Russian attitudes taking hold in US (1 Viewer)

[Lazybones]

in light of Andrus's post, imma bounce

Why? We are being very civil. I’m sure you can come up with something and still be nice.

 

[Archies Ghost]

My entire lifetime the Republican president has always been portrayed as some sort of strange combination of bumbling idiot and evil mastermind while Democrat presidents are brilliant, hip, and cool as the other side of the pillow.

It is just the way it is and this strategy backfired spectacularly with the election of Trump.

Over those same decades, every policy proposal put forward by Republicans has been portrayed as portending death to children, old people, people of color, animals, fish, plant life, the Earth and the Universe.

So many of us see the current atmosphere as a continuation of the past five decades, not as something unique to Trump.

 

[MT15]

Ah, but Trump is unique, I think, anyway. He’s totally unfiltered, which is what his fans love about him, but that will also be his downfall, I believe.

And I agree that he is not like Putin, which we can all be thankful for. It’s bad enough that he admires Putin, though. I truly think he aspires to be like Putin, at least in some ways. It’s part of what makes him truly different. If people think he’s a regular person, let alone a regular Republican, well, that’s in error.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I hear you, but I am replying.


I disagree with the OP and they guy she heard on the radio. I think it is the same old thing just a different day. I think the narrative is to pile on, not converse.

I’m not being rude or argumentative. OP said she believes the narrative and she has her reasons. I said I disagree and I have my reasons. Sure, her posting history just verifies the thought.

The thing that the left misses is that it is this type of hyperbole that drives us crazy. It wouldn’t matter if trump would have lost the election to Cruz. Cruz would have been given the same treatment by the media and people like OP.

That’s not being derogatory, it’s explaining my position, which was asked for by multiple posters and OP. I can’t help it if they don’t like the answer and don’t want to really hear what I have to say.

You are using a new name while simultaneously using another poster's history from the old PDB. Don't you find this to be absolutely hypocritical?

 

[wardorican]

My entire lifetime the Republican president has always been portrayed as some sort of strange combination of bumbling idiot and evil mastermind while Democrat presidents are brilliant, hip, and cool as the other side of the pillow.

It is just the way it is and this strategy backfired spectacularly with the election of Trump.

Over those same decades, every policy proposal put forward by Republicans has been portrayed as portending death to children, old people, people of color, animals, fish, plant life, the Earth and the Universe.

So many of us see the current atmosphere as a continuation of the past five decades, not as something unique to Trump.

Maybe a few. It probably stems from Nixon and the bad taste many people had in their mouths from that.

Reagan only fell into that category, I thought, during his second term, when you could see he was having problems related to age / brain function.

I dont think G HW Bush was a bumbling idiot. He just got called out for the No New Taxes line.

GW Bush was a drug using college party boy who eventually figures his crap out. Was a bit of a bumpkin, but charming. He had overwhelming support after 9/11, until it eventually faded.

Trump... I mean, come on. He's the person on Facebook that posts 20 status updates a day, 1 or 2 are good, and 18 just are terrible, stupid, sloppy, etc.

Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, lawyer, he is really smart and he was cool. But, he was also a whore and was taken to task over that.

Obama is another lawyer, smart, charismatic, but also kinda bland. The joke on him was that he never showed emotions. The whole Key and Peele, "Luther, the Obama Anger Translater " bits were hilarious and on point.

The problem is that the last two Republican presidents were spoiled rich kids. One, learned from it and is a decent human, the other doesn't seem to be.


Regarding policies. It isn't always that hyperbolic, but it isn't exactly wrong of you to say.

However... that will be the nature of the debate when certain Republican policies involve removing social safety net protections.

When you want to limit or remove food stamps to help feed the needy, especially kids, what argument do you expect? When threatening cutting SS, the elderly and soon to be retired, are rightfully concerned. When you remove access to medical care, you threaten the health or finances of the poor and middle class.

If the policies were about other ways to cut costs, without affecting results, that would be another thing. There would be support there. We should have more talks about that.

 

[Ayo]

Regarding policies. It isn't always that hyperbolic, but it isn't exactly wrong of you to say.

However... that will be the nature of the debate when certain Republican policies involve removing social safety net protections.

When you want to limit or remove food stamps to help feed the needy, especially kids, what argument do you expect? When threatening cutting SS, the elderly and soon to be retired, are rightfully concerned. When you remove access to medical care, you threaten the health or finances of the poor and middle class.

If the policies were about other ways to cut costs, without affecting results, that would be another thing. There would be support there. We should have more talks about that.

yea, that was a pretty one-sided decontextualized post

the criticism, many times, is grounded in something more than a cult of personality criticism. There are actually a lot of policies to talk about - and I actually think Clinton is to be included in this discussion. But to suggest that the Republican Presidents haven't earned the criticism is disingenuous and ignorant of history.

Reagan was a blight for many poor and visible minority communities. Clinton's policies around welfare and drugs/incarceration have turned out to be generationally punitive. Bush's foreign policy wasn't a rousing success and, more locally, Katrina response was a federal failure. Up and down the line, there's plenty to be critical of - and I was critical of Obama when it came to education, speaking for myself.

Yes, more talks about that.

But why talk when we can toss out one-sided generalizations that defy relevant reality so that we can prop up a partisan argument?

 

[Lazybones]

You are using a new name while simultaneously using another poster's history from the old PDB. Don't you find this to be absolutely hypocritical?

FYI This was my og saints report name.

 

[Lazybones]

Ah, but Trump is unique, I think, anyway. He’s totally unfiltered, which is what his fans love about him, but that will also be his downfall, I believe.

And I agree that he is not like Putin, which we can all be thankful for. It’s bad enough that he admires Putin, though. I truly think he aspires to be like Putin, at least in some ways. It’s part of what makes him truly different. If people think he’s a regular person, let alone a regular Republican, well, that’s in error.

I agree he is different, but the outcome is still the same. Bash, slam and repeat. What the left is bashing, slamming and repeating may be different, but it’s the same playbook and gameplay uses forever. All republican politicians are labeled as racist bigot, homophobe etc.

This is the reason in my opinion trump has been so successful. Bush 43 didn’t get caught up in it. He acted above the Frey of the media. Trump isn’t taking that road. And people who experience the same type of pushback in regular life, enjoy having someone stand up to the BS as we see it.

 

[Lazybones]

yea, that was a pretty one-sided decontextualized post

the criticism, many times, is grounded in something more than a cult of personality criticism. There are actually a lot of policies to talk about - and I actually think Clinton is to be included in this discussion. But to suggest that the Republican Presidents haven't earned the criticism is disingenuous and ignorant of history.

Reagan was a blight for many poor and visible minority communities. Clinton's policies around welfare and drugs/incarceration have turned out to be generationally punitive. Bush's foreign policy wasn't a rousing success and, more locally, Katrina response was a federal failure. Up and down the line, there's plenty to be critical of - and I was critical of Obama when it came to education, speaking for myself.

Yes, more talks about that.

But why talk when we can toss out one-sided generalizations that defy relevant reality so that we can prop up a partisan argument?

No offense, but just because people that think like you claim the criticism is genuine, much of the country disagrees. And instead of trying to understand why, many on the left would rather disparage and use demeaning language to dismiss those who don’t agree with you.

Your post basically says to me, conservatives are wrong, we are right and that is the final decision.

 

[Ayo]

No offense, but just because people that think like you claim the criticism is genuine, much of the country disagrees. And instead of trying to understand why, many on the left would rather disparage and use demeaning language to dismiss those who don’t agree with you.

Your post basically says to me, conservatives are wrong, we are right and that is the final decision.

no offense taken

But I have no idea what you mean by "much of the country" or what disagreement you're talking about - do you have further explanation or substantiation? Who are you talking about and what's the evidence that points to it?

As far as trying to "understand why" I have - on more than one occasion - used a specific, thorough, documented example on work done over a 5-year period in SW Louisiana that does exactly this. I've even talked about sympathy for exactly people close to me who feel that way. And I'm not in disagreement that there are people on the left who would 'rather disparage' but that's also besides my point.

You seem to be switching things up to make a point because it's not materially related to what I said.

You can believe or interpret whatever you like about what my post says to you, but there are probably some hermeneutic considerations that are relevant how you would take my statement.

Because I do not believe "conservatives are wrong" as a blanket statement.

And I also made references to Democratic Presidents who I think were wrong. ANd I'm not sure how more explicit I can be.

Not to mention that I didn't vote for Clinton nor Obama, so I also have no idea what you mean by "we are right" - who is we? Who else am I a part of?

I think you have no idea what I was talking about, because there isn't a lot here that is validated by what I've said here or in the past.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

FYI This was my og saints report name.

Is it the name you currently post under? If not, I maintain that you are a hypocrite and I assure that I will report every post you make that references any posts from the PDB. It has been made explicitly clear that this is not allowed.

 

[MT15]

I agree he is different, but the outcome is still the same. Bash, slam and repeat. What the left is bashing, slamming and repeating may be different, but it’s the same playbook and gameplay uses forever. All republican politicians are labeled as racist bigot, homophobe etc.

This is the reason in my opinion trump has been so successful. Bush 43 didn’t get caught up in it. He acted above the Frey of the media. Trump isn’t taking that road. And people who experience the same type of pushback in regular life, enjoy having someone stand up to the BS as we see it.

Here’s how he has been shown to be different, to me, anyway. Most presidents in my lifetime have been honorable enough to separate their own personal and or political gain from what’s best for the country. Trump has not. What we have suspected, and now learned for a fact, is that he will use the State Department and the DOJ, and all their power, to further his personal and political goals. Shamelessly and breaking election laws to do it. Without concern for what’s best for the US, foreign policy wise.

I don’t really recall Reagan or Bush the elder being criticized this much and in this way. Both enjoyed fairly high approval ratings that crossed party lines. I don’t think your point is valid; Trump is enjoying the approval ratings he has earned at this point. No, his approval rating should be lower, and I think it will be as more of this stuff comes out.

 

[wardorican]

No offense, but just because people that think like you claim the criticism is genuine, much of the country disagrees. And instead of trying to understand why, many on the left would rather disparage and use demeaning language to dismiss those who don’t agree with you.

Your post basically says to me, conservatives are wrong, we are right and that is the final decision.

I find it interesting that you didn't reply to me, but only the ones that it was easier for you to attack back.

I tried to give a thoughtful answer to your issue. I even said it has a basis of fact in it. Yet, you didn't further the dialogue.

 

[Lazybones]

I find it interesting that you didn't reply to me, but only the ones that it was easier for you to attack back.

I tried to give a thoughtful answer to your issue. I even said it has a basis of fact in it. Yet, you didn't further the dialogue.

Lol. I scrolled back a couple pages. I didn’t read it, but #113 is addressed to you. If you want more, just ask.

 

[Lazybones]

Here’s how he has been shown to be different, to me, anyway. Most presidents in my lifetime have been honorable enough to separate their own personal and or political gain from what’s best for the country. Trump has not. What we have suspected, and now learned for a fact, is that he will use the State Department and the DOJ, and all their power, to further his personal and political goals. Shamelessly and breaking election laws to do it. Without concern for what’s best for the US, foreign policy wise.

I don’t really recall Reagan or Bush the elder being criticized this much and in this way. Both enjoyed fairly high approval ratings that crossed party lines. I don’t think your point is valid; Trump is enjoying the approval ratings he has earned at this point. No, his approval rating should be lower, and I think it will be as more of this stuff comes out.

I understand and appreciate and your response. However, trump was hated before he used the DOJ or anyone else. He was vilified in the republican primaries and it has never stopped.

 

[MT15]

You’re correct, but that had to do with his character (lack thereof) and lack of integrity being known from the very beginning. I agree with the famous evaluation of Trump rendered by Lindsey Graham during the primary season in 2015, actually. You may remember it.

 

[Dadsdream]

Maybe a few. It probably stems from Nixon and the bad taste many people had in their mouths from that.

Reagan only fell into that category, I thought, during his second term, when you could see he was having problems related to age / brain function.

I dont think G HW Bush was a bumbling idiot. He just got called out for the No New Taxes line.

GW Bush was a drug using college party boy who eventually figures his crap out. Was a bit of a bumpkin, but charming. He had overwhelming support after 9/11, until it eventually faded.

Trump... I mean, come on. He's the person on Facebook that posts 20 status updates a day, 1 or 2 are good, and 18 just are terrible, stupid, sloppy, etc.

Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, lawyer, he is really smart and he was cool. But, he was also a whore and was taken to task over that.

Obama is another lawyer, smart, charismatic, but also kinda bland. The joke on him was that he never showed emotions. The whole Key and Peele, "Luther, the Obama Anger Translater " bits were hilarious and on point.

The problem is that the last two Republican presidents were spoiled rich kids. One, learned from it and is a decent human, the other doesn't seem to be.


Regarding policies. It isn't always that hyperbolic, but it isn't exactly wrong of you to say.

However... that will be the nature of the debate when certain Republican policies involve removing social safety net protections.

When you want to limit or remove food stamps to help feed the needy, especially kids, what argument do you expect? When threatening cutting SS, the elderly and soon to be retired, are rightfully concerned. When you remove access to medical care, you threaten the health or finances of the poor and middle class.

If the policies were about other ways to cut costs, without affecting results, that would be another thing. There would be support there. We should have more talks about that.

Petty fair summary and I agree with most of it, but let's not omit Ford.

He has been consistently lampooned as a big, hulking, clumsy oaf because he stumbled on the steps of Air Force One in the rain. People remember him more for the skits done about him as the Klutz in Chief by Chevy Chase on Saturday Night Live than his achievements.

He was Michigan football player, center/linebacker, on two national championship teams, served on the Warren Commission and had a long and distinguished career in Congress. His reputation for fairness and honesty was on the par with that of Jimmy Carter. His pardon of Nixon destroyed any chance of election, though most historians agree it was a necessary evil.

Ford and Chase made public appearances together afterward, something that I daresay we won't see with the current president and Alec Baldwin.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

Petty fair summary and I agree with most of it, but let's not omit Ford.

He has been consistently lampooned as a big, hulking, clumsy oaf because he stumbled on the steps of Air Force One in the rain. People remember him more for the skits done about him as the Klutz in Chief by Chevy Chase on Saturday Night Live than his achievements.

He was Michigan football player, center/linebacker, on two national championship teams, served on the Warren Commission and had a long and distinguished career in Congress. His reputation for fairness and honesty was on the par with that of Jimmy Carter. His pardon of Nixon destroyed any chance of election, though most historians agree it was a necessary evil.

Ford and Chase made public appearances together afterward, something that I daresay we won't see with the current president and Alec Baldwin.

just as Gore was never going to get out from under Clinton's shadow - Ford took the brunt of the nation's anger at Nixon bc Nixon noped out
ha nixon manned up and took responsibility, Ford might have had a chance