Jump to content

The Official Former President Trump thread


banana

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

Fair do's but when I read every day online in the American news websites Fox, CNN, ABC etc there is a huge amount of animosity and law suits between atheist groups and christian groups over the placing of large crosses in towns or the bible quotations in welcome packs for students or Forces personnel as well as other issues.
It seems to me that they would be better omitting any reference to religion in the ceremony - that way everybody is happy and no one is left out.

The animosity arises because of the political strategy used by the left in the culture wars. Our judiciary pretty much now functions as a House of Lords style institution, except that it takes power to fundamentally rewrite laws based on very broad constitutional interpretations and exists well to the left of the public on culture war issues. In large parts of America huge majorities want to continue the traditional public religious symbolism, but small groups of people block such tradition. Anytime you use this type of political strategy rather than a more democratic method you will create great animosity. I would take the opposite view from you. I'd say that it shouldn't be a problem for people to engage in certain traditions even if they don't have personal belief, and that if it's too offensive for an individual the proper move is to refuse to participate rather than to take away the traditions favored by the majority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Deplorable said:

The animosity arises because of the political strategy used by the left in the culture wars. Our judiciary pretty much now functions as a House of Lords style institution, except that it takes power to fundamentally rewrite laws based on very broad constitutional interpretations and exists well to the left of the public on culture war issues. In large parts of America huge majorities want to continue the traditional public religious symbolism, but small groups of people block such tradition. Anytime you use this type of political strategy rather than a more democratic method you will create great animosity. I would take the opposite view from you. I'd say that it shouldn't be a problem for people to engage in certain traditions even if they don't have personal belief, and that if it's too offensive for an individual the proper move is to refuse to participate rather than to take away the traditions favored by the majority.

Fair enough but I as an atheist was mortally (should that be morally?) offended at the gobbledygook as spouted by the various different religious groups.
Perhaps when the religious lot had finished their sermons an atheist should have been invited tae respond.
That way everybody wins.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deplorable said:

The animosity arises because of the political strategy used by the left in the culture wars. Our judiciary pretty much now functions as a House of Lords style institution, except that it takes power to fundamentally rewrite laws based on very broad constitutional interpretations and exists well to the left of the public on culture war issues. In large parts of America huge majorities want to continue the traditional public religious symbolism, but small groups of people block such tradition. Anytime you use this type of political strategy rather than a more democratic method you will create great animosity. I would take the opposite view from you. I'd say that it shouldn't be a problem for people to engage in certain traditions even if they don't have personal belief, and that if it's too offensive for an individual the proper move is to refuse to participate rather than to take away the traditions favored by the majority.

What? That is some one sided bullshitathone right there. The rise and politicisations of the religious right was a deliberate and planned strategy in the 70s with people like Jerry Falwell using issues like abortion to mobilise socially conservatives towards the Republicans. It was a reaction to the civil rights movement that was pressing for more recognition of things like gay rights.

 

The "culture wars" is a battle against sexual, gender and racial equality by Christian zealots.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crackin reminder of how horrendously out of touch/balance the US media and universities are with the American people. Incredible winning achievement by Trump.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016
aObLbmR.png

You mean the less than a quarter of the American people.

Tbh it wouldn't matter if they had endorsed Trump they would still be out of touch.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

You mean the less than a quarter of the American people.

Tbh it wouldn't matter if they had endorsed Trump they would still be out of touch.

I mean enough to win the election with 20 times less media endorsements and 0 college endorsements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, banana said:

Crackin reminder of how horrendously out of touch/balance the US media and universities are with the American people. Incredible winning achievement by Trump.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016

aObLbmR.png

That just shows that educated people weren't conned by his barking rhetoric. It's the thickos who think tax cuts for the rich, closing the borders and benefit cuts will get them better jobs, who voted for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

That just shows that educated people weren't conned by his barking rhetoric.

If you want to put an emphasis on education=college, Trump won 43% of the college grad vote. Yet still 0% college endorsements. Yet another indicator of the dreadful imbalance of political diversity on campuses and academic indoctrination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

That just shows that educated people weren't conned by his barking rhetoric. It's the thickos who think tax cuts for the rich, closing the borders and benefit cuts will get them better jobs, who voted for him.

The thickos love Trump.  This thread is evidence of that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Alan Stubbs said:

College graduates voting for him at practically the same level as the rest of the country doesn't point to much "indoctrination" going on.

Post grads voted just shy of 2:1 for Killary\Shillary or whatever, if we are playing academic top trumps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Democrats win the most highly educated and the least educated. Republicans do better with people in the middle.

Democrats win the highest IQ and the lowest IQ voters. Republicans do better with people in the middle.

It's a slippery slope when Democrats brag about winning people with PhDs. They also massively win people with near retarded IQs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Deplorable said:

when Democrats brag

Who is a "Democrat"? Most on here would have a preference for Obama over Trump but are really not all that into many of the Democrat policies in many areas.

As for people who are "retarded" or have learning difficulties voting for a party, I would say that in many cases those are the kinds of people who the centre left has sought to build state protection for since the New Deal. People on the margins supporting a party is a huge endorsement of that parties policies for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Deplorable said:

Democrats win the most highly educated and the least educated. Republicans do better with people in the middle.

Democrats win the highest IQ and the lowest IQ voters. Republicans do better with people in the middle.

It's a slippery slope when Democrats brag about winning people with PhDs. They also massively win people with near retarded IQs.

Might it be that people with lower intelligence (let's ignore the "r" word for a second) tend to be poorer and therefore more likely to vote on the left hand side of the political spectrum, for obvious reasons  and that people with high IQ's tend to think a bit more about what the real drivers of the tensions in our societies are?

It's possible, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...