Reply With Quote
YAY! DING DING DING I got the word "meltdown", which was exactly what I was shooting for. It's almost like I was trying to make a point about something.
Trump is plenty intelligent. He's just evil and knows how to get his message out. None of these crooks in DC are stupid.
YAY! DING DING DING I got the word "meltdown", which was exactly what I was shooting for. It's almost like I was trying to make a point about something.
yep, making a really strong case, with facts, quotes, and , always gets a "meltdown" fact-free comeback.
... and the right NEVER does that. You want a few examples? Say the word, and I will be happy to troll fox news, and talk radio blatherings for tons of it.
Hypocrisy much?
Be happy to admit the dialogue on both side can/should be elevated. Do you think Trump helped the overall level of discourse in the US, yes or no?
Single digits.
"insulting people never works, that's why I am going to call out all the left elitists".
(facepalm)
Sure. Let's pass over the built-in irony.
Let's assume for the sake of argument the left is elitist. Granted.
Is the right anti-intellectual? Why or why not?
Well put, valid criticisms all.
As I've said, I'm leftist on most issues, but also recognize that conservative thought has a lot value in many areas of social and economic policy.
The Left has an advertising problem, which has grown much, much worse since the advent of blogs, forums and social media. Engaging in dialog with someone who has opposing views was an exercise that had to be done in person, where you couldn't as easily dehumanize a person as you can online. Now that the political debate has largely shifted online, the "person" you're debating with is nameless and faceless, meaning it's easier than ever before to just cut a debate short with an insult. Instead of sincerely listening to a real human being explain why they don't believe in evolution, you can just call them an ignorant caveman who stupidly worships an invisible "sky daddy." The Right is similarly knee-jerky, but I think the Left has a bigger advertising problem, mainly due to the fact liberals tend to be younger and more active online.
So what's this "advertising problem?" The modern image of the Left, per your average Joe American in the Bible Belt or Midwest, is that of a smug, elitist, Coastal or even European "intellectual" who holds their traditions and way of life in contempt; who thinks of them as uneducated, obsolete rednecks pathetically clinging to an outdated ethos. The Left continually fails to understand or under-appreciate just how important religion and other traditions are to that region. Most of those communities are tight knit, going back generations, and religion and the church played a central part in the growth and flourishing of those communities. The modern Left just expects them to instantly shove their cultural iden y into the dustbin because "science." The rise of New Atheism was also a disaster for the Left's hope of building a bridge to those communities. Per Dawkins, Hitchens, and the rest of those blowhards, you'd think the people in the Bible Belt are scheming 24/7 on ways to blow up abortion clinics. Yeah, try reaching out to them with "science" after ling your books "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything."
"Well, those in the Bible Belt probably don't even know about Hitchens, et al."
Indeed they do. Sean Hannity and the rest of the Fox News cabal love using New Atheists as polemic talking points.
And the ironic thing is, conservative aren't science illiterate. Here's a study showing how the scientific literacy of conservatives increase if you phrase the wording differently:
http://www.motherjones.com/environme...fic-illiteracy
And this is not a conservative phenomenon either. The Left is similarly intractable being open minded on issues that attack their cultural iden y.
Also valid criticism, and something that I think should change.
This is the truism I keep coming back to. What would Jim Rome say? "Scoreboard"
I've seen interviews with Trump where he appeared downright intelligent, coherent, even logical. Almost none of those occurred during the course of this campaign. It's like he DID stay on point and on message. That message? "I am as far from an elitist as anyone can possibly be. In fact I'm borderline moron." Maybe that's who is actually is, or that is who he knew he needed to be to get the votes necessary to do the "impossible."
Saying it doesn't work doesn't mean it doesn't work. Try again.
Or you could just admit I nailed that ass, Gus Petch style.
+1
is important when Team Blue has to save the rest of us from Team Red.
conservatives are uneducated
conservatives are religious nuts
conservatives are racists who only disliked obama because he's black
conservatives hate women and that's why they dislike clinton
if this is the pitch, then you aren't willing to go through normal political discourse. you've already written everybody off as incapable of having an intellectual discussion. calling somebody elitist isn't an insult to their intelligence. i've heard leftists assert that conservatives dont like abortion because they're anti-woman. it's entirely dismissive. calling a liberal elitist isn't dismissive of their ability to have a conversation. it's calling out the willingness to allow the other party to engage in the conversation. it's "you're wrong because you're wrong and i'm smarter." good luck with that
it several of their key policy positions, absolutely. while the left can be guilty of it too in certain cir stances (anti-vaccination started out as a leftist thing, anti-gmo stigma is largely left), i think the right has a big problem with it because they'd rather go back to how things were, the way they were used to things, or what just sounds like common sense because it's easier. climate change is the clear example, imo.Let's assume for the sake of argument the left is elitist. Granted.
Is the right anti-intellectual? Why or why not?
If you're going to criticize the way Trump speaks, you might want to brush up on your own grammar first.
I'm sure you've seen Michael Moore's Roger and Me or this do entary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream_(film).
Those people are just as downtrodden and as frustrated as any struggling minority. But because minorities have been growing significantly over the past two or so decades, the Democrats focused their energy on them, since they're poised to become (and already are) a huge voting base.
Like many have said, I don't think they were compelled to vote out of some latent racism. More likely they said to themselves, "Okay, helping working poor immigrants is good and all, but we're kind of in the same situation here. What about us? Don't we count too?"
Trump campaigned hard in the Rust Belt while Hillary had it chalked up. I doubt they believe all those jobs are coming back, but he acknowledged them, and for that they gave him his vote.
All the media that hypes this as the biggest upset in American political history don't understand sop re level probability. This was an upset, but it was never US hockey over the USSR 1980 like the media is trying to say to cover their asses. It was an upset more in line with Cleveland winning Game 7 in Oakland with Bogut out if you placed a bet right before the game. A genuine upset, but not something inconceivable by any means.
why'd you go back and delete your comments about aldridge?
Maybe. Still won't change the against smart things he said, and will continue to say.
Bush 2.0...
I think they genuinely think that scrapping the trade bills will magically create jobs that were lost to automation. People tend to be ignorant about economics and how free markets work, that goes for both sides of the aisle, although it is much more ironic and funny when the supposed free market champions on the right argue things like welfare policy.
Maybe if the media would start sending questions to Trump in advance, let him approve articles, coordinate pieces with his people, and let him approve quotes before printing them, he would be more accommodating.
I would be at least as frightened with a Clinton administration. At least the media is skeptical of Trump. They will actually question his actions, and report them.
Donna Brazile approves this plan
They didn't even have to give him the Democrat Special. They could have just reported on him honestly and impartially. Instead, they tried to destroy him - and now they have the nerve to wonder why he's not going out of his way to make their jobs easier.
Newsflash to the press: if your job requires getting special access and perks from someone, it's probably not a good idea to spread lies about them, give a supportive platform to those who wish to harm them, and treat them like under your shoe. You don't have to kiss their ass, but you probably should treat them with common courtesy.
Last edited by Clipper Nation; 11-11-2016 at 03:30 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
