Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Are you sure? I don't know any of this for a fact, but it seems that's the assumption people make about those with different convictions. For sure there are some people that way, but I'd guess that most people don't vote that way. There have been a bunch of this type of article over the last few years too.
1. Wasn’t my intention to do that and I could care less which words you use to describe what happened this summer. Riots, mobs, etc are all accurate IMO.
Sorry, you lost me at "completely wrong." I'm not here to tell you what's acceptable and what's not. Just telling you how the message is received with that lede.
I agree with you. Like I said, I don’t blame low + middle class families for voting in their own financial interests (or at least what they believe is) because they genuinely do need that extra assistance.
No doubt Trump has shown he's more aligned with conservatives politically, so from a purely political standpoint he is the correct choice. However, don't the other aspects of a Trump presidency begin to outweigh his political accomplishments at some point? The division, the undermining of democratic institutions, the lack of morality. A vote for Trump is a vote for those aspects too. To cast that aside as 'well, a president is not a moral leader' feels like a bit of mental gymnastics and a way avoid reconciling your political desires with voting for a person who doesn't represent your moral character.
One benefit of Trump going is we can somewhat get back to hammering the elites for causing most of these issues and furthering the divide. I have no delusions that Biden hasn’t been part of the problem in the past AND Trump has been uniquely horrible. I’m able to hold both those thoughts in my head without the need to rank them.
I see what you're saying. I even lived that decision... which is why I ended up voting Gary Johnson to keep a clear conscious in 2016.
Absolutely. For as repulsive as Trump was in other areas, he hit on what many Americans feel on this matter with his "drain the swamp" mantra. Heck, it had lifelong democrats casting votes in his direction because of it. Ultimately, the people felt like their government no longer represented them. And, in some ways, they weren't wrong. Trump may not have changed that, but he definitely put a spotlight on it.
I would like to provide an off ramp for my friends who voted for Trump. I respect why some pro life friends felt they had to vote for him. I am not asking for them to apologize for voting for Trump. But I need them to acknowledge Trump has done something wrong here, they don’t need to support impeachment but at the very least censure. For me it is unacceptable for them to continue to think this election was stolen from Trump. It is so difficult to deal with the Trump flag wavers who think he has been and “still is the best President ever” even after this week. The ones who thought the “ f*** your feelings” slogan was acceptable. I don’t consider any of that attitude an opinion, it’s just wrong and I won’t be giving them a pass for it.
I don’t disagree but it’s important to point out (IMO) that Trump didn’t actually mean it or do it. It was one of the lies he used to get elected. He had every intention of being THE swamp monster while convincing people he had their interests in mind. He didn’t and on a unique level from just about any politician ever.
Few thoughts:
I think in some cases you can make that judgment. I do believe small business is important for our economy as a whole and while as a small business owner that tax change was good for me, it was also good for employees. I know in my specific case that because of the QBI that I gave more work hours to employees that I might otherwise have done without or just done the extra work myself. So in this case, that tax law was good for my employees even if it was in an indirect way. By the fact they made more, their families were better off, one could argue that does benefit society.
I do know people who think this way, if not in absolute terms, in some simplistic viewpoint. That idea isn't a suburban one, it's actually more rural. I live in the suburbs now but grew up in a rural area.
I don’t understand this comparison. Were there Democrats that asked protestors this summer to come and protest telling them “ you will never take back our country with weakness” or that you “ need to show strength”? This followed a speech from his attorney Giuliani that used the words “trial by combat” . What I recall from Biden he immediately said “ looting and rioting is not protesting”
Or worse yet claiming he wasn’t born here even after a birth certificate was produced
Trump doesn’t know how to pick his battles, wants to fight every petty battle. Talking about a serious waste of time and energy.
Arithmetic, por favor.Shula-holic said:
I'm not sure what you would like that I could provide. I could give you counties in rural areas but I think it's a given that those areas are heavily red, especially in presidential cycles. Short of telling you I see these folks post on FB and other social media I'm not sure what else I could say. I grew up with them, still talk to them. I can tell you they feel that we don't need more taxes, even if they are net "takers" in the current system. So even if the plan is to tax a different citizen rather than them to cover these other societal programs or entitlements, they simply aren't for it. We could argue whether or not that's in their best interest, but that's the way they feel. I think their voting patterns bear that out.
I should have been more specific. You said, "But when you try to tell the lower middle class voter in rural areas who may have trouble paying their power bill that we need to pay more taxes so that we can have healthcare for everyone including undocumented immigrants, they have a pretty visceral reaction to that."
I didn't make that claim, just the opposite. I made the following bolded statement in my original post:
10-4. I misspoke to say that you claimed something, but you do make it sound like engaging these rural people is an exercise in futility.
How about we don't tax them at all (at least federally)? Let's give them a UBI instead. Deal?
Do you have any sort of theory about why that is? It seems very counterintuitive to me. It seems like “you get these benefits and someone else pays” would be an appealing message.
I guess it depends on what you'd mean by exercise in futility. They know we are running deficits and many know how tough things are on them. They don't see adding an entitlement as a solution to the problems they face. I don't know how to reconcile that but it goes back to where we were earlier talking about the differences in which is more important, your family or overall society and nationalism/globalism.
I know that's popular here, honestly they won't like that too much either. You can say it's in their best interests, and for some it might persuade them. I'm betting not anywhere near the majority. Therefore I don't see it getting passed.
A lot of factors. A lot of it is pride and the mentality is wanting to work. I don't think tons of people anywhere want to live off the government. But in those areas especially, there's very strong feelings about it. Take the drug issues we all know exist in rural America, the average first response on government programs is likely the guy on meth who doesn't work. They don't view "that guy" as deserving governmental support.
Disagree. Honestly, I suspect the primary reason the majority would oppose it is because Fox News tells them to oppose it.
Fair enough. But one last thing, have you ever been to rural Alabama or Mississippi (I suspect sub in most midwestern states)? If you haven't, tell me in percentage how many homes in some of these counties you think even get Fox News, much less watch it. My dad died recently, got buried at an old country church. I could have taken some pics and video on the way out there. These are places that are lucky to keep power, they aren't exactly hanging on for Hannity at 9 PM. These views were held long before there was a Fox News.
I strongly disagree with you. I know tons of people from rural areas in red states and I’m not sure where you’re getting this. UBI would be absolutely huge for rural areas where cost of living is low. If it goes to everyone it takes the word deserve out of it. It not some extra benefit that only goes to the worthy - why would anyone care?
I don't think it polls well there from what I recall. Maybe you've seen something different.
Don't know that I can answer that fully. Some is fiscal beliefs but some of it is based in religious beliefs as well. I think the church is the most powerful place of influence in these communities.
Apologies if I come off in that regard, it is where I grew up but I get that anecdotally it doesn't mean it's an absolute. I just know that most of my friends who are still there, I'm actually to the left of them. We will just have to disagree, I don't see the buy-in coming from those folks. Maybe if you force it on them they might later like it. But I do believe in my personal experience it would have to be forced and politically they will be hard against it so there's a long way to go politically to get there.
I won't disagree at all that the church influences rural people more than any other entity, by far. I too have rural roots (and I currently reside in MS). If I have a valid point here, it is that there are wealthy rural citizens too, and they heavily influence the hardscrabble. And I ask, who influences the wealthy rural citizens?
I think you're right, and I'm too lazy to put in the required googling, but to who do we attribute the most anti-gun quotes - Trump or Obama?
I think many Republicans are looking for a leader with the same policies as Trump but more diplomatic, not such a narcissist and just smarter. That’s not going to work for me but I would be far less critical.
