|
I'm guessing it's that neither candidate is white, but I dunno. Would appreciate your actual answer though, fwiw Maoist Pussy. Surely you can understand it's a little hard to imagine the set of ideological beliefs that lead one to support Obama and Trump with roughly equal fervor. I'm genuinely curious.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 11:27 |
|
|
Obama got boned by political gridlock for eight years and the results were fair-to-middling. Compromise blows. An absolute rear end in a top hat like Trump is the antithesis to Obama's philosophy. It fits on a molecular level. Almost scary, really. And like most democrats I've spoken to, he probably doesn't trust Hillary. At all. Neither do I.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
Both candidates are/were the likeliest within their respective election cycles to bring radical changes to the US.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
I don't know, I have a feeling a lot more "change" would have occurred in the US with a McCain/Palin win, than what we got. With Obama we got status quo, but you can take a look at the House if you feel shortchanged by that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
InsanityIsCrazy posted:Obama got boned by political gridlock for eight years and the results were fair-to-middling. Compromise blows. i think a big piece of it is that obama got some very significant pieces of policy passed (health care and gay marriage) but the average quality of life for families at or below a middle-class income has gotten worse. real wages have continued to stagnate since the 80's, low skilled "honest" work has continued to evaporate as something like 90% of the job growth the economy recovered was at the very highest levels of employment, and the 1% / corporate overlords didn't ever get paraded through the city square and publicly beheaded; instead obama was one of the friendliest (policy-wise) presidents to corporations and wall street. trump's base is angry and willing to vote for an actual fascist because they feel betrayed. the unspoken social agreement has always been that no one would have it better than white men, and while other groups have seen relative gains in their recent social hierarchy (gay people being allowed to marry, for example) trump's base likely hasn't seen any real improvement in their social hierarchy in over a decade. when these people are arguing that we shouldn't be helping refugees from warzones until we fix our own nation's problems first, it is likely because they are indirectly referencing themselves as needing a hand. trump is really doing an excellent job channeling all of that latent hate and frustration into a political force. whether or not it will be enough to push him into the white house remains to be seen, but all his rhetoric about how the US doesn't win any more and how we need to make america great again and how our leaders are incompetent is basically a nice soundbite version of what many people have actually experienced over the last 8 years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I don't know, I have a feeling a lot more "change" would have occurred in the US with a McCain/Palin win, than what we got. With Obama we got status quo, but you can take a look at the House if you feel shortchanged by that. I wouldn't even really blame Obama for that, fwiw he really seemed like he was trying to change things. I don't think anyone, except probably McConnell and Cantor expected the gridlock and divisiveness from the GOP over a black man getting the job. It's been pretty unprecedented, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
Despite how necessary it (probably) was, bailing out the banks was one of Obama's biggest PR problems, and it hounded him through everything else that was accomplished. So now comes Trump and oh, does he hate him some wall street, enough to have wall street execs publicly call him mean names and back his opponents, and if someone actually hated by them has a chance at the presidency, of course the common people are going to resonate with that
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
Thump! posted:I wouldn't even really blame Obama for that, fwiw he really seemed like he was trying to change things. I don't think anyone, except probably McConnell and Cantor expected the gridlock and divisiveness from the GOP over a black man getting the job. It's been pretty unprecedented, honestly. (I didn't mean Obama is a "status-quo" President.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I'm guessing it's that neither candidate is white, but I dunno. I'm guessing accelerationism
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
anybody who thinks trump will magically bring about the End of Days is deluding themselves I can see him as a nice hearty gently caress You vote to the entire political establishment, though. He's probably gonna destroy the GOP one way or the other, and who knows how Democrats will react over the next year to the growing possibility of a reality tv business guy having his finger on the button
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
InsanityIsCrazy posted:Despite how necessary it (probably) was, bailing out the banks was one of Obama's biggest PR problems The thing is, even if everyone agreed that we 100% had to bail out the banks, the Democrats still hosed over the American people for them AFTER the fact as well. Dodd-Frank is a joke, our financial system is no-less corrupt and no mare safe/stable because of it, BUT those big banks are certainly more powerful now. Democrats had iron-fisted control of government, so much so that they were able to pass a poo poo health-care law with ZERO GOP support and total opposition. Yet they didn't bother to use that power to break up the big banks and/or once and for all erect a wall between traditional banking and investment banking, gee I wonder why they let their corporate masters off so ea$ily. Obama and the Democrats have unquestionably hosed over middle class America and the American tax base from every single policy angle - Healthcare, banking & finance, taxes, employment & wages, etc., etc., etc. Their big PR problem is 8 years of loving us in the rear end. Helping poor people is certainly admirable. Helping Wall-Street and crushing small banks is not. Neither is loving the middle class raw to help both groups. It's time to Make America Great Again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NaQxUEfxt0
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Boosted_C5 posted:Democrats had iron-fisted control of government
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Boosted_C5 posted:The thing is, even if everyone agreed that we 100% had to bail out the banks, the Democrats still hosed over the American people for them AFTER the fact as well. Dodd-Frank is a joke, our financial system is no-less corrupt and no mare safe/stable because of it, BUT those big banks are certainly more powerful now. Every time I read your posts it reminds me of the whole poor people voting to keep loving themselves thing that goes on in the US.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Every time I read your posts it reminds me of the whole poor people voting to keep loving themselves thing that goes on in the US. If it's any consolation to you, it's an international thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:If it's any consolation to you, it's an international thing. Oh, good. I was worried. I mean, you have to admire his devotion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Every time I read your posts it reminds me of the whole poor people voting to keep loving themselves thing that goes on in the US. yeah, it's sadly hilarious because as much as trump verbally espouses vague epithets about making america great again, when you look at any of the actual policy comments he's made, or put down in writing, it's very clear he still doesn't give a poo poo about the people he's trying to wield as a political cudgel. his tax plan is basically a love letter to the wealthy elite (with the notable exception of hedge fund managers) and he famously stated on national t.v. at the second (?) GOP debate that the minimum wage is actually too high. the funny thing is that in a lot of respects, he is campaigning in a similar way to 2008 obama. in the same way that a junior senator with no other significant executive experience became the party nominee and eventual POTUS with a message of HOPE & CHANGE, i think it's premature for anyone to immediately discount trump's chances with MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
homeless poster posted:yeah, it's sadly hilarious because as much as trump verbally espouses vague epithets about making america great again, when you look at any of the actual policy comments he's made, or put down in writing, it's very clear he still doesn't give a poo poo about the people he's trying to wield as a political cudgel. #schlonged
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Are we trying to say that the bullshit these people spout up to the day they're sworn in might not be what they actually do in office? That's new.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
So Trump is chaos candidate, is it like being chaotic evil or chaotic good?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
homeless poster posted:i think a big piece of it is that obama got some very significant pieces of policy passed (health care and gay marriage) but the average quality of life for families at or below a middle-class income has gotten worse. real wages have continued to stagnate since the 80's, low skilled "honest" work has continued to evaporate as something like 90% of the job growth the economy recovered was at the very highest levels of employment, and the 1% / corporate overlords didn't ever get paraded through the city square and publicly beheaded; instead obama was one of the friendliest (policy-wise) presidents to corporations and wall street. I'd give corporate america more credit for gay marriage than Obama, not that he didn't do much but rather they pushed the issue far harder earlier. Obama largely just shifted with the political and social winds on gay marriage rather than being instrumental in guiding public opinion. Internet Explorer posted:Every time I read your posts it reminds me of the whole poor people voting to keep loving themselves thing that goes on in the US. Not everyone votes purely based on economic issues Marx.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
 It's a loooooooong way down, Reince.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
etalian posted:So Trump is chaos candidate, is it like being chaotic evil or chaotic good? Chaotic Neutral 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Chaotic Neutral So that's where Landerig went after he got banned?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Chaos Candidate is the coolest thing the Jeb! Campaign has come up with and it's for Trump. Goddamnit Jeb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I don't know, I have a feeling a lot more "change" would have occurred in the US with a McCain/Palin win, than what we got. With Obama we got status quo, but you can take a look at the House if you feel shortchanged by that. This is debatable in hindsight but Obama absolutely looked like he would advocate for more change.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Didn't they actually have control of the House and Senate for like 27 days, due to epic levels of butthurt in the wake of Franken's election to the Senate, and also Joe Lieberman or something? The controversy comes from the fact that, in the senate, they only had a filibuster-proof supermajority for a limited time, yet still passed obamacare via reconciliation and only required 50 votes. There's a ton of populist legislation that they could have steamrolled through but I dunno, either they didn't want to look like bullies (fox news made them into this anyway) or thought their reign would last a thousand years (it didn't ).
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
EngineerSean posted:This is debatable in hindsight but Obama absolutely looked like he would advocate for more change.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Basically the histories of Obama's Presidency, 75-100 years from now after everyone with an axe to grind is in the ground, are going to be  as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
A Neurotic Jew posted:Chaos Candidate is the coolest thing the Jeb! Campaign has come up with and it's for Trump. Goddamnit Jeb. For real, Jeb's team coined that hoping it would stick to Trump and ruin his credibility, but a Chaos candidate is exactly what his supporters want.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:You're the second person who has taken that post to mean I was making a statement about Obama in general, rather than the specific situation he found himself in once elected. I think you're both totally right and that with a more cooperative Congress, even a Republican Congress that wasn't so terrible, he would have gone down as one of the best Presidents we ever had. I still believe that to be the case, actually, but it will be more in the sense that he managed to keep government sort-of going in the face of a Congress and an electorate that basically wanted to tear everything apart if it meant tearing him down, too. i still think the fact that the big banks got bailed out, and no meaningful consequences were suffered by any of the CEOs / shareholders, and no real regulation (with teeth, that is enforceable) was put in place, is a big black mark that overshadows whatever political theater was taking place. i know that isn't obama's sole fault, and i know the republicans and democrats in the house / senate are just as complicit in all the shady poo poo that went down after the recession with the banking industry, but when people talk about obama's presidency in your 100+ year timeframe, i expect that to be more pertinent than the fact that the legislature didn't play nice with him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
A big BLACK mark, huh?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
homeless poster posted:i still think the fact that the big banks got bailed out, and no meaningful consequences were suffered by any of the CEOs / shareholders, and no real regulation (with teeth, that is enforceable) was put in place, is a big black mark that overshadows whatever political theater was taking place. The Obama administration initially wanted a big crackdown on the banks in the aftermath of the recession but got talked out of it by the Treasury department.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
quote:Went to a Donald Trump speech on acid SUPER BAD VIBES (self.Psychonaut)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
And that's how the next Unabomber was born.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Why would you mix a hallucinogen (acid) with a psychotic (trump rally)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:You're the second person who has taken that post to mean I was making a statement about Obama in general, rather than the specific situation he found himself in once elected. I think you're both totally right and that with a more cooperative Congress, even a Republican Congress that wasn't so terrible, he would have gone down as one of the best Presidents we ever had. I still believe that to be the case, actually, but it will be more in the sense that he managed to keep government sort-of going in the face of a Congress and an electorate that basically wanted to tear everything apart if it meant tearing him down, too. In the context of asking why someone who would support Candidate Obama would now support Candidate Trump, it's absolutely more relevant to focus on the change that many of us thought Obama would bring rather than the reality of the past seven years. Kingfish hit the nail on the head, Candidate Trump looks like he'll bring more radical change to Washington than Candidate Bush, Candidate Rubio, or Candidate Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
InsanityIsCrazy posted:Why would you mix a hallucinogen (acid) with a psychotic (trump rally) Gotta Hippie-flip.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Is there anything that Obama and Trump have in common, which draws you to either of them? Hope for a better future?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 11:27 |
|
|
Kilroy posted:I'm guessing it's that neither candidate is white, but I dunno. I am beyond ideology. I believe in greatness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 20:03
|
|