(11-16-2016, 07:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trickle-in electionomics:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

Hillary leads Trump by about 1,200,000 and still counting.

(11-19-2016, 02:56 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(11-19-2016, 12:25 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: You're seeing what happens and witnessing the negative results when there's a major divide/difference/gap that exists between the level of character or the content of ones character. I consider myself to have a fairly high level of character and I prefer to hang out and socialize with those who have higher levels of character. I'll drop down a few notches in character in order to directly and effectively engage with certain progressives on an equal playing field.

I'd watch the difference between a gathering of people of high character, and a gathering of people with the same values.  We recently had a discussion involving appreciation of classical music making fans of classical music feel superior to fans of country and western.  The resulting perception if one isn't a fan of classical music is arrogance, which can result in hostility.  Now, I'm not particularly obsessed with either form of music, I tend to jump styles a lot, but have favorite songs from both traditions.  Still, It seems politically impatient and just rude to be snobbish and superior.

But to me you come across as a strident partisan rather than a person of high character.  This is not to say you are alone in this.  We have no lack of people here with quite variant positions that I perceive of as strident partisans.  I guess you could claim that intensely clinging to one's beliefs might be part of having a high character.  Still, do the extreme partisans advocating blue perspectives come across to you as having high character?  Do they not make it clear how they perceive you?  

I appreciate any effort you might try to make in engaging with progressives.  We need more of that from both sides.  I don't know that being willing to listen and reducing the antagonism and hostility ought to be described as dropping down your character, though.  At least from my perspective, people of good character ought to be able to listen and share, ought not to be so defensive about flaws in one's own perspective, so aggressive in demonizing one's opposites.

(11-22-2016, 03:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-16-2016, 07:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trickle-in electionomics:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

Hillary leads Trump by about 1,200,000 and still counting.

Now her lead is over 1,700,000, and projected by google to be 2,400,000

(11-23-2016, 02:08 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(11-22-2016, 03:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-16-2016, 07:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trickle-in electionomics:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

Hillary leads Trump by about 1,200,000 and still counting.

Now her lead is over 1,700,000, and projected by google to be 2,400,000

Who cares, she already lost the most important election during my adult life.

(11-23-2016, 01:23 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Engaging them how? How do you expect me to engage the left radicals that exist and represent the interests on your side?  Do/can you accept my more serious criticism or outright rejection and more serious conflicts with those who express certain views and hold certain beliefs based on your overall knowledge of the American people in general? What you're not taking into account or accepting as a reality is a persons ability to adjust and adapt their personalities to the environment or the people whom they perceive as being a threat or to a person they really dislike. You can't apply heavenly values  to real life people or real life environments and situations or circumstances that occur and exist in a not so perfect not even close to being a perfect world.
 
As far as how I'm viewed or perceived by those whom I have engaged on your side, I should be viewed as the type of person who could seriously take them on and defeat them. Do I scare the more radical and the more self interest serving left wingers? I hope so because I'm giving them a glimpse of those who will accept and are capable of accepting sacrifices in order to destroy them.Where are we at? We are at where I told you we'd be at in the not so distant future. What happens to people who do not work with the American view or no longer have a basic understanding or an inkling as to what American values are today? I don't claim to know but I do believe we are going to find out in the not so distant future. Can you live without Eric or Playdude, I assume that you are quite capable of living without either of them, Can you live without me? Probably? I haven't directly contributed to your life. Whatever you have, whatever you've accomplished, whatever you cherish, I'm sure that you put in the bulk of the time, the effort and sacrifices  to acquire, accomplish and achieve them. How many people to do know who have done nothing the get something? If you don't know anyone or hardly anyone, why do you expect me to believe in blue values or drop my values? I'm not a fool. How many fools are willing to go a long for the sake of themselves?

(11-22-2016, 03:10 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: How did things go in the state legislatures? Apparently, the Democrats gained just one state, and one chamber, and may have ended supermajorities in a few. I'm still trying to make sense of this article:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/11/1595712/-Despite-harrowing-election-Democrats-make-net-legislative-gain-picking-up-4-chambers-to-GOP-s-3

maybe I can post this graphic:

(11-22-2016, 03:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-16-2016, 07:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trickle-in electionomics:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

Hillary leads Trump by about 1,200,000 and still counting.

Now her lead is over 1,700,000, and projected by google to be 2,400,000

(11-23-2016, 02:08 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(11-22-2016, 03:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-16-2016, 07:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trickle-in electionomics:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

Hillary leads Trump by about 1,200,000 and still counting.

Now her lead is over 1,700,000, and projected by google to be 2,400,000

Who cares, she already lost the most important election during my adult life.

(11-23-2016, 10:08 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Interesting how the blue areas are the ones who can't  get their counts in on time.  Still marking ballots, no doubt.

(11-23-2016, 06:08 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(11-23-2016, 06:02 PM)Odin Wrote:

(11-23-2016, 10:08 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Interesting how the blue areas are the ones who can't  get their counts in on time.  Still marking ballots, no doubt.

Now this is just vile slander of the basest kind.

Dollars to donuts the dude is a Freeper.

Disclosure - so am I. But I've locked horns with many other Freepers over the years. There are definite camps at FR. He fits the profile of one of the camps.

(11-23-2016, 05:27 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Progressives see problems that must be fixed.  Conservatives don’t see the problems as that grave.  Both perspectives might seem natural if the problems aren’t so serious in the conservative region as in the progressive.  Historically, if one doesn’t solve the problems they continue to get worse until the resolve finally comes that they must be addressed.  Alas, if the problems are worse in the more progressive regions, and the solutions are applied nationwide, there is a perception in conservative areas of fixing what isn’t broken.  It is natural to ask why one can’t just be left alone.

(11-23-2016, 08:56 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Welcome to Fascist America -- with the Party of Lincoln having absorbed the spirit of the fictional Simon Legree and the all-too-real Henry Clay Frick. Between the Rockies and the Atlantic Coast there is but one oasis of blue on the map -- Illinois.

(11-23-2016, 01:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-23-2016, 02:08 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(11-22-2016, 03:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-16-2016, 07:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trickle-in electionomics:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

Hillary leads Trump by about 1,200,000 and still counting.

Now her lead is over 1,700,000, and projected by google to be 2,400,000

Who cares, she already lost the most important election during my adult life.

Donald J Trump is the president-elect. Your guns are safe, and money still rules the life of politicians in office.

However, Trump did not get a mandate. And no-one can say that Hillary Rodham Clinton lost the election when she got 2 and half million more votes than Trump.

The Republican hold on the Bible Belt and (for now) the Rust Belt gives them the power, in congress, the statehouses, and potentially the electoral vote (but not the popular vote). Unless younger generations can shake off the fundamentalist memes (both religious and economic-free market fundamentalism), and unless the Rust Belt states return to the blue fold completely, then I predict a national break-up (or at least a looser confederation) may be the only way to bust through this fundamentalist power bloc, perhaps even if only temporarily for a few years so that the constitution can (possibly) be redone to get rid of the advantage which red states have in the electoral college and the Senate, as the price of reunifying the country.

Right now, some younger people are escaping the Bible/Rust Belt by moving to California and other blue states, while some conservative whites have moved out due to the increasing diversity and cost of living there. But this has concentrated the vote of up-to-date and/or diverse people in the states with fewer electoral votes.

More of CA is in, and the margin has now passed 2 million. The percentages in CA are widening too.

(11-23-2016, 05:27 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(11-23-2016, 01:23 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Engaging them how? How do you expect me to engage the left radicals that exist and represent the interests on your side?  Do/can you accept my more serious criticism or outright rejection and more serious conflicts with those who express certain views and hold certain beliefs based on your overall knowledge of the American people in general? What you're not taking into account or accepting as a reality is a persons ability to adjust and adapt their personalities to the environment or the people whom they perceive as being a threat or to a person they really dislike. You can't apply heavenly values  to real life people or real life environments and situations or circumstances that occur and exist in a not so perfect not even close to being a perfect world.
 
As far as how I'm viewed or perceived by those whom I have engaged on your side, I should be viewed as the type of person who could seriously take them on and defeat them. Do I scare the more radical and the more self interest serving left wingers? I hope so because I'm giving them a glimpse of those who will accept and are capable of accepting sacrifices in order to destroy them.Where are we at? We are at where I told you we'd be at in the not so distant future. What happens to people who do not work with the American view or no longer have a basic understanding or an inkling as to what American values are today? I don't claim to know but I do believe we are going to find out in the not so distant future. Can you live without Eric or Playdude, I assume that you are quite capable of living without either of them, Can you live without me? Probably? I haven't directly contributed to your life. Whatever you have, whatever you've accomplished, whatever you cherish, I'm sure that you put in the bulk of the time, the effort and sacrifices  to acquire, accomplish and achieve them. How many people to do know who have done nothing the get something? If you don't know anyone or hardly anyone, why do you expect me to believe in blue values or drop my values? I'm not a fool. How many fools are willing to go a long for the sake of themselves?

I’m not sure I’m parsing that first paragraph right.  I do believe people have strong values, will not let go of them lightly, and the values are in part related to what part of the country one comes from.  I have seen clearly enough how the values conflicts can lead to hatred and antagonism.  I don’t like it, but it is plain enough to see.  I am also dubious that such conflict is constructive, that building resentments and digging in ever more stubbornly is going to be the ultimate answer.

I think one can, should and must apply idealistic (though I would not use the word ‘heavenly’) values to 4T culture clashes.  Enlightenment philosophy was a significant factor in the Revolution.  The desire to free the slaves was a significant factor in the US Civil War.  Fighting for continued democracy was a significant factor in World War II.  The notion of the common man coming together to fight not for perfection, but for the removal of a few of the greatest flaws in society, is at the core of crisis conflicts.

Historically, conservatives don't necessarily agree with the ideals.  The Divine Right of Kings is how things have ever been, and how they should ever be?  Slavery has been the cornerstone of all civilizations?  The boom and bust economy common before the New Deal is perfectly acceptable?  When I hear your rejection of idealism, I can't help but look back at history, at how previous conservative generations have rejected the new ideals proposed by the progressives.

Progressives see problems that must be fixed.  Conservatives don’t see the problems as that grave.  Both perspectives might seem natural if the problems aren’t so serious in the conservative region as in the progressive.  Historically, if one doesn’t solve the problems they continue to get worse until the resolve finally comes that they must be addressed.  Alas, if the problems are worse in the more progressive regions, and the solutions are applied nationwide, there is a perception in conservative areas of fixing what isn’t broken.  It is natural to ask why one can’t just be left alone.

Could you be more specific on what you mean by ‘take them on and defeat them’?  Are you talking abstractly about exchanging forum posts, or are you threatening violence?  I’m becoming more familiar with hillbilly culture.  In abstract I’m aware that violence, drugs and crime are embraced by some among the Republican base.  To some degree a Scotts Irish heritage with the military and violent tradition that comes with it is embraced, is a point of pride.  I’m far closer to the Whig / Yankee culture.  I can vaguely understand the Hillbilly values, but don’t sympathize with them much.

I disagree with your calling red values ‘American’ while implying that blue values are not.  The Whig / Yankee culture striving for freedom, equality, democracy and other ‘heavenly’ ideals has just as strong an influence, has just as strong a tradition, as the Scotts Irish culture.  We won the Revolution and Civil War after all.  Both cultures will wave the flag with as much vigor and as much pride.

It is the nature of Whig / Yankees to want to fix problems.  We see some problems today that badly need fixing.

I don’t particularly ‘need’ Eric, Playwright or yourself.  None of us are particularly necessary to each other’s maintaining their life styles.

I don’t see you as a fool.  I see a lot of folk with red values (and blue) as values locked, unable to honestly evaluate reality.  I anticipate, having no evidence otherwise, that you can operate just fine within the cultural environment you are used to.  Operating well within a cultural environment does not mean you can understand other cultural environments or judge them well against objective reality.  Your perspective is generally red correct blue wrong.  As usual with the partisan approach, the folk on the 'wrong' side are presented as stupid, evil, insane or otherwise mentally incompetent.  I strive to at least understand how both sets of values came into existence and why modern practitioners of different value sets will be pushing in different directions.

For me, after seeing what borrow and spend trickle down did during the two Bush administrations, I have real trouble understanding how anyone would want to go that route again.  I have trouble with folk who reject whole branches of science, such as climate science or evolution.  Oh, in theory, in abstract, perhaps I can see how it happens.  If one lives in a media bubble where one world view has been persistently pushed, or if one is deeply religious and cannot let go of the literal interpretation of the Bible, I can understand in principle why some people just aren’t going to change reality challenged perspectives short of a catastrophic failure of their old way of looking at things.  That’s just how humans think.  In our youth we develop ideas on how the world works and what goals should be striven towards.  Reevaluating these values is hard.  Humans aren’t good at it.  Seeing people clinging to how they have always thought is very much the norm.  I expect it as much from Whig / Yankees as Scotts -Irish.  

Expecting such intense inability to work outside one’s values is one thing.  Being happy about it is another.

(11-24-2016, 12:29 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(11-23-2016, 01:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-23-2016, 02:08 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(11-22-2016, 03:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-16-2016, 07:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trickle-in electionomics:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

Hillary leads Trump by about 1,200,000 and still counting.

Now her lead is over 1,700,000, and projected by google to be 2,400,000

Who cares, she already lost the most important election during my adult life.

Donald J Trump is the president-elect. Your guns are safe, and money still rules the life of politicians in office.

However, Trump did not get a mandate. And no-one can say that Hillary Rodham Clinton lost the election when she got 2 and half million more votes than Trump.

The Republican hold on the Bible Belt and (for now) the Rust Belt gives them the power, in congress, the statehouses, and potentially the electoral vote (but not the popular vote). Unless younger generations can shake off the fundamentalist memes (both religious and economic-free market fundamentalism), and unless the Rust Belt states return to the blue fold completely, then I predict a national break-up (or at least a looser confederation) may be the only way to bust through this fundamentalist power bloc, perhaps even if only temporarily for a few years so that the constitution can (possibly) be redone to get rid of the advantage which red states have in the electoral college and the Senate, as the price of reunifying the country.

Right now, some younger people are escaping the Bible/Rust Belt by moving to California and other blue states, while some conservative whites have moved out due to the increasing diversity and cost of living there. But this has concentrated the vote of up-to-date and/or diverse people in the states with fewer electoral votes.

More of CA is in, and the margin has now passed 2 million. The percentages in CA are widening too.

So she won the popular vote by a few million Californian's, good for her. She's fortunate that people like you didn't cling their values and voted for her instead Jill Stein or she would've lost the popular vote too.  

I'm not going to fight to keep California as part of the United States. To me, California wouldn't be worth the sacrifice. America would get the bulk of its business's and the bulk of the productive workforce and the bulk it's more law abiding and more productive citizens and the bulk of it's agricultural exports that we're used to seeing as well regardless of whether it stays or goes. In my opinion, America needs a blue dumping ground. An alternate world for those who don't want to do shit for a living and uppity fools who feel they're obligated to support them, educated dim wits who ignore major issues relating to the working class who care more about establishing a new precedence and relatively dumb (uneducated) immigrants who are used to working for pennies to flood to by the millions instead of the United States.  

Right now, there's a decent black guy and his family living in my parents house. I'm cool with it and I have no issues with him as a person. Hell, I place more value on him than I place on someone like you. I know that goes against the blue narrative used here. But then again, the blue narrative isn't interested in what's actually going on, what it's actually about or what it actually means and so forth. The blue narrative is only interested in what it seeks to obtain or gain for itself. OK. We know what we've got, we've got two blue regions fixated on itself politically with a blue city located in between them. Minnesota may not stay blue for very long with my age group coming into power and becoming more vocal and more active politically. We could begin to move to separate from the blue cities which would isolate the cities and force the cities to become wiser and less reliant upon the state.

(11-24-2016, 12:29 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I'm not going to fight to keep California as part of the United States. To me, California wouldn't be worth the sacrifice. America would get the bulk of its business's and the bulk of the productive workforce and the bulk it's more law abiding and more productive citizens and the bulk of it's agricultural exports that we're used to seeing as well regardless of whether it stays or goes. In my opinion, America needs a blue dumping ground. An alternate world for those who don't want to do shit for a living and uppity fools who feel they're obligated to support them, educated dim wits who ignore major issues relating to the working class who care more about establishing a new precedence and relatively dumb (uneducated) immigrants who are used to working for pennies to flood to by the millions instead of the United States.  

Quote:Right now, there's a decent black guy and his family living in my parents house. I'm cool with it and I have no issues with him as a person. Hell, I place more value on him than I place on someone like you. I know that goes against the blue narrative used here. But then again, the blue narrative isn't interested in what's actually going on, what it's actually about or what it actually means and so forth. The blue narrative is only interested in what it seeks to obtain or gain for itself. OK. We know what we've got, we've got two blue regions fixated on itself politically with a blue city located in between them. Minnesota may not stay blue for very long with my age group coming into power and becoming more vocal and more active politically. We could begin to move to separate from the blue cities which would isolate the cities and force the cities to become wiser and less reliant upon the state.

(11-23-2016, 08:14 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(11-23-2016, 05:27 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Progressives see problems that must be fixed.  Conservatives don’t see the problems as that grave.  Both perspectives might seem natural if the problems aren’t so serious in the conservative region as in the progressive.  Historically, if one doesn’t solve the problems they continue to get worse until the resolve finally comes that they must be addressed.  Alas, if the problems are worse in the more progressive regions, and the solutions are applied nationwide, there is a perception in conservative areas of fixing what isn’t broken.  It is natural to ask why one can’t just be left alone.

It's more that conservatives see progressive cures as worse than the disease.  Progressive insistence on crushing dissent, to the point of eliminating freedom of the press, is hardly a step toward freedom as far as conservatives are concerned.  Similarly for many other progressive initiatives.