The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Contrarian's picture

    Some Splainin' To Do

    By Contrarian on Sun, 04/09/2017 - 6:06am |

    More important, this minimizes the undeniable fact that Trump's "win" was premised on explicit appeals to white nationalism and overwhelming support from white men. Needless to say, tens of millions of women, people of color, immigrants and LGBTQ, the ones whose rights are threatened, feel differently, despite the self-serving statements of the octogenarian socialist from Vermont.

    1. "explicit appeals to white nationalism" - Explicit appeals to nationalism, 'yes,' but white nationalism? No. One can argue that there were implicit appeals to white nationalism. One can also argue that people only inferred that the nationalistic appeals were explicitly racial because they were so used to people walking on egg shells regarding minority identities that someone with an unrepentant IDGAF attitude appeared to be a Nazi by contrast. Also, by focusing focusing on the allegation that it's 'white,' you're in danger of missing the point when it comes to the importance of the popular appeal of the explicit appeals to nationalism which really cannot be overstated.
    2. "overwhelming support of white men" - So what? Their votes are as good as anyone else's.
    3. "tens of millions of women, people of color, immigrants and LGBTQ, the ones whose rights are threatened" - Horse puckey.

     

    Second, it's more than a little ironic to blame Democrats for "losing" an election in which we got 3 million more votes

    Those 3 million votes- are you suggesting that that indicates the DEMs didn't f@#k up, because to me it indicates that they did. When you have that big of an advantage and still lose, it means that someone doing a bit more legwork and using a few maps would have been able to prevent the loss. If anything that bolster's Sander's point that it was the DEMs to win and they screwed the pooch.

     

    by standing up for civil rights and inclusion, the environment, immigration reform

    If you word it differently... By emphasizing the importance of the environment and seeming not to care about the jobs of people working with fossil fuels. By adopting a strategy which was so laser focused on appealing to particular demographic groups that it fell prey to a counterstrategy which appealed to the demographic groups being ignored. By making yourself look extreme in the eyes of huge swaths of the public when you embrace policies that are unpopular or reject ones that are popular to cater to the targeted groups. By pandering to interest groups focused on allowing foreigners to break our country's laws for economic benefit and calling that a form of justice. More importantly by arguing that rejecting your policy stances are a sign of bigotry so that people who disagree will no longer lend credence to you when you complain of prejudice.

     

    an authoritarian monster who threatens our Democracy every day

    LOL laugh

    Comments

    1) Enough Donald soundbites about ghetto blacks and rapist/murder Hispanics, that funny post he made with the Star of David & blaming Jews for false flag threats on themselves, and all the women as fat pigs stuff. get real.

    2) Try massive voter obstruction, illegal email hacks & collusion, data theft, and federal officials violating laws & ethics rules. Yes, Hillary f@#ked up by not getting 10 million votes  more than she needed so they would have to rig the system a bit harder. But still would.

    3) Obama emphasized bring back the jobs lost by Bush in the huge ass crash, and made sure not to appear too helpful to blacks while doing it, to the complaints of Cornel West, Smiley & others. Can't help if uneducated white people can't read unemployment stats or the paper to see what their Republican representatives are doing to kill people's wages and make corporations wealthier. Remember those actions on overtime, minimum wage, health benefits, pollution cleanup, etc? Hillary's $30 billion plan to rebuild the dying coal Appalachians and deal with opioid addiction in the heartland? Don't recall whites being excluded from any of those.

    Looks like heartland whites outFoxed and outfucked themselves this time - maybe a bit more attention to digging out the truth in the future- people will pull you by the nose and balls if they can get away with it. Bart's Bright, alright, but in a cunning, self-serving way, or better said, serving a cabal of hardnosed billionaires with a strong anti-people agenda.


    by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 04/09/2017 - 12:24pm

    Yawn.

    The winner was the winner. The one whom most voters preferred. 

    Maybe if Trump had shown some interest in the environment and appealed to ¨certain demographic groups ¨ he would have actually gotten the most votes instead of embarrassing himself , and his supporters , by creating an imaginary 3 million democratic poll violators. Poor baby. 

    Lord knows we have our problems  but one of our more  appealing characteristics is our scorn for a presidential  candidate who´s a  ¨poor loser ¨

    .We hadn´t  developed a grooved swing for dealing with that even greater disgrace , the ¨poor winner¨.  Because, fortunately , we hadn´t  had one.

    Until now..  

     

     


    by Flavius on Mon, 04/10/2017 - 6:16am