(03-17-2020 02:14 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Ham - to the substantive points of the post, there isn't much to add to the conversation about that article posted.

I never read it, I just looked up who the author was, since Owl#s took umbrage with the left-wing slant of the publication, and I wondered if the author had a similar slant. Since he focused on the political affiliation of the publication, it seemed like the political affiliation of the author was equally important. And given that the author was of the opposite political spectrum, that seemed relevant to a comment focusing on political spectrum. If you think it doesn't add much insight, that's your prerogative. I have no desire to debate the merits of that article, given I haven't even read it.

Thanks for the response.

I think organizations choose their columnists with intent. Being obvious here because of what is going on... The DNC establishment supporting Biden would never vote for Trump, but many Berniacs won't vote for Biden. If I were a right-wing organization trying to appear balanced and create the impression you've alluded to, I'd ask a known Democrat who perhaps worked with Bill Clinton but now supports Bernie to opine on Biden.

Maybe I'm just more jaded than you, but that's why I wouldn't make the assumption you did... that because the leanings of the publication are meaningful, the leanings of the author are equally so. The guy is a well-known Republican, but he's also a 'never Trumper'. The enemy of my enemy signs my paycheck.

Not saying you're wrong... just a different perspective that I suspect owl at least somewhat shares.

I guess my point is that left-wing rags have gone out of their way to find neocons disaffected with Trump in order to parrot the message that, "Hey, even republicans dislike him." This isn't the first, and won't be the last.

My other point is that the article seems to be nothing more than a succession of opinionated rants, with little in the way of substantive facts to back them up.

(03-17-2020 03:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  he tends to piss off everybody associated with the pre 2016 political establishment.

And he was elected by those pissed off with the pre 2016 political establishment?

(03-17-2020 04:01 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 03:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  he tends to piss off everybody associated with the pre 2016 political establishment.

And he was elected by those pissed off with the pre 2016 political establishment?

Yep.

(03-17-2020 04:23 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 04:01 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 03:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  he tends to piss off everybody associated with the pre 2016 political establishment.

And he was elected by those pissed off with the pre 2016 political establishment?

Yep.

So, he was elected for Hope and Change.

(03-17-2020 04:23 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 04:01 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 03:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  he tends to piss off everybody associated with the pre 2016 political establishment.

And he was elected by those pissed off with the pre 2016 political establishment?

Yep.

So, he was elected for Hope and Change.

(03-17-2020 04:23 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 04:01 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 03:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  he tends to piss off everybody associated with the pre 2016 political establishment.

And he was elected by those pissed off with the pre 2016 political establishment?

Yep.

So, he was elected for Hope and Change.

(03-17-2020 03:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't think the author is necessarily of the opposite side of the political spectrum. Both The Atlantic and the author appear to lie on the Authoritarian side of the Authoritarian/Libertarian divide (the Y-axis, if you will). Left and Right mean less to me, and in particular would seem to mean less in this particular discussion, than Authoritarian versus Libertarian, although I am clearly right of center on the Left/Right axis.

What proof do you have that the author lies above the x-axis on the Authoritarian/Libertarian divide? Just curious, as you kind of casually toss out that conclusion. My guess is that you don't know the author that well but are making this assumption because it fits within your world view. You might be correct about the author, but the assumption you make isn't really an informed opinion.

I should note that I'm just skimming these comments because I don't find them very engaging and I don't really care that much about your response.

In my short life (relative to most of the active posters here), I never remember as many notable people from a president's political party disavowing the president. I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

(03-18-2020 01:01 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 03:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't think the author is necessarily of the opposite side of the political spectrum. Both The Atlantic and the author appear to lie on the Authoritarian side of the Authoritarian/Libertarian divide (the Y-axis, if you will). Left and Right mean less to me, and in particular would seem to mean less in this particular discussion, than Authoritarian versus Libertarian, although I am clearly right of center on the Left/Right axis.

What proof do you have that the author lies above the x-axis on the Authoritarian/Libertarian divide? Just curious, as you kind of casually toss out that conclusion. My guess is that you don't know the author that well but are making this assumption because it fits within your world view. You might be correct about the author, but the assumption you make isn't really an informed opinion.

I said "appear" with does not suggest or require proof. Unlike a lot of anti-Trumpers, I tend not to assert as fact things for which I have only allegations in support. He served in both Bush administrations, which were (particularly GWB) about as neocon as you can get. And the Bushes were pretty adamant in their opposition to Trump. That gets me to "appears." If it doesn't get you there, so what?

Quote:I should note that I'm just skimming these comments because I don't find them very engaging and I don't really care that much about your response.
In my short life (relative to most of the active posters here), I never remember as many notable people from a president's political party disavowing the president. I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

By 2016 much of the republican leadership had gone neocon--which generally appeals to religious right and national defense conservatives. Those folks tend to hate Trump. Zeihan writes and speaks a lot about how Trump does not appeal to a lot of traditional republicans. My brother once described neocons as, "liberal every issue were I'm conservative, and conservative on every issue were I am liberal." They are very much in the upper right-hand corner of the 2-dimensional X-Y diagram. I'm not.

I am more of a libertarian, Main Street economic conservative, fiscally conservative and socially liberal, with a strong military that we never have to use because nobody dares pick on us and we don't go around picking on them. I tend to see republicans more as the enemy of my enemy rather than true friends. As far as Trump, I don't like the way he talks, and I disagree with him on some of his most important policy issues like the wall and tariffs. But I find the incessant criticism based on allegation and innuendo to be extremely off-putting.

(03-18-2020 01:01 AM)mrbig Wrote:  In my short life (relative to most of the active posters here), I never remember as many notable people from a president's political party disavowing the president. I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

How many Berniac Democrats didn't vote for Hillary last time and won't vote for Biden this time either?

How many prominent Democrats have distanced themselves from Bernie?

I think the difference is that Trump, an outsider to the party won... while Bernie, also an outsider to the party did not.... plus perhaps the liberal slant of the Media and the fact that Trump won. There has been more 'play' (that I've seen, plus my Bernie supporting son) for the past 3+ years about Republicans who don't support Trump than from Democrats who didn't support Hillary (Bernie Bros). It's come around a little because of the election, but it's been pretty silent

(03-18-2020 08:15 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 01:01 AM)mrbig Wrote:  In my short life (relative to most of the active posters here), I never remember as many notable people from a president's political party disavowing the president. I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

How many Berniac Democrats didn't vote for Hillary last time and won't vote for Biden this time either?

How many prominent Democrats have distanced themselves from Bernie?

I think the difference is that Trump, an outsider to the party won... while Bernie, also an outsider to the party did not.... plus perhaps the liberal slant of the Media and the fact that Trump won. There has been more 'play' (that I've seen, plus my Bernie supporting son) for the past 3+ years about Republicans who don't support Trump than from Democrats who didn't support Hillary (Bernie Bros). It's come around a little because of the election, but it's been pretty silent

So to Big's comment - you can't think of any similar instances?

Quote: I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

I did not vote for Trump in 2016. I don't think you consider me a prominent Republican, though.

So if Republicans are not his base, what is?

I think, maybe, it is largely working class Americans who are fed up with the colonial attitude of the coastal elites and the business as usual attitude evinced by Hillary. Her platform was essentially "I am Hillary - you owe it to me. It's my turn. I am a woman."

Seeing the latter attitude again in Biden's VP pick.

Quote:I am more of a libertarian, Main Street economic conservative, fiscally conservative and socially liberal, with a strong military that we never have to use because nobody dares pick on us and we don't go around picking on them.

Same here.

Quote:But I find the incessant criticism based on allegation and innuendo to be extremely off-putting.

Same here. I also find it all to be very two-faced. I found the Russian witch hunt to be very irrational. (and witch hunt is MY word. Search the archives for proof) I found the Kavanaugh witch hunt to be profoundly disturbing that top American officials would countenance such a display. I find the tax return witch hunt to be stupid and senseless. I found the impeachment witch stupid and senseless. I find the lies about Trump and the innuendo to be unseemly. I find the blind defense of the lies and innuendo by otherwise smart people puzzling and concerning.

Big, you want evidence. But none is ever presented with the innuendo and allegations. Does this not concern you?

352']

(03-18-2020 01:01 AM)mrbig Wrote:  In my short life (relative to most of the active posters here), I never remember as many notable people from a president's political party disavowing the president. I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

You should have seen the election of 1912

I remember it well.

(03-18-2020 08:19 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 08:15 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 01:01 AM)mrbig Wrote:  In my short life (relative to most of the active posters here), I never remember as many notable people from a president's political party disavowing the president. I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

How many Berniac Democrats didn't vote for Hillary last time and won't vote for Biden this time either?

How many prominent Democrats have distanced themselves from Bernie?

I think the difference is that Trump, an outsider to the party won... while Bernie, also an outsider to the party did not.... plus perhaps the liberal slant of the Media and the fact that Trump won. There has been more 'play' (that I've seen, plus my Bernie supporting son) for the past 3+ years about Republicans who don't support Trump than from Democrats who didn't support Hillary (Bernie Bros). It's come around a little because of the election, but it's been pretty silent

So to Big's comment - you can't think of any similar instances?

The Carter administration - a lot of similarities, including the enmity of establishment Democrats.

(03-18-2020 08:19 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So to Big's comment - you can't think of any similar instances?

First, you'd have to define 'similar'. Apparently you don't see Trump and Bernie as similar. How about Perot? He didn't win either, but he ran as an independent and clearly took votes away from the conservative candidate that gave Clinton the election despite not getting 50% of the vote.... though we don't know how many of them would actually have come and voted for either other candidate.

It hasn't happened in my lifetime that someone who hadn't been part of and supported by their party for many many years before getting that party's nomination... though in both of the past two elections (including the upcoming one) and a few others within my lifetime (Perot), someone has come from outside that situation and impacted the outcome.

Trump is the first one who has come from outside the party and won... so of course you've not seen EXACTLY this happen before...

So the better starting question is, what has happened before that you would consider 'similar'? If Perot and Bernie aren't similar in your mind, then there is literally nothing I can think of to compare it to. As Frizzy noted, Carter was arguably close... but still a longtime elected party Democrat... plus the market/media was 3 major TV stations, weekly or monthly magazines and a daily print newspaper.

If you don't believe there's ever been a similar event, then of course there hasn't been a similar reaction to that event.

(03-18-2020 10:11 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 08:19 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So to Big's comment - you can't think of any similar instances?

First, you'd have to define 'similar'. Apparently you don't see Trump and Bernie as similar. How about Perot? He didn't win either, but he ran as an independent and clearly took votes away from the conservative candidate that gave Clinton the election despite not getting 50% of the vote.... though we don't know how many of them would actually have come and voted for either other candidate.

It hasn't happened in my lifetime that someone who hadn't been part of and supported by their party for many many years before getting that party's nomination... though in both of the past two elections (including the upcoming one) and a few others within my lifetime (Perot), someone has come from outside that situation and impacted the outcome.

Trump is the first one who has come from outside the party and won... so of course you've not seen EXACTLY this happen before...

So the better starting question is, what has happened before that you would consider 'similar'? If Perot and Bernie aren't similar in your mind, then there is literally nothing I can think of to compare it to. As Frizzy noted, Carter was arguably close... but still a longtime elected party Democrat... plus the market/media was 3 major TV stations, weekly or monthly magazines and a daily print newspaper.

If you don't believe there's ever been a similar event, then of course there hasn't been a similar reaction to that event.

Does this count?

(03-18-2020 08:15 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 01:01 AM)mrbig Wrote:  In my short life (relative to most of the active posters here), I never remember as many notable people from a president's political party disavowing the president. I mean, numerous prominent republicans in 2016 were very explicit that they did not vote for Trump. It was pretty striking to me. Obviously didn't matter to most of the base.

How many Berniac Democrats didn't vote for Hillary last time and won't vote for Biden this time either?

How many prominent Democrats have distanced themselves from Bernie?

I think the difference is that Trump, an outsider to the party won... while Bernie, also an outsider to the party did not.... plus perhaps the liberal slant of the Media and the fact that Trump won. There has been more 'play' (that I've seen, plus my Bernie supporting son) for the past 3+ years about Republicans who don't support Trump than from Democrats who didn't support Hillary (Bernie Bros). It's come around a little because of the election, but it's been pretty silent

Judging by social media, quite a few. Some of the twitter rose people might be Russian bots, but I suspect the vast majority are disaffected teenagers / millennials.

Republicans seem to be more inclined to vote "red no matter who" as opposed to Democrats who are far more picky. This is a huge advantage to Trump and could be a key factor in him getting reelected. It also helps that Biden is about as unlikable as Hillary, as opposed to Sanders (who, regardless of your politics, you have to admit is a likable guy).

(03-25-2020 09:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

I have two questions?
1) How useful is this "playbook" in reality?
2) How was it not followed by the Trump administration? Where did it deviate?

My criticism of this sort of document is that it has a whole lot of bureaucratic gobbledygook, but not much in the way of action. That's because there is no federal agency responsible for action. They all MANAGE pieces of the problem, but none of them actually DO anything.

What we need is a RESPONSE plan, not a bureaucratic MANAGEMENT plan. And that requires that we have an identified RESPONSE agency that is charged with actually DOING things.

We've got the wrong verbs.