-
@Siam said in US Politics:
@No-Quarter said in US Politics:
@Rembrandt maybe, but the fact remains that he is the President right now. There's a pretty strong argument that if there wasn't such a polarizing President in charge that uses every event (race relations , Covid, you name it) as an opportunity to play politics and blame the Left instead of trying to unify the country things might not be so bad.
I get that people on the left are just as culpable, but at the end of the day he is President and all of this is happening under his watch, and if he is unable to work with Dem run cities to fix the issues then maybe someone else should be put in charge that can. He's the leader, so needs to show a bit of leadership instead of pitting American's against each other all the time.
In Thailand and other SEA countries many tourists and foreigners are murdered each year. Often brutally. In most cases a public figure will announce that " if they weren't in the country, if they didn't visit, they'd be still alive now". This absolves the murderers and turns the sentiment against the people that chose to murder and rape and puts the blame on people who never wielded a weapon.
The blame is on the person for travelling.
Your post reminds me of this obvious manipulation of physical crimes.
Portland has had 82 days of continuous rioting. Here's a letter putting the blame on trump.
Fair point mate, and I wouldn't absolve the responsibility of the people doing the rioting, looting, assaulting and murdering. The extremists running amok on the streets are just the absolute worst, and Trump or no Trump those people still exist and will kick things off at the drop of a hat.
I was more referring to the fact that Trump has launched personal attacks on his opponents from the get-go, whether that's in the primaries against other Republicans, the election against Hilary, or during his term consistently attacking Democrats across the board. He's made it difficult for them to work with him on any issue at all, which is contributing to the delays getting the right help to the hardest hit cities.
Democrats like Ted Wheeler are also playing the same game, trying to score political points instead of trying to fix the issues causing the people in their cities so much suffering.
At some point someone has to be the bigger person and try to bridge the gap, and the onus falls on the President's shoulders. Trump won't do that though, he's far too egotistical and narcissistic to put the needs of every day American's above his own.
I'm seeing an increasing number of American's on social media that have just given up completely on both parties, and I wonder what the voting turnout is going to actually be given that.
I would also add a strong caveat to my musings here that it is incredibly hard to get a feel for what it is like on the ground in the States, so have really enjoyed the posts from posters like @photo-fox and @DMX to get some more perspective. With all the hype these days it feels like America is tearing itself apart, which is a bad thing for the world - I hope that's not the case.
-
@No-Quarter agree
Unity 2020 is not as spurious as once thought
-
@Frank said in US Politics:
If two things changed - Trump had a better personality and the media propaganda effort weren't so ardently anti-Trump
surely those things are related?
-
@taniwharugby said in US Politics:
@Frank said in US Politics:
If two things changed - Trump had a better personality and the media propaganda effort weren't so ardently anti-Trump
surely those things are related?
If Trump was pro war, pro high drug prices, pro WHO, pro climate change, pro globalization (outsourcing jobs to China), pro open borders, pro masks and closing down the economy etc then the media would love him. Its his policies not his personality. (Trillions are at stake).
-
@Frank said in US Politics:
If two things changed - Trump had a better personality and the media propaganda effort weren't so ardently anti-Trump and in the tank for the Democrats, he would win a landslide because his actual policies are broadly popular.
Trump has waged a war against the media since day one. His default mode of dealing with people is to bully them, mock them, so automatically he sets himself up. If you want to get people to give you a chance that is not the way to go about it
-
@taniwharugby said in US Politics:
@Frank said in US Politics:
If two things changed - Trump had a better personality and the media propaganda effort weren't so ardently anti-Trump
surely those things are related?
Yeah for sure. But for us objective spectators I think they ramped up the narrative unusually high. We spent about 2 years looking for Russian collusion.
All a mess, all divided and all the variables, ( trump, dems and media) all showed themselves as untrustworthy and irrational as each other. IMO
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Frank said in US Politics:
If two things changed - Trump had a better personality and the media propaganda effort weren't so ardently anti-Trump and in the tank for the Democrats, he would win a landslide because his actual policies are broadly popular.
Trump has waged a war against the media since day one. His default mode of dealing with people is to bully them, mock them, so automatically he sets himself up. If you want to get people to give you a chance that is not the way to go about it
That's hilarious that you think if Trump "gave the media a chance" they would have treated him fairly. Such cute old-fashioned values.
-
What I think the US needs as President is a slightly dewy-eyed patriot. America First is an entirely apt banner for this.
Realistically the intellectual left, and many innocent young idealists would hate it, so there’d be a lot of resistance from elements of the Democrats.
On the Republican side, they’d be resistance from those who get rich on the inequality of globalisation.
But such a person could tap in to a large element of the Trump support and the element of the Democrats who are much like the typical Kiwi voter.
It buggers belief that the riots can be seen as acceptable by elected US officials. Law and order is so fundamental that it ought to be a given.
Making America (to the detriment of its competitors) prosper delivers benefits to most of its populace. Again ought to be a no-brainer.
However, given the uneven benefits which have been delivered by policies of the last decade it seems that the electorate is deeply riven. And the philosophical divide between liberal elite and ordinary American values similarly wide.
Not sure any President can just take the country with them right now.
The Democrats to me are wholly incompetent/leaderless. They had four years to find someone statesman-like, moderate and who preached common decency and other traditional American values.
Joe Biden and an anti-Trump campaign doesn’t cut it.
Trump is an absolutely hog, but my money’s on him.
Four more years? -
@pakman you are right about the Dems. After the way Hillary lost, a candidate that failed to galvanize and motivate their support and the swing voters, a campaign that focussed on Trump being Trump, have they learned nothing? How hard can it be to find a younger than 60 year old likeable leader? This race feels like
-
@JC said in US Politics:
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
is ignoring a large part of the populous what we'd expect from a good leader?
Yes, if it's the right thing to do. That's what leadership is, identifying the right path then taking people on the journey. Trump's problem isn't that he ignores them, he antagonises them without any real attempt to persuade or engage. That's really hard when lots of people hate you, but it doesn't make the effort unnecessary.
Arguably the best summing up of what I dislike about Trump.
-
@photo-fox said in US Politics:
I'm just not optimistic enough to think conciliation is possible in this political environment. Everyone is playing to their base, and there's no political advantage to be gained in bipartisanship.
I'd add that both sides see advantages in deliberately fostering divisiveness and refusing to work together.
-
@pakman said in US Politics:
Four more years?
Regardless of who wins - Biden or Trump - we're in for years of division until some sense gets hammered into US politicians on all sides.
-
@taniwharugby said in US Politics:
@Winger his personality is what makes him such a divisive character.
He is either loved or hated, dont think there are too many in the middle.
I laughed at joe rogan when he said a couple of days ago ( smiling ) , arseholes now have a hero
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@pakman said in US Politics:
Four more years?
Regardless of who wins - Biden or Trump - we're in for years of division until some sense gets hammered into US politicians on all sides.
This is such bullshit. Sure plenty of Democrats are fucking idiots, but on the divisiveness scale, from 0 to Trump, where would Biden sit? About fuck-all is where.
It's exactly the false equivalence his supporters go for. The other side is just as bad, so it doesn't matter. The truth is that for every one divisive thing you can say that Biden has done/said, you could find shitloads more Trump has, probably even on the same day.
You have to buy in to the Trump idea that Biden is a puppet of the far left nutters to even imagine any equivalence, and that's just fiction - whereas we know what you get with Trump, and it's a fucking catastrophe in terms of dividing the country. -
@Siam said in US Politics:
@taniwharugby said in US Politics:
@Frank said in US Politics:
If two things changed - Trump had a better personality and the media propaganda effort weren't so ardently anti-Trump
surely those things are related?
Yeah for sure. But for us objective spectators I think they ramped up the narrative unusually high. We spent about 2 years looking for Russian collusion.
All a mess, all divided and all the variables, ( trump, dems and media) all showed themselves as untrustworthy and irrational as each other. IMO
I don't think you can pretend that the Russian interference investigation was a waste of time witch hunt unless you are buying into Trump's put upon rhetoric.
I would expect that a smoking gun as big as that was would be investigated hard. It addresses the very core of democracy and foreign interference.
If it comes up 'clean' then fine. This one came up pretty damn grubby and Mueller didn't help matters by leaving much unsaid and in the hands of others to interpret.
Do I believe that Trump himself actively colluded with Russia? No.
Do I think that his campaign wasn't above accepting help while trying to keep at arms length?Yes -
@Frank said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Frank said in US Politics:
If two things changed - Trump had a better personality and the media propaganda effort weren't so ardently anti-Trump and in the tank for the Democrats, he would win a landslide because his actual policies are broadly popular.
Trump has waged a war against the media since day one. His default mode of dealing with people is to bully them, mock them, so automatically he sets himself up. If you want to get people to give you a chance that is not the way to go about it
That's hilarious that you think if Trump "gave the media a chance" they would have treated him fairly. Such cute old-fashioned values.
Media, and reporters in general, are absolute shockers at turning nasty against criticism. We see it here in NZ as well. Take the likes of Ratpoo as an example. He has held a major grudge against the NZRU for years and fails to be even handed every time he 'writes'
On the flip side, if you blow smoke up their asses they love feeling important.
They are reasonably simple beasts to tame. You won't get them all being nice but you can certainly reduce the hatchet jobs.
US Politics