[kenberg]

Zelandakh, on 2017-August-10, 15:06, said:

Left of which centre? The left-right divide in America is absolutely non-standard in relation to the rest of the world. The Democrats have much in common with right-wing parties in many other states. It would genuinely shock me if 73% of Americans were left of centre in terms of international standards.

I was planning to just let this pass, but since you responded I will as well. I find the statement bizarre. To have a precise figure such as 73% implies that there is a very well-defined center position. Without even getting onto the differences between an American centrist and a European centrist, I could not begin to pin this down. In some post someone, perhaps you I don't recall, suggested that my views are to the left of the American center and to the right of the European center. Quite possibly this is so, at any rate it has some meaning and I can imagine evidence that would indicate whether it is so or is not so. But to simply say that 73% of Americans are left of center shouts for the response "What center?". To put it another way, if we are only speaking of the American center then I would think it is almost tautological to say that some glob, maybe 30% of Americans are in the American center, about 35% of Americans are to the left of the American center, and about 35 % of Americans are to the right of the American center. Replace "American" by "French" throughout and I would expect the same. to be true. It is tough to understand what even could be meant by saying that 73% of Americans are to the left of the American center. It sounds impossible on the face of it. And if we go beyond the American shores to define "center", then how far beyond? The Samoan Islands?

I thought maybe the statement was tongue in cheek, intended to ridicule statistical assertions. Statistical assertions are often deserving of ridicule. We look forward to the time when everyone's standard of living will be above the national average.

[mike777]

Ken and Zel, all good points. I wondered myself about the definitions of left and right. In any case if the methodology is poor fair enough, I don't know. I just found his results interesting and a surprise. If you found the study valid or not up to par, fair enough.

[jjbrr]

RedSpawn, on 2017-August-11, 03:58, said:

If Mueller already had an open and shut case on Trump's money laundering with the Russians why would he need to sit on this information?

Isn't it an egregious national security concern for a sitting President to have laundered money with the Russians and then sit in the Office of the President and conduct foreign policy affairs as an agent of such collusion?

If Mueller had "clear and compelling evidence" of such money laundering then he should act on it to preserve the Union and the integrity of the Office of the President. He should remove the attendant national security threat.

hrothgar, is "***** for brains" still the preferred title for owners of these kinds of posts? it's been a few years since I've followed bbf etiquette closely enough.

[Winstonm]

jjbrr, on 2017-August-11, 08:59, said:

hrothgar, is "***** for brains" still the preferred title for owners of these kinds of posts? it's been a few years since I've followed bbf etiquette closely enough.

I think now it is simply Hannity-for-brains.

[RedSpawn]

y66, on 2015-September-22, 14:31, said:

Why do poor people vote Republican?

Of those who do vote Republican, race, religious beliefs and ignorance are apparently bigger factors than economic self interest. For example, 70 percent of white non-Hispanic evangelicals self identify as Republicans or leaning Republican vs 19 percent Democrat and the rest do not lean either way. In a Public Mind poll earlier this year, 51 percent of Republicans said they believe it to be “definitely true” or “probably true” that American forces found an active weapons of mass destruction program in Iraq vs 32 percent of Democrats.

Sources: Working class voters: why America's poor are willing to vote Republican and Pew Research Center.

kenberg, on 2015-September-22, 15:35, said:

The first thing that struck me was surprise that 41% of those who earned less than $10,000 voted. I would have expected a lower percentage. I am so surprised by that figure I am at least a little skeptical of it.
At the least, I would like to see a breakdown of the figures. There are various reasons that people are making less than $10,000. Over the years I have known people who are in tough situations. They usually don't vote.

On to other figures. In the same Guardian article we find this under $50,000 group was more what I was thinking of when i responded to Gerber. Or something like that. And while I am assuming that this is family income I might be wrong.

Quote

The question of why poor people vote Republican is not simply an issue of income but primarily race and partly region and gender. Poor people may be more likely to vote Democrat; poor white people are not. In 2008 McCain won a slim majority (51%) of white Americans who earn less than $50,000 (this is just below the national median income which is not poor but the only figure available from exit polls that breaks down votes down by race and income), while Obama won a whopping majority of non-whites in the same category (86%). Asked in May which candidate would do more to advance their family's economic interests middle-class white voters who say they are struggling to maintain their financial positions gave Romney a 26 point lead over Obama.

So we have about half the whites in the under $50,000 class voting R. The question is why. Or at least that could be the question. For 2012, apparently many "middle-class white voters who say they are struggling to maintain their financial positions" (which is really the group I was thinking of, the ones under 10K would not be lower middle class or any middle class) think that Romney would have been better for their economic interests [Wrong number deleted] Were they wrong? Perhaps. Perhaps not. In a way, it is more interesting if they are wrong.

In my fantasy family (FF as Rik says) I portrayed a family that quite possibly thinks that the Dems are interested in various definable groups, but not interested in them, maybe even considers them the enemy. If this some good sized number is thinking this way, and if they are wrong, it would be a very good idea for the Democratic Party to start thinking about how they can correct this mistaken view. Providing that the view is mistaken.


bottom line: If 86% [oops, wrong number] of "middle-class white voters who say they are struggling to maintain their financial positions" think an R would be better for their finances than a D, the Ds have, at the very least, a problem in communication. I don't think writing them off as morons is a good idea.

Why would a voter think that "R" would be a better choice for their finances than "D" since we have discussed that "D" and "R" are just two wolves and a sheep discussing what's for dinner?

[RedSpawn]

ldrews, on 2017-August-10, 12:40, said:

I believe it was Winston Churchill who said:"The greatest argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter."

https://jerclifton.c...ople-living-in/

This article was posted back in the Trump discussion group in September 2016, but it explains the Trump voter better allegedly.

Please note that I am NOT a Trump voter, but I will defend who the Electoral College has chosen by following the Constitutional guidelines for federal elections.

It comes as no surprise that the article finds that Democrats and Republicans experience two different realities of the same world. That subconscious mind is at work again.

[RedSpawn]

kenberg, on 2015-September-22, 05:18, said:

Let me take a stab at the first. It's important because the Dems haven't come up with an answer either.


Let me create a fantasy family, fairly common, and not worry too much about whether this is middle class or lower middle class.
Fantasy: Husband, wife, two kids in elementary school. The guy works full time, sometimes with overtime. The woman has a part time job and takes care of the kids after they get home frfom school. They are renting, but saving hoping maybe to buy a house. Vacations are infrequent, and consist of camping in a state park or driving to and staying with relatives. The kids sometimes act up, sometimes don't do their homework, but they haven't failed anything (yet). And, no doubt relevant, they are white.


OK, The Dems explain that we really have to help the poor single mother. We have to close the achievement gap and sometimes it sounds as if they really don't care whether this is done by blacks doing better or whites doing worse. (Not a complete fantasy, I was once at a talk about data showing boys had done worse than in the past on a standardized math test and the guy mentioned that this had narrowed then boy-girl achievement gap. I don't think he was joking.). Also we have to help the gay community and the trans-gender community. We have to help Latinos. The sub-text is that the white working class, married and bringing up their kids, are the enemy.

You might say this is a mis-perception on their part and perhaps it is, but mis-perceptions are usually based on at least some reality, stretched out a bit. The American liberal base has changed a lot since I was a child and there are a lot of votes out there for the party that figures out how to address the needs, hopes and frustrations of the fantasy family described above. Portraying them as selfish, or stupid, because they are enjoying some modest success that others have not achieved is not the way to their vote.


I vote Dem, or at least usually. There are a lot of reasons for this but economic self-interest is not paramount, I am not rich, not at all, but I do not foresee any financial problems. I don't need, or even want, a yacht. I probably would head off to Paris for a while if I had some spare cash but hiking in the Shenandoah is fine. So, at this time of life, I vote mostly on what seems best for the country. I think Dems are more aligned with my values, although there are times that I wonder. I expect the fantasy family above would wonder about this alignment, or lack of it, more often.

This is the best I can offer but I think that there is something to it.

Question for Ken and others: Does this apply to your analysis of Republicans who actually had the audacity to vote for Trump?

[RedSpawn]

mikeh, on 2015-September-22, 09:34, said:

I can see why your fantasy family would have a tough time accepting the Democratic agenda as you portray it (and I know you are not suggesting that it is as simplistic as that), but that is only part of the issue. That explains why many not-rich whites don't vote Democratic, but doesn't directly explain the biggest mystery (to me) of US politics: why they vote for a party that is run by and for the rich. The republican party, at least in terms of the elected representatives, almost uniformly supports measures that have, over the past 35 years, created the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of the world. In an era of ever-increasing productivity and profitability for US business, the middle class and below have seem real incomes stagnate or drop, while the upper class (and the US is absolutely a class-divided country now, just in a different way than the old European ones were), has become extraordinarily rich.

This has been accomplished by massive tax breaks for the wealthy, justified by what used to be called voodoo economics...the patently false notion of trickle down economics. This has likely been cemented in place by the Citizens United travesty, which took a very valuable legal fiction (that corporations are in some senses 'people') and twisted it into giving corporations rights that they have no business (pardon the pun) having...allowing even vaster quantities of cash to distort the democratic process. Join this with the utterly bogus idea that PACS and SUPER-PACS are unrelated to the candidates or parties they endorse, and you get the US system.

It is no surprise that republicans have an open agenda to destroy higher-education for almost all but the children of the wealthy. I know some people who went to high school and/or university in the US, and the tales they tell of the ignorance of most of their fellow students would be amusing if it weren't frightening. Under-educated children....children taught fantasies rather than history, children taught that religion is more reliable than science....turn into ignorant adults, easily indoctrinated by glitzy ads and the liars of Fox News.

I think that the gullibility of the typical white middle or lower class voter is exemplified by the joke that was circulating a few years ago. A trade unionist, a rich man, and a tea party member sat down for coffee. There was a plate of 12 cookies on the table. The wealthy person took 11 of them and then warned the tea party member to watch out: the union guy was going to try to steal the last cookie.

We are not perfect in Canada...not even close....and we have some of the same issues. I often think that one of the reasons we don't have quite the same egregious problems is that we are a far smaller country, and the pot which the rich wish to take for themselves is smaller...the stakes are smaller. I also think that our traditions are far more European than American, in terms of the notion that we are citizens in a society, rather than individuals seeing all others as the competition.

Excellent response, but now we are getting somewhere because the "R" promise is no better than the "D" promise.

Both are just fallacies propositioned by two parties who happen to be opposing sides of the same political coin.

When will the American voters' subconscious mind accept that "R" is no better than "D" and that "D" is no better than "R" and that $19 trillion in debt equals $1,000,000 lottery won 19,000,000 separate times. That is how much BOTH Parties have overspent over this nation's lifetime.

[mike777]

RedSpawn, on 2017-August-11, 14:13, said:

Excellent response, but now we are getting somewhere because the "R" promise is no better than the "D" promise.

Both are just fallacies propositioned by two parties who happen to be opposing sides of the same political coin.

When will the American voters' subconscious mind accept that "R" is no better than "D" and that "D" is no better than "R" and that $19 trillion in debt equals $1,000,000 lottery won 19,000,000 separate times. That is how much BOTH Parties have overspent over this nation's lifetime.

To be fair the voters take full responsibility, the parties don't act in a vacuum.
If anything the voters are saying spend more not less.

[hrothgar]

jjbrr, on 2017-August-11, 08:59, said:

hrothgar, is "***** for brains" still the preferred title for owners of these kinds of posts? it's been a few years since I've followed bbf etiquette closely enough.

Really couldn't tell you.

I've had Red Spawn on ignore since his second or third post.
Really don't have any kind of informed opinion.

[RedSpawn]

hrothgar, on 2017-August-11, 15:26, said:

Really couldn't tell you.

I've had Red Spawn on ignore since his second or third post.
Really don't have any kind of informed opinion.

This is one of the messages left on HROTHGAR's BBO FORUM profile page by an innocent bystander. I have censored the name, but hrothgar's actions to a STRANGER clearly reveals his character. I am so glad he has me on ignore.

Quote

You were rude to me in a Forum message in mid-November, stating I had no profile. At the time, I did not realize there was such a thing. I since have learned you are naturally rude and vulgar, so therefore I am not surprised by what you said. I had expected an apology, but only gentlemen do that. With sincerest wishes, I hope I never see your name again.

Well said!

[Zelandakh]

RedSpawn, on 2017-August-11, 15:50, said:

This is one of the messages left on HROTHGAR's BBO FORUM profile page by an innocent bystander. I have censored the name, but hrothgar's actions to a STRANGER clearly reveals his character. I am so glad he has me on ignore.

For reference, this is the thread that spawned the comment.

[kenberg]

RedSpawn, on 2017-August-11, 14:05, said:

Question for Ken and others: Does this apply to your analysis of Republicans who actually had the audacity to vote for Trump?

Yes, although I would replace "Republicans" by"voters". It is my understanding that many Trump voters usually don't vote at all, and let's think about them.

I had to look up what question I was responding to with my post. It was why lower middle class would vote R. Again I want to change the phrasing a little, I am not entirely comfortable classifying people as lower middle class. Let''s just say people who work with their hands for modest pay. Gerben was saying that voting R is against their economic self-interest and so why would they?

The short answer; "Actually, it is not always the economy, stupid".

I will try to illustrate. My wife's daughter works full time, there was a problem with the air condoning, I said I could be there to let the guy in and discuss the problem. The guy arrived. My father was blue collar, I grew up with guys like this guy, in this case we did not hit it off all that well. Before the guy arrived, I had been doing this and that and found that the garbage disposal wasn't working. I asked the guy (patience, this story does have a point) if he would let me know if he saw the fuse box. I hadn't yet seen it. He did. To get to it, I had to climb up on a washing machine, grab a hold of something, and lean around a corner. I couldn't see it well so I asked if he had a flashlight. He did, and I got a good look, no circuit breaker was tripped.

This led to a total change in atmosphere. I hadn't thought that I had, at first, been acting like a retired college math prof but that's what I am and maybe it came across. But now I was a guy who could climb up on a washing machine and lean around a corner to look at the fuse box. When he was done with the air conditioner he looked at the garbage disposal, went out to his truck and got some tools and came in and gave it a quick fix. Thanks. See you later, buddy.

A lot of this is about respect. Some intuitive feeling as to whether the voter is being respected or condescended to. I think this can, pardon the phrase, trump economics.

It will not surprise you that I believe the voters were seriously conned. And I think this will become clear, and perhaps is already becoming clear.Trump respects no one, as near as I can see. He might praise someone, but it is phony and temporary. But the Dems can sometimes sound more than a little condescending and this left a lot of people ripe for the picking.

I can't prove any of the above, but I deeply believe that a lot of the Trump phenomenon comes from voters feeling that they are disrespected. Gerben was asking about how the "lower middle class" could vote R. I am saying that the phrasing of the question contains a fair sized hint about the answer.

[RedSpawn]

kenberg, on 2017-August-11, 16:23, said:

Yes, although I would replace "Republicans" by"voters". It is my understanding that many Trump voters usually don't vote at all, and let's think about them.

I had to look up what question I was responding to with my post. It was why lower middle class would vote R. Again I want to change the phrasing a little, I am not entirely comfortable classifying people as lower middle class. Let''s just say people who work with their hands for modest pay. Gerben was saying that voting R is against their economic self-interest and so why would they?

The short answer; "Actually, it is not always the economy, stupid".

I will try to illustrate. My wife's daughter works full time, there was a problem with the air condoning, I said I could be there to let the guy in and discuss the problem. The guy arrived. My father was blue collar, I grew up with guys like this guy, in this case we did not hit it off all that well. Before the guy arrived, I had been doing this and that and found that the garbage disposal wasn't working. I asked the guy (patience, this story does have a point) if he would let me know if he saw the fuse box. I hadn't yet seen it. He did. To get to it, I had to climb up on a washing machine, grab a hold of something, and lean around a corner. I couldn't see it well so I asked if he had a flashlight. He did, and I got a good look, no circuit breaker was tripped.

This led to a total change in atmosphere. I hadn't thought that I had, at first, been acting like a retired college math prof but that's what I am and maybe it came across. But now I was a guy who could climb up on a washing machine and lean around a corner to look at the fuse box. When he was done with the air conditioner he looked at the garbage disposal, went out to his truck and got some tools and came in and gave it a quick fix. Thanks. See you later, buddy.

A lot of this is about respect. Some intuitive feeling as to whether the voter is being respected or condescended to. I think this can, pardon the phrase, trump economics.

It will not surprise you that I believe the voters were seriously conned. And I think this will become clear, and perhaps is already becoming clear.Trump respects no one, as near as I can see. He might praise someone, but it is phony and temporary. But the Dems can sometimes sound more than a little condescending and this left a lot of people ripe for the picking.

I can't prove any of the above, but I deeply believe that a lot of the Trump phenomenon comes from voters feeling that they are disrespected. Gerben was asking about how the "lower middle class" could vote R. I am saying that the phrasing of the question contains a fair sized hint about the answer.

I 99.9% agree with what you said, but the average working class Republican voter has been conned way before Trump. Trump was just the final straw that broke the camel's back.

The Republican working class voting block is beginning to connect the propaganda dots. They now realize that helping upper crust rich people or faceless corporations doesn't trickle down to the masses or transform their position on the American socioeconomic ladder. It just transfers wealth to people and 'legal fictions' who least need it.

It's about respect AND understanding other people's narrative and daily walk in life. The average voter wants to be 1) respected and 2) understood. Once you stood on top of the washing machine and could determine that the circuit breaker was not tripped, you elevated from an insulated, "bookish" professor to a card carrying, hands-on, real-life problem solver. The other guy could RELATE to you once he knew you understood what blue collar work was like.

Politicians use psychology and marketing to try to convince voters that they respect them and "get them" and "are looking out for their best interests". However, once in office, politicians have to sell out to the special interests who financed their political campaigns and their supporters eventually feel hoodwinked.

[ldrews]

kenberg, on 2017-August-11, 16:23, said:

Yes, although I would replace "Republicans" by"voters". It is my understanding that many Trump voters usually don't vote at all, and let's think about them.

I had to look up what question I was responding to with my post. It was why lower middle class would vote R. Again I want to change the phrasing a little, I am not entirely comfortable classifying people as lower middle class. Let''s just say people who work with their hands for modest pay. Gerben was saying that voting R is against their economic self-interest and so why would they?

The short answer; "Actually, it is not always the economy, stupid".

I will try to illustrate. My wife's daughter works full time, there was a problem with the air condoning, I said I could be there to let the guy in and discuss the problem. The guy arrived. My father was blue collar, I grew up with guys like this guy, in this case we did not hit it off all that well. Before the guy arrived, I had been doing this and that and found that the garbage disposal wasn't working. I asked the guy (patience, this story does have a point) if he would let me know if he saw the fuse box. I hadn't yet seen it. He did. To get to it, I had to climb up on a washing machine, grab a hold of something, and lean around a corner. I couldn't see it well so I asked if he had a flashlight. He did, and I got a good look, no circuit breaker was tripped.

This led to a total change in atmosphere. I hadn't thought that I had, at first, been acting like a retired college math prof but that's what I am and maybe it came across. But now I was a guy who could climb up on a washing machine and lean around a corner to look at the fuse box. When he was done with the air conditioner he looked at the garbage disposal, went out to his truck and got some tools and came in and gave it a quick fix. Thanks. See you later, buddy.

A lot of this is about respect. Some intuitive feeling as to whether the voter is being respected or condescended to. I think this can, pardon the phrase, trump economics.

It will not surprise you that I believe the voters were seriously conned. And I think this will become clear, and perhaps is already becoming clear.Trump respects no one, as near as I can see. He might praise someone, but it is phony and temporary. But the Dems can sometimes sound more than a little condescending and this left a lot of people ripe for the picking.

I can't prove any of the above, but I deeply believe that a lot of the Trump phenomenon comes from voters feeling that they are disrespected. Gerben was asking about how the "lower middle class" could vote R. I am saying that the phrasing of the question contains a fair sized hint about the answer.

Good post!

[RedSpawn]

Please delete

[mike777]

Again If a union pays for my campaign and I support the union why in the world do you feel hoodwinked?
If a rich, super rich, save the planet guy or gal supports my campaign and I support saving the planet when elected why in the world do you feel hoodwinked?
both are interest groups, special interest groups.

again voters need to take responsibility for their votes and stop playing the victim.....

You come across so naïve, that I might use wait for it....marketing or psychology..... to win, yes win...wow.....I suppose you could just ban both.


as usual I suppose the solution or partial solution may be one word

robots

[RedSpawn]

mike777, on 2017-August-11, 22:20, said:

Again If a union pays for my campaign and I support the union why in the world do you feel hoodwinked?
If a rich, super rich, save the planet guy or gal supports my campaign and I support saving the planet when elected why in the world do you feel hoodwinked?
both are interest groups, special interest groups.

again voters need to take responsibility for their votes and stop playing the victim.....

You come across so naïve, that I might use wait for it....marketing or psychology..... to win, yes win...wow.....I suppose you could just ban both.


as usual I suppose the solution or partial solution may be one word

robots

Mike,

When the Supreme Court says through the Citizens United case ruling that corporations (legal fictions) can contribute unlimited sums of money to political action committees (PACs) and super-PACS for local, state, and federal elections, then this is no longer about a victim mentality or voters failing to take responsibility for their candidate choices (which are now co-opted by the way).

If politicians and their campaign platforms can be owned and operated by Corporate America, then campaign finance reform IS a national security issue. We NEED IT to preserve the Union and protect the integrity of our political institutions from this kind of attack from within.

How does the nation overturn the Supreme Court's ruling which proffers personhood for legal corporations and gives them as much political standing as Men? Corporations can't vote, but THEY CAN exercise a 1st Amendment right they aren't entitled to and BUY THEIR VOTES WITH millions of dollars of excess cash they funnel to PACS and SUPER-PACS.

It's kinda hard to fire a mistaken Supreme Court judge who has transferred ownership of the ballot box from "We the people" to faceless corporations and billionaire tycoons.

nige1, on 2016-December-23, 03:49, said:

I agree with Ken that for all its flaws, democracy is the best system of government available. Unfortunately, special interests have converted democracy into plutocracy. Politicians and parties are effectively up for sale. Politicians make laws to facilitate corruption e.g. to redefine much corruption as "lobbying" or "consultancy". Unfortunately the party system handicaps independent candidates and reduces choice. For example, look at the choice of US presidential candidate.

You can't eliminate corruption. It's ingrained in human nature. But you might be able to reduce corruption by standing as an anti-corruption candidate to campaign for e.g.

• State finance for candidate election-expenses.
• Better pay for politicians.
• Openly publishing family finances and investments of politicians (One bank-account each. No foreign accounts. All transactions through your account. No other transactions in cash or kind).
• Rigorously enforcing a public record of interests.
• Jamming revolving-doors that allow interested companies to reward compliant politicians with jobs on retirement.
• Fostering a culture of openness and honesty e.g. no government corruption-confidentiality clauses -- euphemistically dubbed "commercial confidentiality" in the UK
• Creating an independent government statistics dept.
• Encouraging media to publish more news and less propaganda.

A little less corruption would result in large savings, so would be in the interests of ordinary voters.

[RedSpawn]

mike777, on 2017-August-09, 19:27, said:

You don't think Mattis rattled the saber?? really??

------------------


Perhaps one thing we and are allies can do:
Have Japan and South Korea start to take steps to go nuclear, very noticeable steps, very loud steps.

And soon there will be one less axis per evil as originally outlined by George Bush.

[RedSpawn]

Trump threatens Venezuela with Unspecified Military Option

http://www.msn.com/e...tion/ar-AApTMLD





Never ever underestimate the power of monetary hegemony (petrodollar) when it comes to U.S. Military intervention strategies. Follow the Oil and follow the $$$.