01-05-2022, 04:53 AM
(01-05-2022, 01:03 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(01-02-2022, 10:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:(01-02-2022, 02:05 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: My mother listened to your music. She was American to the core. Musical taste or preference has nothing to do with whether one is American or not. Whether you are aware or not, there is a natural process that is taking place right now. Americans are leaving Democratic controlled areas by the thousands which is good for America in my opinion. I have no love for the Progressives and they have no love for me or Americans in general. You should know that by now. You're on their side, you're working for them and you should know what that means too. I've spent the last two decades reminding Progressives about the American country and showing them what Americans have the freedom to do and the power to do as well. 4 vs 1 only matters here that's all. Right now in real life, its about 6 vs 4 which means you're done. If it takes a fight to prove its done then so be it. To be honest, I don't know a Democrat who is a Democrat these days. YOU ARE GOING to learn that elections have consequences. Every fucking one of you is going to learn it by the time. Welcome to the Real World boy. I wish you luck and Godspeed.
If people are leaving one area for another, that doesn't imply that their philosophy is being left behind. I moved to Red America 50 years ago. I'm sitll a liberal/progressive. As people move, they rebalance the politics of the area they adopt. Right now, the most targetted area is Texas, with expat Californians providing the anchor votes. Why do you think the Texas Republicans are going so far overboard with voter suppression? It may take a few cycles for the demographics to become undeniable, but they will at some point. The real queston: can you Red Americans tolerate being a more-or-less permanent minority?
You live where I live more or less. People like me don't pay much attention to people like you where we live because you're not considered a threat to us right now Believe me, you want it to stay that way. You don't want to mess with us because we will mess with you if it comes to that. A neighbor like you found that out with me. I doubt people are leaving California to make Texas more like Progressive blue state that they left. I'd say the continuous border problem (the continued influx of illegal immigration) and an understanding of what the Left pulled off and got away with during the last election has more to do with the Republicans tightening up voting laws in their state than the folks who left California and chose Texas to live in and raise their children. Minnesota ain't as Democratic controlled as California, New York or Illinois these days.
People are leaving California for Texas to get away from the high rents, the air pollution, and the bad schools. Conservatives about 45 years ago promoted a tax policy that practically froze taxes for landlords and discouraged new construction. Liberals disliked Proposition 13, and they have proved right. California has low property taxes, and property taxes are the usual means of supporting K-12 education. The University of California and State University of California systems are still good, but the K-12 educational system isn't preparing California kids for that. Parents have to be the equivalent of "tiger moms" to ensure that their kids do real learning, which means doing more than the lax educational system demands. "Tiger moms" are heavily associated with certain Model Minorities in America.
Quote:What demographics are you referring to, the minority demographic that's causing the bulk of the issues/problems and lagging behind these days that you've been adding more of on a regular basis that's going to drag you down and ruin you eventually? The demographic that we see robbing and trashing stores and torches portions of cities and when it gets upset or doesn't get it's way and so forth. Yeah. You should do something about that demographic other than what you've been doing with it for years. I suggest that you do something about it before America does something about it and find yourselves (wife included) being gathered up and dumped in with that particular demographic and find yourselves fighting to survive in a lawless Democratic (profanity excised) hole where the majority have been taught to hate white people. I can't think of a better group of people who deserve to go out that way than you guys at this point. Like I said, you better start thinking because American Right is on to you guys and its not going to be long before you start seeing Democrats dropping like flies and what's left of the old GOPer's being replaced by American hardliners who don't have any qualms when it comes to doing battle with Leftists and crushing the Left altogether.
White people are doing their share to muck things up in America. Have you ever been to the Mountain and Deep South? Opiates and meth are now largely drugs for the white population. Yes, people doing crimes of any kind are odious people. These are typically sociopaths, psychopaths, or borderline. I'm all for law and order in the sense that those who do the crime need to do some time at the least as a deterrent. Maybe if someone has a problem messing up his life, then that person needs all appropriate aid in solving that problem.
You tell me -- what non-white people push hatred of white people? LOSERS! Middle-class Hispanics intermarry heavily with white Anglos. Assimilation is ambiguous on the marriages and children. The black bourgeoisie likely intermarries more with white people than do other blacks. Asian-Americans? I've never seen many complaints about the (usually) cute kids.
We liberals have assumed some old conservative virtues that your New Hard Right have cast off. We never had a problem with the Rule of Law or, with legal and diplomatic precedent. The GOP in the time of Dwight Eisenhower appreciated rational thought, expertise, fair play, self-control, deferred gratification, and formal education as virtues. That now better describes Barack Obama than Donald Trump and many of the stars of the GOP. You've seen my map comparing and contrasting elections involving Obama and Eisenhower. Aside from Obama not getting the consistently right-wing areas dedicated heavily to livestock-raising, Obama and Ike won much the same states.
Quote:Conservatism must redefine itself away from the neoliberal and corporatist (crony capitalist, if not fascist) ways. It will need to renounce Big Government either as a ready source of welfare or of sweet deals to rapacious monopolists. It will need to again promote personal responsibility in improving oneself and in creating wealth. It will need to recognize the validity of tradition, but not only of white Christians, in establishing a sane alternative to radicalism, demagoguery, and despotism should the Democrats ever nominate people best described as left-wing versions of Donald Trump.Obviously one would see as the most similar elections by state results those involving much the same personalities in similar times (Eisenhower versus Stevenson is definitive) and of course the nearly-complete sweeps such as FDR in 1936, Nixon in 1972, and Reagan in 1984 against weak nominees either depicte4d as extremists or running unusually-inept campaigns. For Obama to win only states and districts that Ike won except for Hawaii and Dee Cee which weren't voting in the 1950's but then (1) while still winning a decisive victory and (2) across lines of partisan identity suggests that Obama and Ike must have conducted themselves quite similarly and sharing much the same values. The political cultures between the states cannot have changed wildly between times of Ike and Obama except in demographics, which applies in relatively few states (rapid growth of Mexican-American populations in the American Southwest).
That is what the GOP was in the 1950's, when Eisenhower could win Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Rhode island twice. Between them those states have gone for the Republican nominee a grand total of four times. Ike won the people of more-than-average education of his time. If you don't believe me, then look at my favorite overlay map:
Quote:When all is said and done, I think that the Obama and Eisenhower Presidencies are going to look like good analogues. Both Presidents are chilly rationalists. Both are practically scandal-free administrations. Both started with a troublesome war that both found their way out of. Neither did much to 'grow' the strength of their Parties in either House of Congress. To compare ISIS to Fidel Castro is completely unfair to Fidel Castro, a gentleman by contrast to ISIS.
The definitive moderate Republican may have been Dwight Eisenhower, and I have heard plenty of Democrats praise the Eisenhower Presidency. He went along with Supreme Court rulings that outlawed segregationist practices, stayed clear of the McCarthy bandwagon, and let McCarthy implode.
gray -- did not vote in 1952 or 1956
white -- Eisenhower twice, Obama twice
deep blue -- Republican all four elections
light blue -- Republican all but 2012 (I assume that greater Omaha went for Ike twice)
light green -- Eisenhower once, Stevenson once, Obama never
dark green -- Stevenson twice, Obama never
pink -- Stevenson twice, Obama once
No state voted Democratic all four times, so no state is in deep red.
Except to the Biden win of 2020, Obama's victory maps look more like those of Eisenhower with the Parties inverted. Political orientation of the Parties may have changed, but most of the states have not had wild changes in their political cultures. (Ike is really closest to Hoover in 1928; maybe Ike's America is much like what Hoover wanted America to be).
A very poor match between Obama and another Democrat is with Carter in 1976:
Carter 1976, Obama 2008/2012
Carter 1976, Obama twice red
Carter 1976, Obama once pink
Carter 1976, Obama never yellow
Ford 1976, Obama twice white
Ford 1976, Obama once light blue
Ford 1976, Obama never blue
I have no problem with old-fashioned conservative style in politics. Conservatives used to have virtues. I find it hard to see what political virtues Donald Trump has. He an ignorant poseur devoid of any moral compass, and something so complex as the President is best under the command of someone who recognizes how complex the Presidency is.
Oddly I once saw a prediction that Eisenhower that he would try to command the Presidency much as he did an army and demonstrate that such does not work. Congress will not let any President operate that way, whether Ike (he relied more upon persuasion than command) or Trump (who tried such and failed miserably). One has no powers as President that one does not get from Congress. Trump brought his authoritarian style of governing from a business model (My way or the highway!) or even the style of a crime boss (My way or die!) which has never been tried by any previous President... and showed why such does not and cannot work.
In his newly-created role as Emperor (Imperator), Julius Caesar got a role similar to that of President of the United States. The hereditary quality of Emperor would not be understood until Julius Caesar was well off the scene. Julius Caesar found to his chagrin that the Senate would resist his intended reforms, ultimately literally having their knives out for him on the Ides of March.
As Caesar had Brutus, Trump... may have been lucky to have not been re-elected shadily.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.