Why is their a high ratio of Trump supporters here?

Page 3 of 4 [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

01 Jan 2018, 3:36 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
sly279 wrote:
Tim_Tex wrote:
If the ratio is indeed high, it would be very baffling, considering one of the first things Trump did in his campaign was mock a disabled reporter.

However, I feel we would still be getting the short end of the stick even if Hillary or Bernie were president.

And Clinton flaunted how she once defended a rapist knowing he did it. She also attacked women who came out about her husbands sexual activities. Yet tons of women voted for her anyways.

Trump was closest to what I liked. And he saved me and millions of other disabled people on social security from losing our rights. So so far he’s done what I wanted.

Yes, Hillary is a sociopath, no arguments here. But wait until the end of the year before you start praising GOP policies towards the disabled: tax cuts were last year, the only way they can cover the costs of said tax cuts and retain their 'fiscal discipline' argument is by cutting social programs this year forward, of which social security and medicare are the two biggest targets.

Ryan says Republicans to target welfare, Medicare, Medicaid spending in 2018


Ryan wants to cut those programs, but if he can't make it pass they'll just borrow to pay for the tax cuts. Effectively boomers robbing their kids and grandkids.

True. Chances are it will be like healthcare, a giant boondoggle they just can't seem to pass because of it's unpopularity. That said, I made the post so Sly would at least understand the intent of the GOP at this point.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,193
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

01 Jan 2018, 4:00 pm

I increasingly think government is the wrong place to craft all kinds of policies. Healthcare is one of them, ideas like UBI are another.

What I mean by this - I really think robust professional organizations need to lead the charge at drafting bills - whether healthcare, economic well-being, global warming, etc. because these organizations have the competence and command of the subjects to actually come up with good ideas. I don't think there are enough doctors in congress to draft sensible healthcare legislation. Similarly I don't think there are enough scientists in congress to adequately handle the shape and character of global warming legislation.

I brought up the UBI issue here in context of something Dave Rubin brought up in a recent interview which I though was a fascinating criticism of what would happen if congress legislated UBI - ie. wouldn't politicians just raise UBI sky-high to milk votes in their district? I think that forces the response that you couldn't have congress in charge of UBI rates - they'd reliably do the wrong things with it because their incentive structure cuts against what's actually healthy for the maintenance of such a system. What you'd need is something like a governmental organization, of similar kind to the Office of Inspector General or CBO, doing an analysis of the costs of living, evaluating the poverty line and the changes in the costs of living, and their detailed analysis should be the only thing to raise UBI - any other considerations would have to be very carefully orchestrated with that office, that office always having high-hand on the pendulum in considering or rejecting any changes to UBI.

I think this is where we might have to consider that our systems, and demands of knowledge, are too far beyond our legislators to have them doing what they want, on political knee-jerk (or based on their lobbyists) to expect sane solutions. We need expertise worked into the system properly and if there is a major populist backlash the only thing legislators should really do is push for transparency in these departments, push for them to have better PR, and really explain to the public - adequately - what they're doing and why their actions, one way or the other, are the best choices that can be made given the information that they have available.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Last edited by techstepgenr8tion on 01 Jan 2018, 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

01 Jan 2018, 4:00 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
sly279 wrote:
Tim_Tex wrote:
If the ratio is indeed high, it would be very baffling, considering one of the first things Trump did in his campaign was mock a disabled reporter.

However, I feel we would still be getting the short end of the stick even if Hillary or Bernie were president.

And Clinton flaunted how she once defended a rapist knowing he did it. She also attacked women who came out about her husbands sexual activities. Yet tons of women voted for her anyways.

Trump was closest to what I liked. And he saved me and millions of other disabled people on social security from losing our rights. So so far he’s done what I wanted.

Yes, Hillary is a sociopath, no arguments here. But wait until the end of the year before you start praising GOP policies towards the disabled: tax cuts were last year, the only way they can cover the costs of said tax cuts and retain their 'fiscal discipline' argument is by cutting social programs this year forward, of which social security and medicare are the two biggest targets.

Ryan says Republicans to target welfare, Medicare, Medicaid spending in 2018


Ryan wants to cut those programs, but if he can't make it pass they'll just borrow to pay for the tax cuts. Effectively boomers robbing their kids and grandkids.

True. Chances are it will be like healthcare, a giant boondoggle they just can't seem to pass because of it's unpopularity. That said, I made the post so Sly would at least understand the intent of the GOP at this point.


I’m not a big fan of gop. But that hasn’t happen yet. The social security ban was going happen if trump hadn’t been elected. Hilary would of for sure vetoed the congress getting rid of it. O prefer a congress that’s split and can’t pass anything. Both parties want and will do horrible things. Currently gop doesn’t have the votes in senate anymore they couldn’t pass the concealed carry law. Also trump wants t be popular so if it appears stripping social security is unpopular he won’t support it. He supports what will make his ego feel more popular. Which is why he stopped the ban, I don’t think he gives a c**p about disabled people losing their rights. He just saw it was popular to stop it.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

01 Jan 2018, 4:04 pm

What’s ubi



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,193
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

01 Jan 2018, 4:24 pm

universal basic income


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Chronos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,698

05 Jan 2018, 12:53 am

Shahunshah wrote:
This is something I am beginning to notice. In this forum, there are allot of Trump supporters from what I am beginning to see. I have my own explanation for why that might be the case but I want to hear yours. My guesses could be on a scale to stop on to totally garbled and incorrect.

Trump's campaign was about change and this may have had an appeal to those on the spectrum. Many of them feel disenfranchised, are struggling and want something better, pride and a good life. As a result, Trump may have appealed to them by offering those very things. The same spirit of change that drove Trump to win his greatest triumph in the Rust Belt might be in these individuals too. In addition, his appeal may have had a very masculine ring to it, there was a guy saying to you not to back down in society but to rise up and don't back down.

Many autistic people here feel disenfranchised by feminists from what I have seen, a very common scapegoat. Due to fact that it has allegedly created standards for women dating men to be so high that many autistic individuals feel they cannot compete and thereby receive love and romance. The end result is a feeling of persecution. As a result, many of them may be drawn to Trump. He is after all the antithesis of liberal thinking and is by no stretch of the imagination a feminist. He is offering to beat back liberalism, the SJWS and radical feminist culture all of which may be seen as being highly appealing to these individuals.


Liberals are more likely to comment on ideological causes and conservatives are more likely to comment on politicians. So I doubt there are actually more conservatives here. I think they are just more inclined to comment on politicians in this forum.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

05 Jan 2018, 8:49 pm

Raptor wrote:
EzraS wrote:
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
He probably does, given that he likes to nihilistically gawk at pointless fringe asshattery


Nah I mostly ignore your posts.

Which is the best way to deal with trolls, unless you just want to toy with them...
:P

Trolls are as trolls do...


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,471
Location: Aux Arcs

06 Jan 2018, 11:13 am

Darmok wrote:
EzraS wrote:
If someone was claiming Trump was a reptilian, and I pointed out I think that's kooky, that doesn't really mean I'm actually defending him.

There you go again spreading your fake news. Everyone knows it's Putin that is the reptilian. Trump is just Putin's human puppet. Wake up, people!!

8)

Putin has no royal blood,he is not a true Reptillian.He's a poser.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi