2020 Presidential Election

[Dill]

(05-22-2020, 03:38 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It's an important message. One of the problems with teaching government is that I have to worry about people wanting me to "teach both sides", especially now with all of my material online. I'll do what I can to play devil's advocate and present things as "some believe this while others believe this. Use the evidence and make up your own mind".

But... what could I possibly post from Trump if I were to post Obama's graduation speech? Even on the most important occasions, he takes any oppurtunity to lie and insult people. With out fail. I guess I could find something from W? We've gotten to the point where I have to promote W's oratory skills because the GOP has normalize Donald Trump.

I sympathize with the difficulty, and would offer a suggestion--teach both sides, sure, but set up a rational framework for comparing them and evaluating claims. Let students themselves notice any differences which pop up.

E.g., if student teams had compared Hillary's campaign website with Trump's back in 2016, they'd have likely noticed that Hillary's was professional and informative, reaching deeply into policy solutions with one level for skimmers and links for wonks who wanted details.  Trump's, on the other hand, was sloppy, full of accidental repetition and misspellings, and mostly sloganizing and accusation. I'd ask students how to account for these differences, in terms of how each candidate attracts and organizes staff, and the standards and judgment implied by the candidate's "sign off" on the site. What might that imply about the candidate's ability to appoint a cabinet and staff the WH? Let the students argue about it and come to own their conclusions without "correcting" them (other than on logical consistency).

It's ok to compare speeches even if Trump lies and insults.  That's what Trump offers so that is what you have to teach.

Well, those are just suggestions. You are probably doing something like this already. I'm sure you've got all kinds of lesson plans and readings that will develop your students, and you are doing the kind of work that is critical to maintaining democracy, if that is really the kind of government we want.

Probably the situation will be the same this summer and fall, regarding websites etc.

[samhain]

(05-23-2020, 03:41 AM)Dill Wrote: Yow!

"The bigotry of soft expectations" the "Democratic party has destroyed the black family" "The party of slavery" "the party of segregation" "the party of socialism"  "The party of the Ku Klux Klan . . . lynchings . . . . Jim Crow," it has "ALWAYS been against the black community in America."

Look out Dems and other "real" racists! Move over Candace Owens.  

A powerful new voice breaks out of GROUPTHINK mode to finally articulate a fresh vision for Black conservatives.

However, if voting patterns are any indication, Biden's statement might have increased his already considerable share of the black vote, especially among those who pay more attention to what Trump says and does regarding race than how Republicans characterize Democrats.  Been that way since '64

Candace Owens is basically the worst kind of opportunist.  She was a Bernie Sanders supporter for Christ's sake, then all the sudden some alt-right dudes start saying nice things about her, then she changes her entire political belief system almost instantly, lol.  That's not a good example of a politically cognizant human being.  It's a profile of someone trying to capitalize on a niche that wasn't occupied at the time.  I'm sure it's served her well in terms of public profile and financial gain.  

I see her as the modern-day Norma McCorvey.  She's making good carrying water for a cause that she once vehemently opposed because it's profitable.  Good for her.

[Dill]

(05-23-2020, 04:40 PM)samhain Wrote: Candace Owens is basically the worst kind of opportunist.  She was a Bernie Sanders supporter for Christ's sake, then all the sudden some alt-right dudes start saying nice things about her, then she changes her entire political belief system almost instantly, lol.  That's not a good example of a politically cognizant human being.  It's a profile of someone trying to capitalize on a niche that wasn't occupied at the time.  I'm sure it's served her well in terms of public profile and financial gain.  

I see her as the modern-day Norma McCorvey.  She's making good carrying water for a cause that she once vehemently opposed because it's profitable.  Good for her.

She sticks in my memory for the somersaulting MAGA definition of "nationalism" that she trotted out in that House hearing where someone played her video explanation of why Hitler was not a nationalist--he killed his own people and meddled in other countries instead of just focusing on his own! 

No nationalist would do that stuff, she insisted.  LOL.
I am guessing Hitler is still a "socialist" though.

[Benton]

(05-23-2020, 03:07 PM)Dill Wrote: .

Framing Biden's last gaff as "calling out a whole race" probably won't change any minds. .

Not a lot is going to change anyone's minds. By design on both sides it's "us versus them."

Bidens comment was moronic. But it boils to "our moron versus their moron" for each side instead  of asking "why can't we get better candidates"?

[*Nately120*]

(05-23-2020, 06:08 PM)Benton Wrote: Not a lot is going to change anyone's minds. By design on both sides it's "us versus them."

Bidens comment was moronic. But it boils to "our moron versus their moron" for each side instead  of asking "why can't we get better candidates"?

We can't get better candidates because the DNC controls who we get on one side, candidates who are republicans get an easier road to the white house because of our system, and both sides fight tooth and nail to keep 3rd parties from having a shot and the voting public complains about only getting 2 candidates but then scoffs at voting for a 3rd option.

That's how I see it. 

[BmorePat87]

(05-23-2020, 04:40 PM)samhain Wrote: Candace Owens is basically the worst kind of opportunist.  She was a Bernie Sanders supporter for Christ's sake, then all the sudden some alt-right dudes start saying nice things about her, then she changes her entire political belief system almost instantly, lol.  That's not a good example of a politically cognizant human being.  It's a profile of someone trying to capitalize on a niche that wasn't occupied at the time.  I'm sure it's served her well in terms of public profile and financial gain.  

I see her as the modern-day Norma McCorvey.  She's making good carrying water for a cause that she once vehemently opposed because it's profitable.  Good for her.

Similar to Joy Villa. She tried to jump start a music career by wearing mesh plastic fencing with nothing underneath as a dress to the Grammy's. That didn't work so she started wearing these elaborate MAGA dresses. Now the former Democrat is suddenly a "citizen journalist" for the right, telling journalists they need to stop "fake news". When the real journalists asked her if she had copy editors or fact checking, she said she doesn't need that because she has an "unbiased opinion". 

[samhain]

(05-23-2020, 07:27 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Similar to Joy Villa. She tried to jump start a music career by wearing mesh plastic fencing with nothing underneath as a dress to the Grammy's. That didn't work so she started wearing these elaborate MAGA dresses. Now the former Democrat is suddenly a "citizen journalist" for the right, telling journalists they need to stop "fake news". When the real journalists asked her if she had copy editors or fact checking, she said she doesn't need that because she has an "unbiased opinion". 

I'd say Villa has been a damn sight less successful exploiting her niche than Owens, but same deal, yeah.  I saw Owens' ad for sending some petition or whatever to Pelosi to "take back black America" or some such shit.  

I'll say this much: I'm around a fair amount of black people daily.  I can't think of a single one that thinks of her as any kind of national leader.  Now, I do know a lot of MAGA white dudes that have confederate traitor flags on their cars (at least two of them anyway) that think she's just the bee's knees and will (loudly) let you know about it when it becomes expedient in a political discussion.  That's basically her purpose.  

[hollodero]

(05-23-2020, 07:23 PM)Nately120 Wrote: We can't get better candidates because the DNC controls who we get on one side, candidates who are republicans get an easier road to the white house because of our system, and both sides fight tooth and nail to keep 3rd parties from having a shot and the voting public complains about only getting 2 candidates but then scoffs at voting for a 3rd option.

That's how I see it. 

I see it the same way... but to be fair, your alternative options are not really much better as well. A party argueing about stuff like blind people should get drivers lincences and a party led by a weird conspiracist. And Joe Exotic.

[Dill]

(05-23-2020, 06:08 PM)Benton Wrote: Not a lot is going to change anyone's minds. By design on both sides it's "us versus them."

Bidens comment was moronic. But it boils to "our moron versus their moron" for each side instead  of asking "why can't we get better candidates"?

Gaffs won't change much, but Trump's press  conferences have been shifting the independents Biden's way.

Biden's comment was moronic, but at the moment the majority realizes he is a far more decent moron than Trump, and, with the added government experience, lower risk in the Oval Office. Not the moron Putin wants, for sure.

[GMDino]

Meanwhile after an incredibly hard day of golfing (remember, Trump will be working so hard for you he won't have TIME to golf...so that tells you how well he is doing that he DOES have time to golf now!) Trump took time out of forgetting to eat to retweet about two women that are referred to as fat (implied) and a skank (directly stated).

I'm starting to suspect that @MELANIATRUMP's #BeBest campaign is a fraud pic.twitter.com/cyCFwniCvv

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 24, 2020

 


I don't think we, those of us so wrapped up in ourselves, can understand the level of personal courage it takes for the POTUS to not only call these two women out BY NAME but to do so by sharing what someone ELSE called them thus backing those comments with the full weight of the Oval Office.

[GMDino]

As we move toward tomorrow's remembrance of Memorial Day and those who gave all in service to their country the POTUS continues to prove his personal courage by calling for an investigation into a death that was investigated and solved BUT that involves someone who doesn't say nice things about him!  And again DJT does not HAVE to call that person out by NAME!  He can just retweet a story about him saying it shold be investigated!

A blow to her head? Body found under his desk? Left Congress suddenly? Big topic of discussion in Florida...and, he’s a Nut Job (with bad ratings). Keep digging, use forensic geniuses! https://t.co/UxbS5gZecd

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 24, 2020

 

As you are placing flags at loved ones graves and taking a moment of silence (not a KNEE I hope!) remember that there was once a young women who passed away and her tragic death, while completely solved, can now be used for petty, personal attacks by the POTUS thanks to his incredible sense of personal courage.

You won't catch TRUMP apologizing for something like this!  He's a man of his word!

[fredtoast]

(05-23-2020, 07:23 PM)Nately120 Wrote: We can't get better candidates because the DNC controls who we get on one side, candidates who are republicans get an easier road to the white house because of our system, and both sides fight tooth and nail to keep 3rd parties from having a shot and the voting public complains about only getting 2 candidates but then scoffs at voting for a 3rd option.

That's how I see it. 

Two things that have to happen for thrid parties to be considered viable.


1.  Election reform.  Under our current "Winner-Take-All" system with no campaign spending limits no third party will get a foothold.

2.  There has to be a third party that isn't just the extreme elements of the existing parties.  For example it seems that Libertarians believe in extreme amounts of government de-regulation, and Green Party believes in extreme levels of environmental regulation.  Neither of those are reasonable options for me.

[BmorePat87]

(05-24-2020, 11:01 AM)GMDino Wrote: Meanwhile after an incredibly hard day of golfing (remember, Trump will be working so hard for you he won't have TIME to golf...so that tells you how well he is doing that he DOES have time to golf now!) Trump took time out of forgetting to eat to retweet about two women that are referred to as fat (implied) and a skank (directly stated).

I'm starting to suspect that @MELANIATRUMP's #BeBest campaign is a fraud pic.twitter.com/cyCFwniCvv

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 24, 2020

 


I don't think we, those of us so wrapped up in ourselves, can understand the level of personal courage it takes for the POTUS to not only call these two women out BY NAME but to do so by sharing what someone ELSE called them thus backing those comments with the full weight of the Oval Office.

"HRC the skank"

This is how desensitized we are to Trump. This is just a normal Sunday. 

[GMDino]

(05-24-2020, 12:45 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: "HRC the skank"

This is how desensitized we are to Trump. This is just a normal Sunday. 

Exactly.

There was a lot of coverage of the Biden statement from two days ago.  I read that the opinion shows are still talking about it.

Trump was talking about Henry Ford's blood lines (and you know Miller slipped that in to the speech so DJT probably didn't even realize what it meant) and it's already history.  This tweet will be forgotten by the next racist/misogynistic thing Trump says.

And the "right" will cry and scream that Biden gets a pass because of Trump.

It's so demonstrably wrong I wouldn't understand why they keep saying it except it is all they have.  Have years of defending Trump and what he actually said not being what he meant ("we don't know what's in his heart"), saying we should look at his actions instead and then saying those actions don't mean anything, after all that they can't defend him so they just claim the side is defending their guy.

It's as laughable as it is stupid.

[BmorePat87]

Biden Facebook video team is doing a solid job:

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=175716307153458

"Nearly 100,000 Americans have died. The death toll is still rising. The President is playing golf."

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-24-2020, 12:45 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: "HRC the skank"

This is how desensitized we are to Trump. This is just a normal Sunday. 

But, did he literally say Hillary Rodham Clinton? Or was it basically? Because the distinction is important to the foundation of Stephen A. Smith’s next disingenuously “earnest” argument.

[BmorePat87]

(05-24-2020, 04:09 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: But, did he literally say Hillary Rodham Clinton? Or was it basically? Because the distinction is important to the foundation of Stephen A. Smith’s next disingenuously “earnest” argument.

HRC could mean hot rod cars 

[Benton]

(05-26-2020, 12:43 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: HRC could mean hot rod cars 

Heretical republican congressmen?
Maybe it was a typo for skunk? Herbervoric rabid chewers is a skunk.

Literally, could mean anything.

[Dill]

(05-24-2020, 04:09 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: But, did he literally say Hillary Rodham Clinton? Or was it basically? Because the distinction is important to the foundation of Stephen A. Smith’s next disingenuously “earnest” argument.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-26-2020, 12:43 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: HRC could mean hot rod cars 

Exactly. He never literally wrote/said Hillary’s name. Just a lot of TDS. Because Trump.