How Elated Are Conservatives?

[RedDenver]

1 hour ago, Comfortably Numb said:

 

I don't disagree but I don't like it. I guess the insinuation is that there are no reasonable conservatives and if you are conservative then you support Trump and what's passing as republicans these days. Maybe I happen to be in an extreme minority but I don't like it. I have maybe gotten an inch more liberal over the years but the party I used to identify strongly with has gone so far goofy right it is unrecognizable. And for balance, I also believe the Dems have gone further left. There's a large vacuum in the middle where I like to think a lot of people would like to reside but there sure isn't any proof that a reasonable, moderate middle exists in our politics.

I mean, sure the Dems have moved further left than Clinton and Obama, but they aren't even close to as far left as they were prior to the 1980's. Bernie Sanders might be considered far left today, but he'd be a pretty standard New Deal Dem from 1940-1980. I actually think the vast majority of today's Dem politicians are in the middle - a bit left socially and a bit right economically.

[JJ Husker]

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

 

So, 67% of US Adult Conservatives, irrespective of party affiliation, approve of Trump's job performance.  88% of Republican conservatives approve, and 18% of Democrat conservatives approve.

 

Clearly those numbers don't say **all** conservatives approve. And it's probably pretty uncomfortable to be lumped in with that number if you're in the minority of conservatives who disapprove. 

 

But it is not unfair to use the word "conservatives" to describe Trump supporters. 

 

Agreed.

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I mean, sure the Dems have moved further left than Clinton and Obama, but they aren't even close to as far left as they were prior to the 1980's. Bernie Sanders might be considered far left today, but he'd be a pretty standard New Deal Dem from 1940-1980. I actually think the vast majority of today's Dem politicians are in the middle - a bit left socially and a bit right economically.

 

Obama was a moderate cast as a left-winger by right-wing media. 

 

The characterization stuck, and now people believe "both sides" are equally polarized. 

[TGHusker]

Sometimes I think we have to think about those polls differently.  High % approve performance - I think of policy.  I don't necessarily think of that as liking the man behind the policy.   I think those of us who lean conservative cringe at the idea that Trump has become the 'face' of the party and of conservatism.  I say he is more of a nationalist than a conservative.  The vast majority of Republicans and conservatives have hitched their wagon to him out of necessity as he is the only one to get their agenda through - we didn't elect a Rubio, Bush, Kasich, or Cruz etc.  I think the support you see in the polls is from people speaking about policy but these same people  would most likely desire a different person leading the charge.  Of course the DC congressmen want the power and as long as Trump is the power broker, they will support him.  I for one won't give my vote to him.   Many of the conservative people I know in my state voted for him reluctantly, or like myself abstained and wish there was a different face for the party.  Yes, Okla went overwhelmingly for Trump over Hillary.   However, none of the conservative people that I rub shoulders with (family or friends, Co-workers)  voted for him in the primaries - our votes were divided primarily between Cruz, Kasich, and Rubio.   I do fault the party that they set up the scenario where a guy like Trump could win the primary in the first place.  Or maybe I'm slow to the realization that most of the party is not like me anymore - or that as I moved more to the center the party has moved more to the right - and unfortunately towards wacky right.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Gotta admit, the only place I'm having conversations with thoughtful conservatives and independents who are troubled or even sickened by Trump is here on Huskerboard.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Here's the thing about America's shifting middle:

 

The liberal equivalent of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Breitbart, Fox News and InfoWars isn't MSNBC or Stephen Colbert or the New York Times.

 

It's a bipolar hippie shouting on a Berkeley street corner.

[RedDenver]

37 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Here's the thing about America's shifting middle:

 

The liberal equivalent of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Breitbart, Fox News and InfoWars isn't MSNBC or Stephen Colbert or the New York Times.

 

It's a bipolar hippie shouting on a Berkeley street corner.

I think the liberal equivalent is the much smaller online outlets such as TYT Network and some independent shows like Majority Report and The David Pakman Show. Those outlets are bigger than InfoWars and probably Limbaugh but not anywhere close to Fox News.

 

And if we're going to talk about the far-left (and not the far more centrist Dem Party), then we should really be talking about the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Their membership went from a few thousands to tens of thousands (might have crossed 100k by now, not sure).

[TGHusker]

1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Here's the thing about America's shifting middle:

 

The liberal equivalent of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Breitbart, Fox News and InfoWars isn't MSNBC or Stephen Colbert or the New York Times.

 

It's a bipolar hippie shouting on a Berkeley street corner.

That is funny but then again maybe not so much

[Moiraine]

1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Here's the thing about America's shifting middle:

 

The liberal equivalent of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Breitbart, Fox News and InfoWars isn't MSNBC or Stephen Colbert or the New York Times.

 

It's a bipolar hippie shouting on a Berkeley street corner.

 

 

What's frightening is the Trumpers and others think New York Times and The Washington Post are the equivalent to Breitbart. They might think they're the equivalent to Fox News except many think Fox News is fair and unbiased.

 

I had a FB friend who I posted that Fox News video on Obama and Kim Jong Un vs Trump and Kim Jong Un and she defended it by saying the 2 situations are 100% different. It was not possible in her addled brain that Fox News was biased.

 

And she claims she doesn't like Trump.

 

 

I worked at a hippie grocery store and the equivalent to these far right media are the guy who wouldn't use normal toothpaste or anything other than purified oxygenated non-fluoridated water from the store because of how horribly "toxic" fluoride is. Or the gal who posted the video of a guy turning ice into air without ever going to a liquid stage using fire which proved that someone was putting something bad in the air or clouds.

 

Big difference here is these crazy hippies aren't as hateful.

[Guy Chamberlin]

On 6/27/2018 at 6:44 PM, Moiraine said:

 

 

I was just thinking about this. They are probably working on how to keep them upset now that they've stopped the flow of Islamic Terrorists and Mexican Rapists.

Oh wait, they have the deep state and the witch hunt to be pissed off at. Everything's fine.

 

In fairness, both Democratic and Republican fundraising efforts are almost entirely fear and anger based. 

[Moiraine]

11 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

In fairness, both Democratic and Republican fundraising efforts are almost entirely fear and anger based. 

 

 

Do you think the 2 are equivalent and equally called for?

[Guy Chamberlin]

1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Do you think the 2 are equivalent and equally called for?

 

I think the Democratic Party is far better at fundraising than they are at governing, and has done a much better job of portraying the enemy than defining themselves.

 

Obviously I think there's more to fear from a Republican-controlled government headed by a megalomaniac moron, but I can't let Dems off the hook for their own fear-mongering. Perhaps more to your point, the Democrats -- even under Obama -- rarely used pride and encouragement to fire up the base. They were also vested in keeping potential donors angry.

[TGHusker]

The main reason many issues don't get solved - both parties need their 'plantation issues' to keep the base in their respective cages and fired up.  Thus it fuels the continued fund raising, campaigning and insuring that those in power remain in power and that the incumbents continually have a huge advantage over new thinking opponents - whether in the primary or general election.  It is a big money self-generating, perpetual, well oiled machine.    Take away the fear and the anger - then it exposes that both parties have no clothes on and they stand naked and guilty of not fixing things and not working together as they should to resolve our nation issues.  Look at immigration or sensible abortion laws,  etc and etc.  Pick a topic and there is a boggy man and a knight on a white horse.  But unmask them both and we have a poor excuse of a congress person not doing what they were elected to do - taking care of the people's business first and foremost.