I Hate Liberals!

[Thyrsis]

That seems to be the strongest driving force behind the strongest Republican followers and some of the leaders.

Ladoga's bizarre posting is an example of that. Why would any conservative who cares about America or about most of the things the Republican party has historically espoused over the years support a guy who's been a Democrat his whole life, who has savaged Republican leaders for his own personal gain, who's taken political positions as candidate that run counter to Republican policy, is an imbecile, is incompetent, doesn't care about America, is corrupt, is dangerous, and is likely crazy in some meaningful way? Especially considering that if Trump went away there would be a line of traditional conservative Republicans ready to take his place? Ladoga's posts tell us: it's because he (and they) "hate liberals!" (whatever their skewed and purported sense of that term might mean to them) and the enemy of my enemy is my friend!

I've talked about shunning news sources (especially including Fox News, 'right wing' aggregators and blogs, and talk radio) that don't really care about news and only care about inflaming and misinforming as an actual central component of their mission. Sadly, that notion doesn't get universal support (and far from it). Still, that would be my hopeful shared common value #1 (in no particular order): we want a media that carries out the traditional purpose of journalism (even if it's flawed).

Hopeful shared common value #2: We want officeholders who care more about effective governance than about their personal wealth and office.

Hopeful shared common value #3: We want officeholders who care more about norms of effective governance than about their TEAM's immediate gain.

Hopeful shared common value #4: We want officeholders who are competent, informed, experienced and educated.

Hopeful shared common value #5: We care about pragmatic results more than pure ideology or untested theoretical beliefs that are unsupported by evidence.

Hopeful shared common value #6: We can't win all the time; when we can't win, we shouldn't instead just be content to make the opposition lose.

Hopeful shared common value #7: As one of the richest and most free countries on the planet, we should aim to have more indicators of societal greatness: less poverty, great and affordable health care, greater business opportunities, solid infrastructure, more wealth, stronger economy, stronger middle class, a clear commitment to the arts, and a vibrant sense of 'American spirit' that reflects the country's status as world leader.


We don't have to agree on everything or anything, but we need to function and to do so within the norms of governance. This seems hokey upon typing, but it's sensible to me and wholly at odds with what we have or seemingly aspire to. It's deeply unfortunate.

 

[RBB89]

That seems to be the strongest driving force behind the strongest Republican followers and some of the leaders.

Ladoga's bizarre posting is an example of that. Why would any conservative who cares about America or about most of the things the Republican party has historically espoused over the years support a guy who's been a Democrat his whole life, who has savaged Republican leaders for his own personal gain, who's taken political positions as candidate that run counter to Republican policy, is an imbecile, is incompetent, doesn't care about America, is corrupt, is dangerous, and is likely crazy in some meaningful way? Especially considering that if Trump went away there would be a line of traditional conservative Republicans ready to take his place? Ladoga's posts tell us: it's because he (and they) "hate liberals!" (whatever their skewed and purported sense of that term might mean to them) and the enemy of my enemy is my friend!

I've talked about shunning news sources (especially including Fox News, 'right wing' aggregators and blogs, and talk radio) that don't really care about news and only care about inflaming and misinforming as an actual central component of their mission. Sadly, that notion doesn't get universal support (and far from it). Still, that would be my hopeful shared common value #1 (in no particular order): we want a media that carries out the traditional purpose of journalism (even if it's flawed).

Hopeful shared common value #2: We want officeholders who care more about effective governance than about their personal wealth and office.

Hopeful shared common value #3: We want officeholders who care more about norms of effective governance than about their TEAM's immediate gain.

Hopeful shared common value #4: We want officeholders who are competent, informed, experienced and educated.

Hopeful shared common value #5: We care about pragmatic results more than pure ideology or untested theoretical beliefs that are unsupported by evidence.

Hopeful shared common value #6: We can't win all the time; when we can't win, we shouldn't instead just be content to make the opposition lose.

Hopeful shared common value #7: As one of the richest and most free countries on the planet, we should aim to have more indicators of societal greatness: less poverty, great and affordable health care, greater business opportunities, solid infrastructure, more wealth, stronger economy, stronger middle class, a clear commitment to the arts, and a vibrant sense of 'American spirit' that reflects the country's status as world leader.


We don't have to agree on everything or anything, but we need to function and to do so within the norms of governance. This seems hokey upon typing, but it's sensible to me and wholly at odds with what we have or seemingly aspire to. It's deeply unfortunate.

There are a significant amount of people who care solely about the fact that a guy with an R beside his name won the election. It's all about winning and losing. Party before country. And yes, it's unbelievably twisted and stupid.

Excellent post, by the way.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Why would any conservative who cares about America or about most of the things the Republican party has historically espoused over the years support a guy who's been a Democrat his whole life, who has savaged Republican leaders for his own personal gain, who's taken political positions as candidate that run counter to Republican policy, is an imbecile, is incompetent, doesn't care about America, is corrupt, is dangerous, and is likely crazy in some meaningful way? Especially considering that if Trump went away there would be a line of traditional conservative Republicans ready to take his place?

I'll attempt an answer. The value I place on a president's ideology is subordinated to other executive, relationship and administrative skills. Frankly, a president who can keep the trains running on time is more important than what the President thinks about abortion. I place much more importance on the ideology of congress, and in particular the House, where their work ought to be a a product of negotiating among people of varying ideologies. The rise of obstructionism, instead of cooperation and negotiating in congress, does far greater damage to our policy-making apparatus than does any president with whom I might disagree. Next in problem-causing line is a POTUS who thinks his or her views ought to trump congress and that congress is there to follow the executive lead on policy. Actually it should be the opposite.

Take health care. The house bill is good and bad in terms of your ideological view. Sources tell us that Trump was very involved with negotiating the final house product. He was focused on accomplishing something instead of focusing on a political point of view.

Really can't add to your list of values. But I would note that the assault on those values has been going on for decades. It is getting worse though.

 

[Ladoga]

That seems to be the strongest driving force behind the strongest Republican followers and some of the leaders.

Ladoga's bizarre posting is an example of that. Why would any conservative who cares about America or about most of the things the Republican party has historically espoused over the years support a guy who's been a Democrat his whole life, who has savaged Republican leaders for his own personal gain, who's taken political positions as candidate that run counter to Republican policy, is an imbecile, is incompetent, doesn't care about America, is corrupt, is dangerous, and is likely crazy in some meaningful way? Especially considering that if Trump went away there would be a line of traditional conservative Republicans ready to take his place? Ladoga's posts tell us: it's because he (and they) "hate liberals!" (whatever their skewed and purported sense of that term might mean to them) and the enemy of my enemy is my friend!

I've talked about shunning news sources (especially including Fox News, 'right wing' aggregators and blogs, and talk radio) that don't really care about news and only care about inflaming and misinforming as an actual central component of their mission. Sadly, that notion doesn't get universal support (and far from it). Still, that would be my hopeful shared common value #1 (in no particular order): we want a media that carries out the traditional purpose of journalism (even if it's flawed).

Hopeful shared common value #2: We want officeholders who care more about effective governance than about their personal wealth and office.

Hopeful shared common value #3: We want officeholders who care more about norms of effective governance than about their TEAM's immediate gain.

Hopeful shared common value #4: We want officeholders who are competent, informed, experienced and educated.

Hopeful shared common value #5: We care about pragmatic results more than pure ideology or untested theoretical beliefs that are unsupported by evidence.

Hopeful shared common value #6: We can't win all the time; when we can't win, we shouldn't instead just be content to make the opposition lose.

Hopeful shared common value #7: As one of the richest and most free countries on the planet, we should aim to have more indicators of societal greatness: less poverty, great and affordable health care, greater business opportunities, solid infrastructure, more wealth, stronger economy, stronger middle class, a clear commitment to the arts, and a vibrant sense of 'American spirit' that reflects the country's status as world leader.


We don't have to agree on everything or anything, but we need to function and to do so within the norms of governance. This seems hokey upon typing, but it's sensible to me and wholly at odds with what we have or seemingly aspire to. It's deeply unfortunate.

Setting aside #1 and #7 as separate issues for discussion, I agree with everything in #2 through #6 except the word experience in #4. Sometimes the best thing is to elect someone who has no governmental experience of any kind. If not, we have a political self-perpetuating machine where only the insiders can play ;like we've already had for centuries.

Good post. I spose you know that I do not care what people here think of what I have to say. We aren't real people here.

 

[Thyrsis]

Setting aside #1 and #7 as separate issues for discussion, I agree with everything in #2 through #6 except the word experience in #4. Sometimes the best thing is to elect someone who has no governmental experience of any kind. If not, we have a political self-perpetuating machine where only the insiders can play ;like we've already had for centuries.

Good call, but I didn't say "governmental" experience. I think that's an important consideration, but not the only one.

I spose you know that I do not care what people here think of what I have to say. We aren't real people here.

I wish you did. I'm sure you do good work in your professional life, but much of your posting here and your comment above that "we aren't real people" indicates a lack of respect for other people (not just based on their political beliefs) and a disregard for whatever community of ideas exists here. This doesn't have to be a playground and it isn't so just because you unilaterally decided as much.

 

[Lucy01]

3/4 of the posters here aren't real!

 

[UncleMark]

That seems to be the strongest driving force behind the strongest Republican followers and some of the leaders.

Ladoga's bizarre posting is an example of that. Why would any conservative who cares about America or about most of the things the Republican party has historically espoused over the years support a guy who's been a Democrat his whole life, who has savaged Republican leaders for his own personal gain, who's taken political positions as candidate that run counter to Republican policy, is an imbecile, is incompetent, doesn't care about America, is corrupt, is dangerous, and is likely crazy in some meaningful way? Especially considering that if Trump went away there would be a line of traditional conservative Republicans ready to take his place? Ladoga's posts tell us: it's because he (and they) "hate liberals!" (whatever their skewed and purported sense of that term might mean to them) and the enemy of my enemy is my friend!

I've talked about shunning news sources (especially including Fox News, 'right wing' aggregators and blogs, and talk radio) that don't really care about news and only care about inflaming and misinforming as an actual central component of their mission. Sadly, that notion doesn't get universal support (and far from it). Still, that would be my hopeful shared common value #1 (in no particular order): we want a media that carries out the traditional purpose of journalism (even if it's flawed).

Hopeful shared common value #2: We want officeholders who care more about effective governance than about their personal wealth and office.

Hopeful shared common value #3: We want officeholders who care more about norms of effective governance than about their TEAM's immediate gain.

Hopeful shared common value #4: We want officeholders who are competent, informed, experienced and educated.

Hopeful shared common value #5: We care about pragmatic results more than pure ideology or untested theoretical beliefs that are unsupported by evidence.

Hopeful shared common value #6: We can't win all the time; when we can't win, we shouldn't instead just be content to make the opposition lose.

Hopeful shared common value #7: As one of the richest and most free countries on the planet, we should aim to have more indicators of societal greatness: less poverty, great and affordable health care, greater business opportunities, solid infrastructure, more wealth, stronger economy, stronger middle class, a clear commitment to the arts, and a vibrant sense of 'American spirit' that reflects the country's status as world leader.


We don't have to agree on everything or anything, but we need to function and to do so within the norms of governance. This seems hokey upon typing, but it's sensible to me and wholly at odds with what we have or seemingly aspire to. It's deeply unfortunate.

https://www.arcamax.com/thefunnies/pearlsbeforeswine/s-1956212

 

[hgdownunder]

3/4 of the posters here aren't real!

No body exists but myself.

 

[Univee2]

3/4 of the posters here aren't real!

Does that 3/4ths end at the knees or the neck?

With progressives I think we know the answer ....

 

[Digressions]

The rise of obstructionism, instead of cooperation and negotiating in congress, does far greater damage to our policy-making apparatus than does any president with whom I might disagree. Next in problem-causing line is a POTUS who thinks his or her views ought to trump congress and that congress is there to follow the executive lead on policy. Actually it should be the opposite.

Our congressmen are paid to not compromise. If they were to compromise, they would be primaried and beaten. And they will have gotten beat by a politician, who beat them, with the money they could have pocketed, if they just wouldn't have compromised. Therefore, congress is hamstrung and the vacuum is being filled by the executive. It's only going to get worse.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

That seems to be the strongest driving force behind the strongest Republican followers and some of the leaders.

Ladoga's bizarre posting is an example of that. Why would any conservative who cares about America or about most of the things the Republican party has historically espoused over the years support a guy who's been a Democrat his whole life, who has savaged Republican leaders for his own personal gain, who's taken political positions as candidate that run counter to Republican policy, is an imbecile, is incompetent, doesn't care about America, is corrupt, is dangerous, and is likely crazy in some meaningful way? Especially considering that if Trump went away there would be a line of traditional conservative Republicans ready to take his place? Ladoga's posts tell us: it's because he (and they) "hate liberals!" (whatever their skewed and purported sense of that term might mean to them) and the enemy of my enemy is my friend!

I've talked about shunning news sources (especially including Fox News, 'right wing' aggregators and blogs, and talk radio) that don't really care about news and only care about inflaming and misinforming as an actual central component of their mission. Sadly, that notion doesn't get universal support (and far from it). Still, that would be my hopeful shared common value #1 (in no particular order): we want a media that carries out the traditional purpose of journalism (even if it's flawed).

Hopeful shared common value #2: We want officeholders who care more about effective governance than about their personal wealth and office.

Hopeful shared common value #3: We want officeholders who care more about norms of effective governance than about their TEAM's immediate gain.

Hopeful shared common value #4: We want officeholders who are competent, informed, experienced and educated.

Hopeful shared common value #5: We care about pragmatic results more than pure ideology or untested theoretical beliefs that are unsupported by evidence.

Hopeful shared common value #6: We can't win all the time; when we can't win, we shouldn't instead just be content to make the opposition lose.

Hopeful shared common value #7: As one of the richest and most free countries on the planet, we should aim to have more indicators of societal greatness: less poverty, great and affordable health care, greater business opportunities, solid infrastructure, more wealth, stronger economy, stronger middle class, a clear commitment to the arts, and a vibrant sense of 'American spirit' that reflects the country's status as world leader.


We don't have to agree on everything or anything, but we need to function and to do so within the norms of governance. This seems hokey upon typing, but it's sensible to me and wholly at odds with what we have or seemingly aspire to. It's deeply unfortunate.

I agree with most of that.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

There are a significant amount of people who care solely about the fact that a guy with a D beside his name won the election. It's all about winning and losing. Party before country. And yes, it's unbelievably twisted and stupid.

My change to your post is just as true - if a Democrat had won, of course. This is a fact for somewhere between 20 and 30 percent on each side. Some of those people post here. However I think there is 50 percent, give or take, that could be persuaded one way or the other. Problem is that politicians play to the extremes and those in the middle have to pick their poison.

 

[Digressions]

My change to your post is just as true - if a Democrat had won, of course. This is a fact for somewhere between 20 and 30 percent on each side. Some of those people post here. However I think there is 50 percent, give or take, that could be persuaded one way or the other. Problem is that politicians play to the extremes and those in the middle have to pick their poison.

If I'm pro second ammendment, I can give money to the NRA. If I'm pro gun control, I can give money to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence*. If I believe in the second ammendment, but also want stronger background checks, and also believe the mentally ill shouldn't be allowed to purchase firearms, who do I make the check out to? That's why politicians play to the extremes. There's no money in the middle. Only voters forced to pick their poison.

*I had to Google anti-gun lobby to find that one.

 

[sglowrider]

The longer a man spent in the gym the less they believed in the redistribution of wealth

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...lass-research-brunel-university-a7752741.html