The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Dear ess,
What are you talking about? I was referring to your comment about democrats not supporting the working people of America. If, you are somehow referring to the article that you enclosed, it is still not clear what you mean. I didn't get that the democrats lost working class people.

The conservative take naturally blames the democrats.

My personal opinion is that Trump simply capitalized on a more deeply-rooted racist and bigoted America than any of us realized.

The most unfortunate piece of this is the Republican Party’s lack of backbone to hold him accountable for his unpresidential behavior. It will catch up with them in the end, I’m sure of that.

(01-13-2018 12:27 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  The conservative take naturally blames the democrats.

My personal opinion is that Trump simply capitalized on a more deeply-rooted racist and bigoted America than any of us realized.

The most unfortunate piece of this is the Republican Party’s lack of backbone to hold him accountable for his unpresidential behavior. It will catch up with them in the end, I’m sure of that.

Hoekjeness -

Here is a direct quote from the LA Times article from Joe Biden (no conservative and someone who certainly understands politics and voters) on Trump voters and Clinton's campaign:

"They’re all the people I grew up with. They’re their kids. And they’re not racist. They’re not sexist. But we didn’t talk to them."

Biden made this statement after watching several Trump rallies in Western Pennsylvania, where he grew-up.

And while I agree the GOP should be harder on Trump's moronic statements, the Democrats looked the other way while President Clinton raped and Ted Kennedy killed.

Neither of the two major parties are anything to be proud of.

Dear GullLake,
I will not defend Clinton's sexual behavior, nor Kennedy's behavior in that tragic accident, but you are bringing up episodes of history that are twenty and fifty years ago. To use them as examples of politicians that behaved badly, in regard to what is going on with our present president, to me, is pointless.
Democrats have done far more for the average citizen, then republicans who wouldn't even come close. So democrats have much to be proud of, and will continue to outshine republicans in working for the average American.

(01-13-2018 02:24 PM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Democrats have done far more for the average citizen, then republicans who wouldn't even come close. So democrats have much to be proud of, and will continue to outshine republicans in working for the average American.

What is an "average citizen"?

What is an "average American"?

Who belongs to the "working class"?

Dear ess,
If, you don't know by now, that's too bad. They are people who work for wages, who are employed by various companies, making products or giving services for the wages they earn.

(01-13-2018 12:27 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  The conservative take naturally blames the democrats.

My personal opinion is that Trump simply capitalized on a more deeply-rooted racist and bigoted America than any of us realized.

The most unfortunate piece of this is the Republican Party’s lack of backbone to hold him accountable for his unpresidential behavior. It will catch up with them in the end, I’m sure of that.

That formula has worked for years.

Reich apparently thinks it's obsolete

What has happened in America should not be seen as a victory for hatefulness over decency. It is more accurately understood as a repudiation of the American power structure.

And that the Democrats need a new playbook.

(01-13-2018 02:41 PM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear ess,
If, you don't know by now, that's too bad. They are people who work for wages, who are employed by various companies, making products or giving services for the wages they earn.

Under your definition.

Are there workers that aren't "average"?

If so.

Which ones?

(01-13-2018 02:24 PM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear GullLake,
I will not defend Clinton's sexual behavior, nor Kennedy's behavior in that tragic accident, but you are bringing up episodes of history that are twenty and fifty years ago. To use them as examples of politicians that behaved badly, in regard to what is going on with our present president, to me, is pointless.
Democrats have done far more for the average citizen, then republicans who wouldn't even come close. So democrats have much to be proud of, and will continue to outshine republicans in working for the average American.

I'm not foolish, or naive, enough to defend EITHER one.

(01-13-2018 10:30 AM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear BroncoPhilly,
You cannot generalize about democrats with your statement about envious. If you knew anything about the democratic party, then you would know that they have always stood for helping the working class people in America. If, that means trying to get better wages for those people, so be it. That does not mean automatic envy of those who may be better off economically.
Speaking of the Clinton's sharing their wealth, how much has President Trump shared? He still owes people money that did work for him. Notice, they did work for him. Yet he doesn't pay for an honest days work. How is that making America great again?

I don't have great things to say about either party, since even republicans have been drawn into the the thinking that the government is responsible for curing the ills of society. But to say the democrats have stood for and helped the "working class" is not only grossly inaccurate, it is sad, since people who are motivated to work and achieve for themselves are the most hurt by socialism and socialist policies which have for generations now been the hallmark of the Democratic Party. The democrats, instead, should be symbolized by the poor. Democrats rely on a target group of the electorate; blacks, hispanics, and the white welfare class. Policies which not only offer benefits for being poor, also insure that those same people remain poor, and dependent on the system that those folks know that democrats will continue to support. The "white guilt" that Shelby Steel eloquently and bravely describes, and other emotionalism has over the years added a huge section of misinformed members of the electorate who have been brainwashed into believing the those who have achieved success somehow should owe those who haven't, and that this debt must be forced upon the "producers" in society, even if they have done nothing to cause the misfortune of the "needy".

I don't care about democrats or republicans, but rather whether people understand the value of freedom, individual liberty, free enterprise capitalism, self initiative and reliance, and LIMITED government. Very few get this today though. Too few.

(01-12-2018 09:56 AM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear brovol,
Socialism is not immoral. You may think that, but many countries of the world are socialistic and are doing just fine. Doesn't the Bible condemn greed? I think you have gone overboard with your statement of greed being a great thing. Our government should look after the people who live here. Hasn't the government passed laws to make our citizens lives better? Pure Food and Drug laws, clean water laws, anti-pollution laws, etc. Do you really believe if many of the business leaders in our history had the chance to spend their money to improve some of the above, that they would have done it? Not a chance.

I don't think that business leaders have any obligation to improve the lives of others. And Ken, no matter what your class in society is, I don't think you owe me a thing, even if I am in a lower class. I owe myself the obligation to achieve through my own means. If you would like to offer me help from the generosity of your heart, well that's great, but you should not be compelled to do so, unless you have personally done something wrongfully to cause my misfortune. Freedom is moral. Compromising freedom is immoral. Socialism is immoral. Greed, on the other hand, is simply the desire to want as much as you can get, and does not require any wrongful or hurtful elements. Moreover, as I said before, it motivates people to work hard. Which do you think is less moral; a hard work ethic or laziness?

As for the government regulations you cite, I will simply suggest that a free market does allow for consumer choice. If a company is producing bad or unhealthy goods, given better options, the guy that sells the hotdogs that make folks vomit will generally go out of business. Deregulation tends to promote business, which means more job and better wages. Jobs and wages does more for "the working class" than welfare and regulation.

Government can best "look out for" people who live here by keeping the lowest profile possible, and getting out of the way for our economy.

(01-12-2018 11:05 AM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear Boca Rocket,
Yes, but you gave examples that were more communistic than socialistic, in their approach. What about Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Belgium, to name a few?

How have Venezuela and Greece done with socialism Ken?

(01-13-2018 10:39 AM)ess Wrote:  

(01-13-2018 10:30 AM)Ken Barna Wrote:  If you knew anything about the democratic party, then you would know that they have always stood for helping the working class people in America.

"have always" really means "used to"

Exactly. The Democrat Party used to fight for the American blue-collar working man, not anymore. They're more interested in naturalizing illegal aliens than they are fighting for blue collar working folks.

(01-13-2018 11:46 AM)GullLake Wrote:  

(01-13-2018 11:23 AM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear ess,
No it doesn't. You are misinformed.

Oh please. We are becoming "Slappy City."

Anyone who thinks either the Dem or GOP are marginally more moral or ethical than the other is "misinformed."

Working class? Democrats? Read Joe Biden's take on the election from the LA Times in Dec 2016. Clinton and the Dems were so busy trashing Trump personally (granted, there is a lot to trash), and talking about non-issues like gender-neutral bathrooms, that they never did talk about how to put people to work and allow the middle class to keep more of its pay.

That is why so many working class voters reluctantly voted for Trump. The Dems and Hillary in particular, were not speaking to them. They were speaking to the "elite" who are perceived to look down their noses at the working class.

All Dems seem to care about these days is getting illegal immigrants the right to vote as quickly as they can. That's it. They want to legalize another 10-30 million (depending on whose data you accept) potential voters-who will vote 90% Democrat based on history.

Work on behalf of American blue-collar workers? That went out in the 1990's when Bill Clinton signed NAFTA. This isn't your grandfathers Democrat Party anymore. And that's why they lost to Donald Trump in 2016, with as many issues as he had he still came across as more sincere for American workers than Hillary Clinton.

Quote:My personal opinion is that Trump simply capitalized on a more deeply-rooted racist and bigoted America than any of us realized.

And you called me obtuse, your side still hasn't grasped what the last election was all about. You're not as smart as you think you are.

All Dems seem to have anymore is name calling and conspiracy theories. Calling everyone who disagrees with you a 'bigot' or 'racist' may make YOU feel better, but you're not building a political movement. And that's all Schumer and Pelosi have.

Tax Reform-which NOT ONE Democrat voted for-is responsible for my 401k to increase in value 45% last year. On the mere promise of the bill to come, I gained that much. Since the start of 2018 my investments have increased 5% in value. In 14 days.

The Dems are setting themselves up for a major election beat-down in 2018. If the economy is still humming along and all they have to show for it is voting 'No' on everything Trump puts up, they're going to get thumped big time. And justifiably so.

And then they can all run around and suggest 'whitelash' and 'racism' was the cause for their losses-again. I mean, what else does the Party have?

Dear brovol,
Yes, pick a country that has virtually a dictator as their leader, Venezuela, and use that to bash socialism. What about the European countries that I mentioned? Those countries are doing well, and their people are happy. That is bad?

Dear BroncoPhilly,
The economy was well on the road to recovery before the election of Trump. How many republicans voted for anything President Obama wanted to accomplish? Talk about calling the kettle black.
Over thirty republicans have declined to run for re-election, and this is just January, and you are calling for a democratic beatdown? We will see what transpires this year in congressional elections.

(01-14-2018 10:23 AM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear BroncoPhilly,
The economy was well on the road to recovery before the election of Trump. How many republicans voted for anything President Obama wanted to accomplish? Talk about calling the kettle black.
Over thirty republicans have declined to run for re-election, and this is just January, and you are calling for a democratic beatdown? We will see what transpires this year in congressional elections.

The Obama mantra-everything BAD that happened during his Administration was attributable to George W. Bush. Everything GOOD that happens for Trump was attributable to Obama. Talk about ducking responsibility!

Obama never saw 3% growth in GDP in the 8 years he was in office. The ONLY President in the last century to never see that level of growth. The facts are, he proposed no policies that would promote economic growth in America. None. He had no understanding of economic issues and could care less.

What little growth we saw coming back from the 2008 recession was attributable to massive deficit spending. Obama doubled the national debt in 8 years-that I'll give him credit for. American saw no increase in real wages during Obama's 8 years, in fact we saw a DECREASE in real wages during most of those years.

He got his failed ACA pushed through when the Dems controlled Congress his first 2 years and that was it for any significant legislation. The rest of the time he spent flying around the world apologizing for America.

Obama had no interest in working with Republicans to come up with compromise legislation. He was truly a 'my way or the highway' Leftist. IMO his 8 years in office will go down to historians as some of the least productive for a modern American President.

Dear BroncoPhilly,
Well, we certainly know that you are in support of the economy as it benefits you. Deficit spending was responsible for continual job growth with Obama's last two years in office?
You draw information from the Fox News station that wouldn't know to tell the truth, or both sides of a story, when it comes to fairness, or objective reporting.
You are letting your republican bias show, influenced by Fox. "Flying around the world", "Apologizing for America", "No increase in real wages". Those were all catch phrases of that wonderful Faux News.

(01-13-2018 11:50 AM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear ess
If, you are somehow referring to the article that you enclosed, it is still not clear what you mean. I didn't get that the democrats lost working class people.

What DID you get from the article, Ken?

Robert B. Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley and Senior Fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies. He served as Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the twentieth century.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama helped shift power away from the people towards corporations. It was this that created an opening for Donald Trump

The Democratic party once represented the working class. But over the last three decades the party has been taken over by Washington-based fundraisers, bundlers, analysts, and pollsters who have focused instead on raising campaign money from corporate and Wall Street executives and getting votes from upper middle-class households in “swing” suburbs.

Democrats have occupied the White House for 16 of the last 24 years, and for four of those years had control of both houses of Congress. But in that time they failed to reverse the decline in working-class wages and economic security. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without providing millions of blue-collar workers who thereby lost their jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well.


They stood by as corporations hammered trade unions, the backbone of the white working class – failing to reform labor laws to impose meaningful penalties on companies that violate them, or help workers form unions with simple up-or-down votes. Partly as a result, union membership sank from 22% of all workers when Bill Clinton was elected president to less than 12% today, and the working class lost bargaining leverage to get a share of the economy’s gains.

Bill Clinton and Obama also allowed antitrust enforcement to ossify – with the result that large corporations have grown far larger, and major industries more concentrated. The unsurprising result of this combination – more trade, declining unionization and more industry concentration – has been to shift political and economic power to big corporations and the wealthy, and to shaft the working class. This created an opening for Donald Trump’s authoritarian demagoguery, and his presidency.