Donald Trump

swjohnsey

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

First.Aspect

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

kingstongraham

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

You just need to know what buttons to press to get a reaction.

Pross

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Well, if you were the person you pretend to be you'd certainly be helping support the Trump voter stereotype.

swjohnsey

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

Did I say that? To be fair, Blacks make up about 12% of U.S. population but only 40% of those on welfare.

First.Aspect

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

Did I say that? To be fair, Blacks make up about 12% of U.S. population but only 40% of those on welfare.

Yes, you did. And I am being fair.

Next question, what in your (small) mind does that stat tell you?

swjohnsey

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

Did I say that? To be fair, Blacks make up about 12% of U.S. population but only 40% of those on welfare.

Yes, you did. And I am being fair.

Next question, what in your (small) mind does that stat tell you?

That folks need to get a job and stop knocking out kids they can't support? Last count 75% of Black children born in the U.S. are to single mothers.

elbowloh

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

Did I say that? To be fair, Blacks make up about 12% of U.S. population but only 40% of those on welfare.

Yes, you did. And I am being fair.

Next question, what in your (small) mind does that stat tell you?

That folks need to get a job and stop knocking out kids they can't support? Last count 75% of Black children born in the U.S. are to single mothers.

All the daddies were shot by the police...

I would do a winking face to signify a joke, but it's not really a laughing (BL) matter.

swjohnsey

elbowloh said:

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

Did I say that? To be fair, Blacks make up about 12% of U.S. population but only 40% of those on welfare.

Yes, you did. And I am being fair.

Next question, what in your (small) mind does that stat tell you?

That folks need to get a job and stop knocking out kids they can't support? Last count 75% of Black children born in the U.S. are to single mothers.

All the daddies were shot by the police...

I would do a winking face to signify a joke, but it's not really a laughing (BL) matter.

Every year around 1,000 civilians in the U.S. are killed by the police. In 2019 the number was 1,004, 370 White, 235 Black, 158 Hispanic and the balance race other or not given. I don't think it will make a difference.

elbowloh

swjohnsey said:

elbowloh said:

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

Did I say that? To be fair, Blacks make up about 12% of U.S. population but only 40% of those on welfare.

Yes, you did. And I am being fair.

Next question, what in your (small) mind does that stat tell you?

That folks need to get a job and stop knocking out kids they can't support? Last count 75% of Black children born in the U.S. are to single mothers.

All the daddies were shot by the police...

I would do a winking face to signify a joke, but it's not really a laughing (BL) matter.

Every year around 1,000 civilians in the U.S. are killed by the police. In 2019 the number was 1,004, 370 White, 235 Black, 158 Hispanic and the balance race other or not given. I don't think it will make a difference.

Yes. It was a joke.

DeVlaeminck

sungod said:

damage to the ozone layer was certainly in the news by the mid-70s, i remember it

for instance...
https://www.nytimes.com/1975/06/22/archives/aerosol-feels-the-ozone-effect.html

No you don't - no idea what that link is supposed to be it's unreadable.

DeVlaeminck

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

Republicans (or Mitch McConnell at least) seem to be doubling down on the Trump approach. At the very least they seem committed to backing disinformation, fake news candidates in future.

Electorate arguably doesn't really punish them for it, so why not double down?

It is working at the moment. Not sure if in 4-8 years time the younger voters will show this to be short sighted though. These are a generation of people who grew up with the internet, unlike the middle aged white working class moron base they currently have.

A majority of white Americans with degrees voted for Trump first time around. You may think they are morons but they aren't all working class by any means.

That's very misleading. And not true. It was something like 49-46 in that demographic. Compared to historic levels, there was a definite and significant swing towards Trump in non-college level voters, and away in college-level or higher.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/

If you take away the "white" filter, there is quite a stark 9 points in favour of the democrats. There is no doubt that his "base" is NOT a cohort of white, white collar workers.

You would expect that after 4 chaotic years, these differences will be even more pronounced this time around (but based on the prism that most republicans would vote for a mannequin if they had to, rather than democrat, and vice versa).

Well those were the figures I got from googling it last night.

A quote from the independent.
"Despite Mr Trump's support from the working class, exit poll data shows that over half of voters on incomes below $30,000 a year supported for Ms Clinton. Meanwhile, half of voters earning between $50,000 and $99,000 a year supported Mr Trump and he was favoured more by voters in higher income brackets – but only by very narrow margins."

So again whatever way you cut it it's not just a working class phenomenon.

I'm not going to take away the white filter because nobody has argued that isn't important.

Well you can fixate on the use of cartoonish stereotypes on an internet forum if you like. However the point remains that he won by disproportionatelt mobilizing the demographic I am refering to. His racist rhetoric should tell you this because it was playing to the same audience. It was always a balancing act as to how many right minded Republicans could tolerate this. Hence, the Democrats put up a pretty innocuous candidate and they picked up some "good conscience" votes that will likely revert if the next Republican candidate isn't a sociopath.

Of course all republicans are not morons but you are getting vicariously offended there aren't you.

However, if you actually look into it, there was a pretty dramatic swing towards the, lets say, wishful of thinking in 2016.

There was also a reversion towards the mean amongst other groups more traditionally republican.

I just take issue with you using a cartoonish stereotype that demonises the working class - if you want to write them off as morons expect to be pulled up on it.

sungod

DeVlaeminck said:

sungod said:

damage to the ozone layer was certainly in the news by the mid-70s, i remember it

for instance...
https://www.nytimes.com/1975/06/22/archives/aerosol-feels-the-ozone-effect.html

No you don't - no idea what that link is supposed to be it's unreadable.

yes i do, the link works fine

as you've chosen to be obnoxious i'll just leave you in the lies and ignorance you so clearly revel in

First.Aspect

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

Republicans (or Mitch McConnell at least) seem to be doubling down on the Trump approach. At the very least they seem committed to backing disinformation, fake news candidates in future.

Electorate arguably doesn't really punish them for it, so why not double down?

It is working at the moment. Not sure if in 4-8 years time the younger voters will show this to be short sighted though. These are a generation of people who grew up with the internet, unlike the middle aged white working class moron base they currently have.

A majority of white Americans with degrees voted for Trump first time around. You may think they are morons but they aren't all working class by any means.

That's very misleading. And not true. It was something like 49-46 in that demographic. Compared to historic levels, there was a definite and significant swing towards Trump in non-college level voters, and away in college-level or higher.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/

If you take away the "white" filter, there is quite a stark 9 points in favour of the democrats. There is no doubt that his "base" is NOT a cohort of white, white collar workers.

You would expect that after 4 chaotic years, these differences will be even more pronounced this time around (but based on the prism that most republicans would vote for a mannequin if they had to, rather than democrat, and vice versa).

Well those were the figures I got from googling it last night.

A quote from the independent.
"Despite Mr Trump's support from the working class, exit poll data shows that over half of voters on incomes below $30,000 a year supported for Ms Clinton. Meanwhile, half of voters earning between $50,000 and $99,000 a year supported Mr Trump and he was favoured more by voters in higher income brackets – but only by very narrow margins."

So again whatever way you cut it it's not just a working class phenomenon.

I'm not going to take away the white filter because nobody has argued that isn't important.

Well you can fixate on the use of cartoonish stereotypes on an internet forum if you like. However the point remains that he won by disproportionatelt mobilizing the demographic I am refering to. His racist rhetoric should tell you this because it was playing to the same audience. It was always a balancing act as to how many right minded Republicans could tolerate this. Hence, the Democrats put up a pretty innocuous candidate and they picked up some "good conscience" votes that will likely revert if the next Republican candidate isn't a sociopath.

Of course all republicans are not morons but you are getting vicariously offended there aren't you.

However, if you actually look into it, there was a pretty dramatic swing towards the, lets say, wishful of thinking in 2016.

There was also a reversion towards the mean amongst other groups more traditionally republican.

I just take issue with you using a cartoonish stereotype that demonises the working class - if you want to write them off as morons expect to be pulled up on it.

I was demonising the Trump base, which happens to disproportionately fit into that bracket. The Venn diagram of white, working class, Trump base, college degree and moron is complex, but there's overlap all around. The "Trump base" and "moron"
epithets are pretty much a tautology though.

joenobody

pinno said:

When the dust finally settles, it will be clear the damage Trump has done to the Republican party (and trust in government).

I don't know if this is true, at least to the Trump base/Republican supporters. This is a message I received from a family friend when I asked what she thought of the current situation (post the declaration of Biden as president-elect and Trump's statement regarding legal challenges):

I believe that there were voting irregularities in Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Georgia and NC by design.

I need to add Michigan and Wisconsin to the aforementioned states. I've watched US election results intently since 1982 ish and have never heard of voting counts being halted mid-process for hours or days and then restarted. That happened this year in several, if not all of the states I mentioned. Apparently the delays occurred when the algorithm inherent in the software determined that Trump's lead had advanced to the point that Biden votes (from whatever source) needed to be infused into the count. A close ally of Democratic House Speaker Pelosi, created the software, and thus the algorithm being used for counting votes in all of the Democratic led states I mentioned. Dem Senator Diane Feinstein's husband is also a major player in that software company, BUT my antennae started going up after Trump's election when Hillary Clinton funded and other prominent democrats promoted the false narrative that Trump colluded with Russia in the 2016 elections to prevent Hillary Clinton from winning. It was made up, but they all sang from the same sheet of music in an attempt to impeach Trump from office.
Trump's abrasive, often self-serving manner existed, in part, because the man was trying to lead a nation while being blind- sided and thwarted at every turn! A less determined President would have told the nation to stick it and moved on. He never even took a salary, and yet he persisted!
As this election controversy has unfolded, the reasons the Democrats have wanted Trump out of office so badly was that he had interrupted their grand scheme to take control of the country in perpetuity. The plan that would or will give them the power to take control is to make Washington DC a state in direct violation of the constitution. Puerto Rico would also be made a state, but I need to do some research to know if that is a constitutional violation as well. Both DC and Puerto Rico would be Democratic strongholds and alter the balance of power in the house and Senate. The democrats, if ever in control, would stack the Supreme Court to increase the number of Judges on the bench beyond the constitutionally directed number of nine. A majority of Democratic leaning judges could guarantee that that party could do just about anything it wanted to do, and a democratic agenda could always prevail.
From my standpoint that would mean that my constitutional right to assemble with other like-minded individuals for religious or any other purpose would be in jeopardy, and my ability to keep and bear arms would be the first to be tossed out the proverbial window.
Moreover, abortion, even up to the time of birth would become legal.
I'm not anti-abortion in all circumstances, but I do not want abortion to be used as a form of birth control.
Trump is pro American, just as Boris Johnson should be! Who else should heads of state be looking out for?

I have a feeling, of course unsubstantiated, that this view is not unique. Trump's actions actually reinforce this, IMO, and whoever the candidate is, Republican voters will continue to support their party for the reasons given above.

I didn't dig in to the BoJo reference - it's a rabbit hole I didn't want to go down...

First.Aspect

DeVlaeminck said:

sungod said:

damage to the ozone layer was certainly in the news by the mid-70s, i remember it

for instance...
https://www.nytimes.com/1975/06/22/archives/aerosol-feels-the-ozone-effect.html

No you don't - no idea what that link is supposed to be it's unreadable.

It really was. I think CFCs were banned in the early 80s in the US, so at least a scientific discussion point well before that.

I don't remember it though. Earliest memories are of Open University programmes of bearded scientists wearing brown flares demonstrating what a black hole was using marbles. the Breakfast TV came along and ruined it all. In the interim there was a strange thing call an election where a lady with bad hair was involved and my dad was pretty upset. And, of course, Tomorrow's World and the impending global freeze.

briantrumpet

kingstongraham said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

You just need to know what buttons to press to get a reaction.

Exactly so. It's not hard to get a reaction on here, even with a fictional character.

elbowloh

If the Dems were so good at rigging votes and "fixing" government their way, then surely they would have won a majority in the Senate, Trump wouldn't have won in 2016 and there would not be a conservative majority on the Supreme Court!

swjohnsey

elbowloh said:

If the Dems were so good at rigging votes and "fixing" government their way, then surely they would have won a majority in the Senate, Trump wouldn't have won in 2016 and there would not be a conservative majority on the Supreme Court!

You don't understand the American electoral process. Just for grins google Lyndon Johnson and Box 13. I taught 7th grade in Alice, Texas, the town where that occurred. For years Lyndon Johnson was referred to as Landslide Lyndon, mostly behind his back.

rjsterry

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

First.Aspect said:

swjohnsey said:

Yeah, sayin' Trump supporters are a bunch of ignorant crackers isn't. My statement is fact but yes, it is a generalization. Black support for the Democrat Party has run as high as 95% in recent years. Trump made serious inroads into the Hispanic community especially in the Cuban-American community in Florida.

Far be it from me to assume that you need to be an ignorant cracker to think that black people and hispanics are illegal immigrant benefit sponges.

Did I say that? To be fair, Blacks make up about 12% of U.S. population but only 40% of those on welfare.

Yes, you did. And I am being fair.

Next question, what in your (small) mind does that stat tell you?

That folks need to get a job and stop knocking out kids they can't support? Last count 75% of Black children born in the U.S. are to single mothers.

Amazing! You have parthenogenesis over there?

tailwindhome

The whole supreme court life term thing's a bit bonkers.

An 18 year term limit with 1 judge replaced every 2 years would seem a sensible more stable arrangement

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

sungod said:

damage to the ozone layer was certainly in the news by the mid-70s, i remember it

for instance...
https://www.nytimes.com/1975/06/22/archives/aerosol-feels-the-ozone-effect.html

No you don't - no idea what that link is supposed to be it's unreadable.

It really was. I think CFCs were banned in the early 80s in the US, so at least a scientific discussion point well before that.

I don't remember it though. Earliest memories are of Open University programmes of bearded scientists wearing brown flares demonstrating what a black hole was using marbles. the Breakfast TV came along and ruined it all. In the interim there was a strange thing call an election where a lady with bad hair was involved and my dad was pretty upset. And, of course, Tomorrow's World and the impending global freeze.

I can confirm, I too remember talk of another ice age in the early 80s.

swjohnsey

tailwindhome said:

The whole supreme court life term thing's a bit bonkers.

An 18 year term limit with 1 judge replaced every 2 years would seem a sensible more stable arrangement

Life terms for federal judges is ingrained in the constitution and would require a constitutional amendment to change. It would be difficuly/impossible.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

sungod said:

damage to the ozone layer was certainly in the news by the mid-70s, i remember it

for instance...
https://www.nytimes.com/1975/06/22/archives/aerosol-feels-the-ozone-effect.html

No you don't - no idea what that link is supposed to be it's unreadable.

It really was. I think CFCs were banned in the early 80s in the US, so at least a scientific discussion point well before that.

I don't remember it though. Earliest memories are of Open University programmes of bearded scientists wearing brown flares demonstrating what a black hole was using marbles. the Breakfast TV came along and ruined it all. In the interim there was a strange thing call an election where a lady with bad hair was involved and my dad was pretty upset. And, of course, Tomorrow's World and the impending global freeze.

I can confirm, I too remember talk of another ice age in the early 80s.

me too, I think the story was that we would only need an average temp drop of 2 degrees.

swjohnsey

I asked my wife today to name the prime minister of England. Not a clue. The same question to my next door neighbor. "What's a prime minister?" I really don't understand y'all's interest in our presidential election.

briantrumpet

Here's another fictional character

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventures_of_Huckleberry_Finn

First.Aspect

swjohnsey said:

I asked my wife today to name the prime minister of England. Not a clue. The same question to my next door neighbor. "What's a prime minister?" I really don't understand y'all's interest in our presidential election.

It would only be a fair test if you asled her what a president was. For all we know she thinks it is a camambert.

shirley_basso

#humblebrag we are the most powerful nation on earth :shudder: who cares who y'all are

swjohnsey

Whatsa camambert?

kingstongraham

swjohnsey said:

I asked my wife today to name the prime minister of England. Not a clue. The same question to my next door neighbor. "What's a prime minister?" I really don't understand y'all's interest in our presidential election.

I'm sorry to hear that Mrs Mitty is so ignorant of world affairs.