Why I Think Trump is the Best Democratic Asset

In my original post I see that I should have said "some."
 
Individual Bernie voters. We had one on this forum.

What does that demonstrate though? You know one person who voted for Bernie in the primaries and didn't vote at all in the General. Cool. So what?
 
I'm not trying to prove anything. I was just trying to end this pointless bickering that was occasioned by my omitting the word "some" in my original post.
 
I'm not trying to prove anything. I was just trying to end this pointless bickering that was occasioned by my omitting the word "some" in my original post.

I don't think calling it pointless bickering is very helpful, when you should have known that would be a mildly offensive generalization to many other posters.
 
I'm not entirely sure time is on the Democrats side. The new generation coming after millennials tend to be nowhere near as liberal as we are.
Has that ever actually been substantiated by that one really wooly survey by a marketing firm that found they like entrepreneurs more than they like tattoos?

I buy that teenagers are likely to hold more conservative views than people in their twenties and thirties, but it's not really clear that this has anything to do with some generational drift, given that most of Generation Z are still children living with their parents, and that children tend to repeat what their parents tell them more or less uncritically, even when they think they're being rebellious.
 
I don't think calling it pointless bickering is very helpful, when you should have known that would be a mildly offensive generalization to many other posters.
I only characterized it as pointless bickering once it continued after I explicitly acknowledged I should have said "some."
 
it was pointless before that

Moderator Action: If something is pointless and someone posts to say that, posting that you agree that it was pointless is bordering on spam. ~ Arakhor
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm perfectly fine with people pointing out that I've expressed myself poorly.

By the way, this particular kind of ambiguity is much on my mind of late, so it's ironic that I stumbled into it myself. The way a declarative statement that uses a collective noun, X, can mean either "Some of X" or "All of X." Why else but because Trump uses this construction to slide between the two meanings (only technically say "some" but effectively communicate "all").
 
My honest guess is Dems will get lazy just like they did in 2008 when their message consisted almost entirely of "we are not Bush". Then all of those great reforms they had spoken about in 2000 and 2004? Yeah, they didn't actually do any of those when they had complete control and the ability to do them.

All we got was a piss Poirot watered down healthcare bill which cost too much and didn't actually cover everyone. The rest? All of those reforms were conveniently forgotten.
 
The only team that can beat the Democrats is the Democrats. 2020 is probably theirs to lose, but I won't be surprised if they manage to. With the way the Democratic primary is shaping up, I won't be surprised if there is a significant progressive challenge to the establishment and/or a third party progressive if they fail. If a progressive wins the dem nomination, won't be surprised to see a moderate 3rd party nominee emerge... someone of significance. Either way I think a third party will come into play in 2020 and that hurts dems more than Trump (who is kind of in a nothing to lose position, with a rock solid floor but low ceiling)
 
I won't be surprised if the Democrats end up with a long-shot candidate as the nominee because I don't believe the Establishment will be able to coalesce around a single candidate.
 
Just to be clear I am not an American but from the outsider looking in the Republicans are in deep trouble. I think Trump is partly right in terms of the mainstream media being out to get him (but he makes it so easy), but he is wrong in terms of them making stuff up.

He is not wrong. Mainstream media will both make stuff up and selectively report to actively misrepresent or lie about information outright. It has been caught doing so repeatedly, buzzfeed multiple times lately but CNN/Fox and others have also.

Trump also makes things up, so there's not a lot to trust.

By any objective means Trump is not a good president. He is a dead duck and cannot pass any of his legislative agenda (such as it was) so even if you are a Republican/like him just thought I would point that out.

One does wonder, for example, why the wall is a big deal right now as opposed to earlier in his term. You'd think he might have managed funding for it in the first two years of his term, if keeping that particular promise were a high priority.
 
Mainstream media will both make stuff up and selectively report to actively misrepresent or lie about information outright.

It's a trite offtopic example, but I still run into people everywhere that think Monsanto sues farmers for windblown pollen. NPR debunked the urban legend years before John Stewart threw gas on it. Buzzfeed seems to make Stewart look like a nostalgic and reliable source of news. They should stick to "Worth It," which is one more media product than I watch from Fox.
 
I don't use Buzzfeed, but the name doesn't inspire condidence.

Reuters, BBC, Washington Post, and I sometimes look at Fox just to see what they're saying.
 
Reuters, BBC, Washington Post, and I sometimes look at Fox just to see what they're saying.

Washington post and Fox are both similarly bad. I don't see info from Reuters/BBC enough to comment but have little reason to expect they're better.
 
Back
Top Bottom