[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Maru

People keep bringing up the candidates the status quo, but the truth is, the vast majority of Americans don't appear to agree on what the status quo actually is. That's why you hear a lot of talk about left/right wing media twisting and manipulating perception... the truth is, neither represents the status quo, both parties have become increasingly irrelevant, which is why they HAVE to rely on divisive political rhetoric to make the case for their relevance. Once they're voted back in, it's back to same ol' same ol'.

There is no single majority perception anymore.. America has become very mixed and many people are in denial of this fact... they keep trying to force their vision of what the US actually is, but it won't stick in people's mind because 1) It's not seated in fact and 2) Both visions are too restrictive to truly represent an increasingly mixed population and an all inclusive minority population.

I would argue there are some things Clinton specifically is not going along with the status quo on, and then there are some things that Trump is more inline with good ol' boy politics on. On other issues, it's flipped around. However, Trump is not anti-status quo candidate when looking at the entire picture... the brand he is trying to sale to the American public may disagree, but looking at the issues and positions, this does not appear to be the case.

Anyway, you have to look at the issues. Not whether their personality or not clicks with you. As a female US voter, Trump will never get my vote because not only is his business record highly suspect (something he could easily clear up by releasing tax returns), but his actual understanding of how foreign politics and economies actually work isn't even college level.

The last major issue I have is obviously his sexist commentary and his treating alleged sexual harassment victims as "not pretty enough" to be sexually harassed on the campaign trail... it just goes backwards in time with regards to everything that has been accomplished in the US.

Not to mention, his brand and way of carrying himself as a leading image of the US would be a massive catastrophe for US foreign policy.

Brilliant post Maru

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Maru

People keep bringing up the candidates the status quo, but the truth is, the vast majority of Americans don't appear to agree on what the status quo actually is. That's why you hear a lot of talk about left/right wing media twisting and manipulating perception... the truth is, neither represents the status quo, both parties have become increasingly irrelevant, which is why they HAVE to rely on divisive political rhetoric to make the case for their relevance. Once they're voted back in, it's back to same ol' same ol'.

There is no single majority perception anymore.. America has become very mixed and many people are in denial of this fact... they keep trying to force their vision of what the US actually is, but it won't stick in people's mind because 1) It's not seated in fact and 2) Both visions are too restrictive to truly represent an increasingly mixed population and an all inclusive minority population.

I would argue there are some things Clinton specifically is not going along with the status quo on, and then there are some things that Trump is more inline with good ol' boy politics on. On other issues, it's flipped around. However, Trump is not anti-status quo candidate when looking at the entire picture... the brand he is trying to sale to the American public may disagree, but looking at the issues and positions, this does not appear to be the case.

Anyway, you have to look at the issues. Not whether their personality or not clicks with you. As a female US voter, Trump will never get my vote because not only is his business record highly suspect (something he could easily clear up by releasing tax returns), but his actual understanding of how foreign politics and economies actually work isn't even college level.

The last major issue I have is obviously his sexist commentary and his treating alleged sexual harassment victims as "not pretty enough" to be sexually harassed on the campaign trail... it just goes backwards in time with regards to everything that has been accomplished in the US.

Not to mention, his brand and way of carrying himself as a leading image of the US would be a massive catastrophe for US foreign policy.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

He literally only got as far as he did because of his comments on immigrants and muslims. If he never made those statements then he wouldn't have made the ticket.

People only like Trump for three reasons, he appeals to their bigoted opinions, or they are generally ignorant and believe that he should be president because he's 'different and not a politician' or, like many users on this site, they support him because they think it's funny to do so.

The rest of your post is pure exaggeration and silliness. I don't know what your problem is lately Kirk but sort it out.

Kirk makes a good point. I think you may be too entrenched in your views to see the forest for the trees. Most of your posts have been heavily influenced by emotion and tinged with anger/outrage. Clearly others in this section have the same issue as well, but you are intelligent and do have a point a lot of times. However, It’s just impossible to argue with anyone when it comes to how they feel.

Feelings are specifically personal to you and your experiences as a person. I notice when people argue with your viewpoints, you take it as them deconstructing you as a person than hearing your views. You hold your views and so close to your heart, it makes it very difficult to separate you from them. You’ve shown a thin skin at times when people try to bring up the flaws in your argument and it's a shame. Not just kirk, but I and others have casually or not so casually have tried to have conversations with you, but you often take it very personally. Usually that results in you going the moral/self-righteous route, rather than taking in what others have said to you as something valid and worth listening to and recognizing. Maybe you don’t value their viewpoint, but it can come off as mean-spirited to use up their time with arguments if you don’t actually care to have one from any other POV. What you feel doesn't have to change…

Anyway… back on the point which kirk made, not everything in life is so black and white. If I had a choice to vote for a candidate that didn't engender any of the qualities I find abhorrent in a human being, I would no ****ing question vote them in and spread the word. However, the people we often have a choice of vetting are often not even remotely close to what we envision as being best for America. Maybe their smoke and mirrors campaign makes you feel that way... but again, it's feeling... when they're voted in, the real facts show that to not be the case. They have their own interests and they put those issues first.

So instead, we have to vote for those who are most likely to represent our interests and put them first.

Speaking on Trump's positions, I don't fully understand the phenomenon tbqh. Even I didn't take him seriously for a long time because I thought it was a reality TV villain posing as an actual political candidate... I didn't even think he'd win the primary.

Now here we are, he's a menace, but then this campaign has become gone downhill on so many levels, that not only is Trump's face covered in mud, but the media, Hillary and various other groups... Trump has fully and skillfully trolled the entire US political system. That said, I see some of Hillary's responses and manipulation of the viewpoints that have so many voters engaged (from Trump's demographics), that I get pissed off... every single one of those mother ****ers, Trump, Hillary, media, everyone... is trying to paint with broad brushstrokes and really have no ****ing clue the ire they've tapped into.

I don't think most people know what a status quo even looks like in the US. Every election cycle feels like a cognitive dissonance for me. I know other voters who feel the same. We are just so disenchanted with our govt... this has been going on for so long too. We had a gridlocked Congress when Obama when was voted in, as you recall... Republicans blocked Democrats... Democrats block Republicans.... same song and dance.

Some people are just fed up they are more than willing to vote the nuclear option. I guess because the political dogma here is so banal and low-level that Trump's sexism and overt disdain of certain demographics in this country really pale in comparison... most political stories now are all about scandals, self-victimization, throwing people under the bus, sex scandals with Congressional pages, booty on the side... you name it... we have become so desensitized. I think some people will hold onto even the mildest hope that Donald Trump can shake up this broken country (though I disagree and agree with you, he's just trash)... but that just isn't the way everyone feels here at home. If we could Build-A-Bear a politician straight into office, we would do it in a heartbeat over the likes of Hillary or Trump...

Look at the primary voting %’s at some point if you ever have a chance. I think it was NYT’s that mentioned that only 9% of the total population voted Donald Trump/Clinton onto the ticket. 9%. It’s hilarious to me that people are ranting and raging on the telly about how they can’t believe once again the status quo left them with such a **** ticket when almost no one votes in primaries…

To put it in perspective, in my county, Harris (which is the largest pop in TX) encompasses most of Houston and surrounding areas, Hillary Clinton received 156,729 votes… Trump received 147,721 votes… Harris County’s population is 4.3 million… their combined vote, 304450… That’s 14% of the total pop which is quite dismal. I vote in primaries and thankfully Cruz won my state.

Perhaps if Trump wins and royally screws everybody over, people will wake up and we will se a surge in primary participate. However, so many minorities and especially minority female voters opt out of getting involved entirely for “personal reasons”. Which is quite sad because these groups are being already under-represented.

So that said, it’s very hard to paint with such broad brushstrokes when considering the polls. We have such a poor showing at primaries and even some generals have this issue. I know some people that only vote every 8 years and will vote straight ticket the rest of the ballot. They stay home with the assumption during the midterms and always assume that the incumbent will be re-elected… I really don’t understand that kind of voter.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

evidence?

Tbqf, both presidencies could be potentially damaging to our national security. They both will likely divide the nation further and this could weaken our standing abroad (and further empower terrorist ideological forces such as ISIS).

Trump is all impulse, no self-control which will have the worst result. What he has done to the atmosphere of this country in the past 1 1/2yr can't remotely compare to what he could do in 4yr as president. Whether you agree with his views or not, he has no limits when it comes to protecting his fragile ego. I wouldn't put it past him to start ghetto 3AM Twitter wars with other nations and their "departments"... ISIS and other groups that don't fall in line with his rhetoric will use this to their advantage to pull apart at the country. We've already seen a surge in countries/interest groups hiring trolls on the internet to write blogs/make commentary on the internet to increase the public's resentment towards our own government.

I figure it will happen one of two ways...

Either Trump will say or do something abroad that will get us in a world of trouble.

Or the disease will start from within, he will damage the public's trust and faith in democracy... which makes it ripe for our foreign enemies and other malicious groups to come in, fan this controversy and further divide the nation and cause chaos.

Granted, Hillary could do the same as well if she were to make some terrible decisions and then act in secrecy. She will lose the public trust and she already is disliked by much of the population. However, Hillary is at least self-aware enough to know when to shut her mouth and to handle these divisions in a sensitive manner. Sensitivity and self-awareness doesn't even seem to be in Donald Trump's vocabulary.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Maru

Kirk makes a good point. I think you may be too entrenched in your views to see the forest for the trees. Most of your posts have been heavily influenced by emotion and tinged with anger/outrage. Clearly others in this section have the same issue as well, but you are intelligent and do have a point a lot of times. However, It’s just impossible to argue with anyone when it comes to how they feel.

Feelings are specifically personal to you and your experiences as a person. I notice when people argue with your viewpoints, you take it as them deconstructing you as a person than hearing your views. You hold your views and so close to your heart, it makes it very difficult to separate you from them. You’ve shown a thin skin at times when people try to bring up the flaws in your argument and it's a shame. Not just kirk, but I and others have casually or not so casually have tried to have conversations with you, but you often take it very personally. Usually that results in you going the moral/self-righteous route, rather than taking in what others have said to you as something valid and worth listening to and recognizing. Maybe you don’t value their viewpoint, but it can come off as mean-spirited to use up their time with arguments if you don’t actually care to have one from any other POV. What you feel doesn't have to change…

Anyway… back on the point which kirk made, not everything in life is so black and white. If I had a choice to vote for a candidate that didn't engender any of the qualities I find abhorrent in a human being, I would no ****ing question vote them in and spread the word. However, the people we often have a choice of vetting are often not even remotely close to what we envision as being best for America. Maybe their smoke and mirrors campaign makes you feel that way... but again, it's feeling... when they're voted in, the real facts show that to not be the case. They have their own interests and they put those issues first.

So instead, we have to vote for those who are most likely to represent our interests and put them first.

Speaking on Trump's positions, I don't fully understand the phenomenon tbqh. Even I didn't take him seriously for a long time because I thought it was a reality TV villain posing as an actual political candidate... I didn't even think he'd win the primary.

Now here we are, he's a menace, but then this campaign has become gone downhill on so many levels, that not only is Trump's face covered in mud, but the media, Hillary and various other groups... Trump has fully and skillfully trolled the entire US political system. That said, I see some of Hillary's responses and manipulation of the viewpoints that have so many voters engaged (from Trump's demographics), that I get pissed off... every single one of those mother ****ers, Trump, Hillary, media, everyone... is trying to paint with broad brushstrokes and really have no ****ing clear the ire they've tapped into.

I don't think most people know what a status quo even looks like in the US. Every election cycle feels like a cognitive dissonance for me. I know other voters who feel the same. We are just so disenchanted with our govt... this has been going on for so long too. We had a gridlocked Congress when Obama when was voted in, as you recall... Republicans blocked Democrats... Democrats block Republicans.... same song and dance.

Some people are just fed up they are more than willing to vote the nuclear option. I guess because the political dogma here is so banal and low-level that Trump's sexism and overt disdain of certain demographics in this country really pale in comparison... most political stories now are all about scandals, self-victimization, throwing people under the bus, sex scandals with Congressional pages, booty on the side... you name it... we have become so desensitized. I think some people will hold onto even the mildest hope that Donald Trump can shake up this broken country (though I disagree and agree with you, he's just trash)... but that just isn't the way everyone feels here at home. If we could Build-A-Bear a politician straight into office, we would do it in a heartbeat over the likes of Hillary or Trump...

Look at the primary voting %’s at some point if you ever have a chance. I think it was NYT’s that mentioned that only 9% of the total population voted Donald Trump/Clinton onto the ticket. 9%. It’s hilarious to me that people are ranting and raging on the telly about how they can’t believe once again the status quo left them with such a **** ticket when almost no one votes in primaries…

To put it in perspective, in my county, Harris (which is the largest pop in TX) encompasses most of Houston and surrounding areas, Hillary Clinton received 156,729 votes… Trump received 147,721 votes… Harris County’s population is 4.3 million… their combined vote, 304450… That’s 14% of the total pop which is a quite dismal. I vote in primaries and thankfully Cruz won my state.

Perhaps if Trump wins and royally screws everybody over, people will wake up and we will se a surge in primary participate. However, so many minorities and especially minority female voters opt out of getting involved entirely for “personal reasons”. Which is quite sad because these groups are being already under-represented.

So that said, it’s very hard to paint with such broad brushstrokes when considering the polls. We have such a poor showing at primaries and even some generals have this issue. I know some people that only vote every 8 years and will vote straight ticket the rest of the ballot. They stay home with the assumption during the midterms and always assume that the incumbent will be re-elected… I really don’t understand that kind of voter.

You are a very smart, wise, and observant lady Maru. You put most of that in the first couple of paras a lot more kindly and sensitively than I would have! I hope it's received well. I fear not.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by jaxie

You are a very smart, wise, and observant lady Maru. You put most of that in the first couple of paras a lot more kindly and sensitively than I would have! I hope it's received well. I fear not.

Hope for the best, expect the worst. My husband's motto at work

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Maru

Hope for the best, expect the worst. My husband's motto at work

I feel the US needs a strong leader at the moment. Particularly with how aggressively Putin seems to be behaving in the last few years. I don't think either of the candidates is a potentially strong leader, and I don't think Obama has been either.

In an ideal world who would you like to see as President and why, it doesn't have to be a current candidate, just someone you think would be a good leader?

[Maru]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I feel the US needs a strong leader at the moment. Particularly with how aggressively Putin seems to be behaving in the last few years. I don't think either of the candidates is a potentially strong leader, and I don't think Obama has been either.

In an ideal world who would you like to see as President and why, it doesn't have to be a current candidate, just someone you think would be a good leader?

Oh wow, that's such a difficult question to answer. Anyone who takes the job will have their hands full just dealing with whatever mess has been left behind by the previous administration. I think I remember reading somewhere Obama had taken up smoking again after having quit

If I could Build-A-Bear a president, it would be someone who is a great parent, but who is also very practical, fair-minded, the opposite of an adversarial figure who is very receptive to the voting public and doesn't solely engage only when there is a David and Goliath story going around the media. Despite the disenchantment, the upside is that the population is actively engaged in the future of this country. This is a great thing and that energy can be tapped and worked with in a very positive matter if by the right hands... it's been a while since we've had a president who speaks to the public.

That said, Obama's 2004 DNC speech (the one that likely led to him being elected) is one of my favorite of all time.

Youtube video

The pundits, the pundits like to slice and dice our country into red states and blue States: red states for Republicans, blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We worship an awesome God in the blue states, and we don't like federal agents poking around our libraries in the red states.

There’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America.

[kirklancaster]

I cannot quote ALL your posts Maru but there is no need - Suffice it for me to say, that they are ALL brilliantly written, so well thought out, and irresistibly readable, and the points which you make in them are so difficult to rebut.

I personally think, that you are a very welcome addition to this forum - the intellectual quality of which, has been enriched by your joining.

Thank you.

[Maru]

Issues in Hillary Clinton’s Past Leave Her Muted in Furor Over Donald Trump (NYT)

In the past week, as a swirl of sexual assault accusations against Donald J. Trump has prompted a loud national discussion about male power and women’s rights, the first woman to be a major party’s presidential nominee was barely heard from.

Though Hillary Clinton has stood at the center of feminist debates for more than two decades, she has at times been an imperfect messenger for the cause. That has never been more apparent than now, as her old missteps and her husband’s history have effectively paralyzed her during a moment of widespread outrage.

The most impassioned speeches on the topic have come not from her, but from the first lady, Michelle Obama, who said Mr. Trump’s words had “shaken me to my core,” and from President Obama and others. When Mrs. Clinton herself spoke, she quickly changed the subject to other groups of people Mr. Trump had insulted, and she tried to lighten the mood with a joke about watching cat videos.

“It makes you want to turn off the news. It makes you want to unplug the internet or just look at cat GIFs,” Mrs. Clinton told donors in San Francisco on Thursday, making her first remarks on Mr. Trump’s treatment of women since several came forward to accuse him.

“I’ve watched a lot of cats do a lot of weird and interesting things,” she said, drawing a few laughs. “But we have a job to do. And it’ll be good for people and for cats.”

The virtual silence from Mrs. Clinton speaks volumes about the complicated place she has occupied as a 1960s Wellesley feminist who stayed as a devoted wife to her husband through infidelities and humiliation.

Forcefully denouncing sexual assault would most certainly provoke ugly attacks on Bill Clinton and Mrs. Clinton’s role in countering the women who accused him of sexual misconduct. That painful past haunted Mrs. Clinton last Sunday when Mr. Trump invited some of her husband’s accusers to the second presidential debate.

In the days since, Mrs. Clinton has had to once again navigate the messy crosscurrents of politics, symbolism and her ambition to shatter “that highest, hardest glass ceiling” of being elected the first female president.

Now, when the collective voice of American women and victims of sexual assault seems to be letting out a cathartic scream, Mrs. Clinton has deferred to another first lady to speak for her. At the San Francisco fund-raiser on Thursday, she pointed to Mrs. Obama’s speech earlier that afternoon when the first lady placed her hand on her heart and spoke out for the many who were outraged.

Speaking to college students in New Hampshire, Mrs. Obama called Mr. Trump’s lewd remarks about how he had forced himself on women “disgraceful” and “intolerable.”

“I can’t believe I’m saying that a candidate for president of the United States has bragged about sexually assaulting women,” Mrs. Obama said as a crowd of young women watched with silent and somber expressions. “I can’t stop thinking about this — it has shaken me to my core.”

Mrs. Clinton has every political reason to avoid wading into the discussion of sexual assault that has riled a nation and thrown her Republican rival’s candidacy into chaos. Not known as a naturally emotive public speaker, Mrs. Clinton risks stumbling if she embraces the issue at a time when polls show that she is in her strongest position yet to defeat Mr. Trump on Nov. 8. She has played it safe, all but disappearing from the campaign trail until the next debate in Las Vegas on Wednesday.

But then again, two decades ago, it was Mrs. Clinton, who, as a 47-year-old first lady in a powder pink suit, defied her husband’s West Wing advisers and captured the attention of women worldwide by declaring, “Human rights are women’s rights, and women’s rights are human rights once and for all.”

Last summer, Mrs. Clinton began her campaign by declaring that she wanted to create “an America where a father can tell his daughter: ‘Yes, you can be anything you want to be. Even president of the United States.’”

Since then, allegations of sexual harassment have led to the ouster of Roger Ailes as chairman of Fox News; college campuses have been shaken by the six-month jail sentence given to Brock Turner, a former Stanford University student found guilty of sexual assault; and women continue to come forward with allegations against Mr. Trump.

At the same time, Mrs. Clinton, so close to becoming the first woman to win the White House amid national outrage over reports of her rival’s male lechery, has all but abandoned gender as an issue.

On Thursday, Mrs. Clinton appeared to get choked up on the set of “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” when, during a taping, Ms. DeGeneres played a portion of Mrs. Obama’s speech.

But Mrs. Clinton quickly composed herself and, in a remarkable post-gender punt, pivoted to a laundry list of other constituencies whom she said Mr. Trump had offended.

“It’s not just what Trump has said about women, as terrible as that has been,” Mrs. Clinton told Ms. DeGeneres. It’s “what he has said about immigrants and African-Americans and Latinos and people with disabilities and P.O.W.s and our military and Muslims and everybody.”

On Friday, without mentioning the accusations against Mr. Trump, Mrs. Clinton told volunteers in Seattle: “This election is incredibly painful. I take absolutely no satisfaction in what is happening on the other side with my opponent.”

Asked if Mrs. Clinton would be speaking more directly about the issue, Jennifer Palmieri, the campaign’s communications director, noted that Mrs. Clinton had confronted Mr. Trump at the last debate about the recently released 2005 video in which he bragged about groping women. “You should expect that she’ll continue to do that,” Ms. Palmieri said.

Mrs. Clinton has battle wounds from wading into gender in the past. In 1992, she seemed an affront to stay-at-home mothers when she defended her legal career, saying, “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies.” As a working mother in the White House, Mrs. Clinton redefined the role of first lady when she tried, and subsequently failed, to overhaul health care, but she also played the role of a traditional wife when she stayed with Mr. Clinton despite his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

In hacked emails released by WikiLeaks this week, Mrs. Clinton was shown in an interview transcript pondering, at length, the many complexities of running to be the first female president.

“When I ran the last time, the research was pretty clear that there was a resistance to a woman president, not just among Republicans and independents, but among Democrats,” she said in one of the thousands of emails obtained by hackers who illegally breached a top aide’s account. “They didn’t think a woman was qualified, could do the job, didn’t see a woman as commander in chief,” Mrs. Clinton continued.

So, in 2008, she played up her fortitude and tried essentially to run as if she were a man. Eight years later, Mrs. Clinton talks regularly about being a mother and a grandmother, and she doesn’t shy away from embracing her potential to make history. She has also promised that as president she would advance policies that would help women, including doubling the child care tax credit, increasing the minimum wage and pushing for 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave.

And yet Mrs. Clinton has found in her second presidential campaign that young women aren’t particularly moved by her promise to make history. Many of them voted instead for Mrs. Clinton’s primary opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Thinking about her current campaign, Mrs. Clinton said in the transcript, “You know, I mean, I’m damned if I do, I’m damned if I don’t.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/us...ald-trump.html