the electorate. I cannot remember the exact numbers - it was slightly over half of those who did vote, I believe who voted for your friend Hilary, and just under half voted for my friend Strumpet. If I am remembering correctly then yes it's splitting hairs as it was fairly even. I was only making a technical correction that it wasn't half the populace.
Adaydreambeliever 