Trump and the triumph of ignorance
I think it provides good guidance in how to react to recent events. People don't know what's coming next but if they know the coercive tactics being used then they're at a (comparative) advantage.
If you know someone wants you to react a certain way, then you should reconsider reacting that certain way. Don't knee jerk. Know that if you do so you're being manipulated just the way they planned.
Steve Bannon, for all the name calling thrown his way, is a very crafty operator. He understands how to manipulate people and it seems he's unbound by any ethical code that you or I might recognise.
So the point is to rise above recent shocks and not get hysterical or lock down in partisan politics.
Stay cool, get an overarching view of the battlefield and look two moves ahead to what the opponent is doing.
No-one really knows Bannon's endgame but recent talk about dismantling the state apparatus should be heeded. Not necessarily as literal but as portent for Bannon's vision.
There is a lot of justifiable noise about Trump. The man is a fraud.
But I'm pleased with the news the courts are being engaged to fight his edicts. There is one thing Americans all love regardless of their politics and its the law. If Trump breaks the law, and it seems he is, the court writs will be immediately be issued. It will be a slow tide but it will grow nonetheless.
How is he a fraud Guysmiley ?
He's doing exactly what he said he'd do.
Just cause you don't agree with him - or the 60,000,000 + people that voted for him to represent them in their own country as is their right - doesn't make him a fraud.
Not yet , anyway.
Hey Blowin, there is no denying what you say about his vote, his actions and I certainly don't like him. Fraud? look at his statements and actions, he is no leader of the free world, how will he ever (or could ever) leave the world a better place? He is the worst of the worst of what is wrong in the world today.
Trump on the stump on trade:
"A Trump administration will also ensure that we start using American steel for American infrastructure. And aluminum.
Just like the American steel from Pennsylvania that built the Empire State Building, that's what we're going to do. It built the Empire State Building. It will be American steel that will fortify America's crumbling bridges -- American steel. It will be American steel.
It will be American steel that sends our skyscrapers soaring, soaring into the sky, beautiful sight, more beautiful with American steel. It will be American steel that rebuilds our inner cities. It will be American hands that remake this country, and it will American energy mined from American resources, that powers this country.
It will be American workers who are hired to do the job. Nobody else -- American workers.
We are going to put American steel and aluminum back into the backbone of our country.
This alone will create massive numbers of jobs, high-paying jobs, good jobs, not the jobs we have today, which everybody agrees are bad jobs. We're going to create massive numbers of good jobs."
Tremendous?!
http://europe.newsweek.com/how-donald-trump-ditched-us-steel-workers-chi...
What's crazier than believing that the Liberals here are the better economic managers?
The Four Bankruptcies?!
Where and when: 1991, 1992, 2004, 2009
The dirt: Four times in his career, Trump’s companies have entered bankruptcy.
In the late 1980s, after insisting that his major qualification to build a new casino in Atlantic City was that he wouldn’t need to use junk bonds, Trump used junk bonds to build Trump Taj Mahal. He built the casino, but couldn’t keep up with interest payments, so his company declared bankruptcy in 1991. He had to sell his yacht, his airline, and half his ownership in the casino.
A year later, another of Trump’s Atlantic City casinos, the Trump Plaza, went bust after losing more than $550 million. Trump gave up his stake but otherwise insulated himself personally from losses, and managed to keep his CEO title, even though he surrendered any salary or role in day-to-day operations. By the time all was said and done, he had some $900 million in personal debt.
Trump bounced back over the following decade, but by 2004, Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts was $1.8 billion in debt. The company filed for bankruptcy and emerged as Trump Entertainment Resorts. Trump himself was the chairman of the new company, but he no longer had a controlling stake in it.
Five years later, after the real-estate collapse, Trump Entertainment Resorts once again went bankrupt. Trump resigned from the board, but the company retained his name. In 2014, he successfully sued to take his name off the company and its casinos—one of which had already closed, and the other of which was near closing.
The upshot: Trump is very touchy about any implication that he personally declared bankruptcy, arguing—just as he explains away his campaign contributions to Democrats—that he’s just playing the game: “We’ll have the company. We’ll throw it into a chapter. We’ll negotiate with the banks. We’ll make a fantastic deal. We’ll use those. But they were never personal. This is nothing personal. You know, it’s like on The Apprentice. It’s not personal. It’s just business. Okay? If you look at our greatest people, Carl Icahn with TWA and so many others. Leon Black, Linens-n-Things and others. Henry Kravis. A lot of ‘em, everybody. But with me it’s ‘Oh, you did—’ this is a business thing. I’ve used the laws of this country to pare debt.”
Tremendous?!
Trump knows immigration AND workers! Tremendous?!
The Undocumented Polish Workers
Where and when: New York City, 1980
The dirt: In order to construct his signature Trump Tower, the builder first had to demolish the Bonwit Teller store, an architecturally beloved Art Deco edifice. The work had to be done fast, and so managers hired 200 undocumented Polish workers to tear it down, paying them substandard wages for backbreaking work—$5 per hour, when they were paid at all. The workers didn’t wear hard hats and often slept at the site. When the workers complained about their back pay, they were allegedly threatened with deportation. Trump said he was unaware that illegal immigrants were working at the site.
The upshot: In 1991, a federal judge found Trump and other defendants guilty of conspiring to avoid paying union pension and welfare contributions for the workers. The decision was appealed, with partial victories for both sides, and ultimately settled privately in 1999. In a February GOP debate, Marco Rubio brought up the story to accuse Trump of hypocrisy in his stance on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, Massimo Calabresi shows that testimony under oath shows Trump was aware of illegal immigrants being employed there.
Actually, maybe BB could start another thread?! Or meld it with Doggo's latest?
Call it "The hypocrisy of the Trump".
Those claiming legitimacy for Trump on the basis that he has only implemented his campaign promises are almost certainly premature in their judgement. This early in his term it may be too early to be sure of his real goals but it would be naive to believe that they are only what he promised on the campaign trail. One of the looming possibilities is that he wishes to entrench and greatly strengthen the US plutocracy. To understand this it helps to know that the period of relative income equality experienced in the west in the post war period was extremely unusual. Across most cultures and most eras, wealth has been much more concentrated. Western economies have been drifting back towards the norm for a few decades now. In this hypothesis Trump's economic disruption within the US has two benefits. The first is that it can be used to drive US wages even lower to make business more internationally competitive, and so increase the wealth of the plutocrats. The second is that economic disruption can be used as an excuse to create oppressive new laws or enforce existing laws more rigidly to disenfranchise any opposition. The installation of plutocrats in positions of power through-out the government can be seen as the means to achieve this. The question of what can reasonably be done to avoid this may quickly become anachronistic.
Blindboy and the Dancing Parrot : Neither can believe what Trump is doing to the workers of the United States - driving down wages , employing foreign workers with out regard for locals and without proper work conditions or entitlements.
Though When I've asked both for their opinions on the similar situation occurring in Australia - only without The Great Evil ( Trump ) in the equation - the answer was a collective " who gives a fuck " to wit : " Its not high on my present priority of concerns" .
Fuck off you pair of theoretically driven wankers.
You didn't give a rats arse about the erosion of workers rights by foreign labour occurring in Australia and now you would like us to think that the proletariat of a country 5000 kms away are close to your heart.
Go find another nest to cuckold with your brittle and ill fitting declarations of solidarity.
"As society reels and tempers run high, those responsible for the shock event perform a sleight of hand to achieve their real goal, a goal they know to be hugely unpopular, but from which everyone has been distracted as they fight over the initial event."
Yeah good point. We've seen it a thousand times really and not just with Trump. But it's related to how I thought Trump got the nomination. Every time an opponent would start to make traction about an actual policy he'd say something outrageous. About Rubio, Little Marco as he dubbed him, “We have to have somebody that doesn’t sweat." The media spent days discussing Trump's line about Marco sweating and how it would make him a bad president. That is, they were talking about Trump and his audacity to say something like that.
Another time, talking about Ted Cruz, Lyin' Ted as he called him, he accused Ted's father of helping assinate JFK. The media went into overdrive discussing this above anything else.
We've all seen from the beginning he's been manipulating the media like that. It makes sense that he's still doing it. I'm sure he's done other things in the past few days beyond signing an order to favour Christian refugees over Muslim ones and block Muslim green card holders from coming home, but we aren't discussing what that might be (despite blindboy mentioning a few extra issues to raise Blowin's ire ;-) )
Trump though, also drew a cat recently ;-)
What kind of crazy talk is this ?- ( Quote from SMH article )
"In his public statements, Bannon espoused a basic idea that Trump would later seize as the centrepiece of his campaign.
While others saw the world rebounding from the financial crisis of 2008, Bannon just saw it becoming more divided by class.
The elites that had caused the crisis - or, at least, failed to stop it - were now rising higher. Everyone else was being left behind.
"The middle class, the working men and women in the world... are just tired of being dictated to by what we call the party of Davos," Bannon said in a 2014 speech to a conference at the Vatican in a recording obtained by BuzzFeed. Davos is a Swiss ski resort that hosts an annual conclave of wealthy and powerful people.
Bannon blamed both major political parties for this system and set out to force his ideas on an unwilling Republican leadership."
Who the fuck can argue against that ?
Seems like anyone that supported the occupy movement might have a champion....maybe. Unless he's full of shit.
Maybe Trump just wants to be the people's champion so he can get some love, sweet love
Not his fault if he coincidentally gets exponentially wealthier at the same time is it ?
"Who the fuck can argue against that ?"
Not me, though it would seem to run contrary to many of DT's cabinet picks. It would even, at least on surface appearances, run contrary to DT himself. Why is he not a part of the 'elites'? Is it just because he says so? He's done awfully well out of America's open markets, loose regulations, and Chapter 11 laws.
I reckon that bannon guy is spot on with his observations. He's definitely a little unappealing, but seems very genuine in his intentions (a bit like jackie lambe).
Turkeyman loves a bit of naomi klein, he should be on board, wasn't it klein that said the davos class have failed?
Well they have failed anyway...on many fronts
There's 'elites' and there's 'elites', and trump clearly isn't invited to the master of the universe club....well not without duress
I reckon trump's disdain is for a club he's not invited to, and it's holier than thou elitist aloofness.
But it's a convenient word that anyone can relate to, be it financial elite, cultural elite, class elite, sports elite, celebrity elite, academic elite...Everyone's got a gripe with one, or all of these, if lightly prodded. This is the genius of his campaign, like 'establishment', elite means and captures everyone somewhere along the spectrum.
One could even claim blindboy is part of the media 'establishment', and is incredibly condescending with his 'elitist' attitude'.
Because it sure feels that way
https://www.google.com.au/amp/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/01/16/what-to-make-o...
I thought I better copy n paste all of this, just in case Blowie decides to do some more self-redacting to cover his sorry arse. Forgive me.
"Blindboy and the Dancing Parrot : Neither can believe what Trump is doing to the workers of the United States - driving down wages , employing foreign workers with out regard for locals and without proper work conditions or entitlements.
Though When I've asked both for their opinions on the similar situation occurring in Australia - only without The Great Evil ( Trump ) in the equation - the answer was a collective " who gives a fuck " to wit : " Its not high on my present priority of concerns" .
Fuck off you pair of theoretically driven wankers.
You didn't give a rats arse about the erosion of workers rights by foreign labour occurring in Australia and now you would like us to think that the proletariat of a country 5000 kms away are close to your heart.
Go find another nest to cuckold with your brittle and ill fitting declarations of solidarity."
C'mon mate, if someone thinks better of a post then let it lay.
The straw men are going down like flies today!
Stu - "C'mon mate, if someone thinks better of a post then let it lay."
That's in reference to Turks copy and paste?
Speaking of ignorance, this can happen when you make deals with a lame duck
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/02/trump-told-turnbu...
Stu, of course Blowie can self-redact comments. He has in the past. But putting in other stuff to cover it, and changing the nature of the convo as recorded? It's also one thing to go back and edit a comment to fix some spelling or some grammar or even to shore up something you've put forward, but to change it fundamentally? Not really cricket or 'netiquette' in my book. Here's an idea, maybe think (before you drink) before you post?
Especially when you're directing utter crap at others!
Anyhoo, regarding that emotive (aided?) spray above from the Blow-in/Blowin'/Blowie, & talking purely from my view-point ( I'm sure BB can look after himself), what a colossal piece of 'strawman', 'post-truth', balderdash!
In fact, it's quite deranged in its overreach. But then you get that when you try to marry half-baked ideas to cover your sorry, scaredy-cat fear of the other (and that's putting it mildly). And then try and sell that as a reasonable response to the world's woes, as you see them, to others of your ilk.
It's Pauline's entire MO! And you voted for her, Blowie! Pauline's glommed onto the 'globalisation' bandwagon this time round (as well as 'muslims' and 'climate change'), and she doesn't even know what it is! And with your many, and dodgy, parroting (Hah! Dance, cockie, dance!) statements, it seems you've fallen into the same lazy trap.
Globalism vs globalisation. How the right use this confusion, and certain 'buzzwords', stripped of meaning, to PR themselves for the Thankgiving-voting turkeys. And I say, Thanksgiving 'cos this bollocks originated with the right-whingin' brains-trust 'elites' in the States waaay back. Actually, we may have to get back to this, sooner rather than later. Watch this space (here we go again)...
Anyways, I used to think Pauline, giving her the benefit of the doubt, was at the very least a 'true believer', but now I'm thinking that's totally naive. She's just another cynical careerist politician, like the majority on the right (she is a failed Lib). And second-rate, of course. Like the majority of our political class in total. Sheesh, Ashby is her Bannon! Ashby!!
Bannon. How long ago pre-election did I post a TL:DR article about that dangerous narcissist? And now, surprise! he's on the security council! Actually, that is a surprise. There’ll be a few more doozys, I wager.
Bannon, the actual worse example of a type infesting public life. Ethically/morally unbound, say whatever to get whatever. The thing is, what will this vain-glorious fuckwit push to further his desperate need for relevancy? Looking at his previous careers it don't bode well...for the little people of whatever type.
Sippy, comrade, stop sipping the mediated 'US corporate sugar/salt water -ADE'. It's rotting your faculties.
Seems democracy only suits lefties when it goes their way. If it doesn't then they spend the rest of their lives complaining about double standards which they refuse to see exist on both sides of the fence. This seems to be the true triumph of ignorance.
I reckon this will be the legacy that see's far right wing parties continually elected as there is a staggering lack of self reflection in the non Trump camp. He's definitely crazy but he just does not give a fuck. He's making news ten times faster than the desperate media can print it, dissect it then bitch about it so catch him if you can!
Also, tell me a single president in US history that wasn't financially better off after they finished? The fact he was already stinking rich just gives him a head-start. There's obviously always conflicts of interests in their cabinet picks but only an idiot wouldn't try and stack the cards with like-minded individuals. Obama had drug company execs to help with Obamacare.
Don't be hating the player gents hate the game.
All over the shop there, Gazza. 'Lefties' in the US political game? Like what, Jill Stein? Ol' Bernie?
Surely, you're not talking about the corporate Democrats?
As Michael Moore stated in his speech (at the same event where the corporate media mainly reported on Madonna's utterances), it is time for the people to take over and reform/remake/reclaim the Democratic Party.
It's an interesting comment too. Hate the game whilst cheering on the main player? You can't play a player, beeyatch! Depends on what you think the game actually is, and how the main player is dealing with it, I s'pose?
& it's all about the green, huh? Tell Thomas Jefferson that, for one. Poor bugger ended up broke. Actually,
"beginning with Millard Fillmore in 1850, the financial history of the presidency entered a new era. Most presidents were lawyers who spent years in public service. They rarely amassed large fortunes and their incomes were often almost entirely from their salaries. From Fillmore to Garfield, these American presidents were distinctly middle class. These men often retired without the money to support themselves in a fashion anywhere close to the one that they had as president. Buchanan, Lincoln, Johnson, Grant, Hayes, and Garfield had almost no net worth at all."
Trump is the richest president ever to enter the White House. Fuck the elites!
"Not really cricket or 'netiquette' in my book."
I agree.
I don't like bannon, just as I don't like trump, and he is a bit weird, a bit otaku, but most of the stuff he says is perfectly reasonable, even conmendable, the media go hard on him but they ain't got nothing really.
Turkeyman do you really think he's that much worse than some other odd right wing nutter that ted cruz or another republican president would have appointed?
Probably not, and this is probably true for most of trump's appointments
Yet the hysterics continue
Bannon;
"We think of ourselves as virulently anti-establishment, particularly 'anti-' the permanent political class"
Background on bannon;
"Bannon worked at Goldman Sachs as an investment banker in the Mergers and Acquisitions Department.[34] In 1990, Bannon and several colleagues from Goldman Sachs launched Bannon & Co., a boutique investment bank specializing in media."
In conclusion, Bannon is as "establishment" and swampy as the next former Goldman Sachs banker.
I know he's former goldman sachs, but he doesn't talk kindly of the bankers of wall st. He wants to punish them. Pretty hard words to walk away from.
We'll see who's lying with time
Nope turkey I'm referring to the other "pretend" lefties in the democrat camp. Remember the one that actually got selected to run, old Hillary? Flat broke in 2001 now worth over $100mil just from "hangin around". But you prove the point perfectly. Voters had to choose between corporate republicans & corporate democrats and it ended in tears.
Or are you confused about who the "lefties" are? Because obviously the two you mentioned fit the bill but somehow the democrats got stuck with a lemon? Or maybe its just the democrat voters that "think" the party has an ounce of socialism in there somewhere.
I guess things are pretty confusing over in democrat land at the moment as no one seems to know who or what day it is since Trump started casually pumping away at the American media with his barely rigid contempt. And with no lube either, the swine!
If you have to reach back into the Victorian era to prove a point old mate I think perhaps you're looking a bit flimsy on the issue. I'm starting to think you're a 14 old boy learning to use the google machine whilst punching out a 200 word essay for english class.
Now take a seat turkey & prepare to learn something as I'm going to use this highly technical google thingy myself and type in "what is the game" so we can work out this riddle just for your benefit.
Here it is:
verb
1.
manipulate (a situation), typically in a way that is unfair or unscrupulous.
"it was very easy for a few big companies to game the system"
So Turkey don't hate Trump too much just hate the game. The rich are going to get richer, regardless of government.
"I know he's former goldman sachs, but he doesn't talk kindly of the bankers of wall st. He wants to punish them. Pretty hard words to walk away from.
We'll see who's lying with time"
bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha......... he wants to "punish them"............ bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Sorry, sypo....... But that is fuckn gold......
Back to the books, Gazza. The Democrats are not a left-wing party. Being 'left of...' doesn't make you left-wing. Trump via Bannon made more 'leftish' pronouncements than Clinton pre-election, let alone his Republican cohorts, especially in regards to trade and employment etc.
The key is the 'via Bannon' part. As well as Trump's own real history in regards to trade and work relations, of course.
ie ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT.
PR for the Thanksgiving-voting turkeys.
History. Know it or be doomed to repeat it.
"In the past, the United States has sometimes, kind of sardonically, been described as a one-party state: the business party with two factions called Democrats and Republicans. That’s no longer true. It’s still a one-party state, the business party. But it only has one faction. The faction is moderate Republicans, who are now called Democrats. There are virtually no moderate Republicans in what’s called the Republican Party and virtually no liberal Democrats in what’s called the Democratic [sic] Party. It’s basically a party of what would be moderate Republicans and similarly, Richard Nixon would be way at the left of the political spectrum today. Eisenhower would be in outer space. There is still something called the Republican Party, but it long ago abandoned any pretence of being a normal parliamentary party. It’s in lock-step service to the very rich and the corporate sector and has a catechism that everyone has to chant in unison, kind of like the old Communist Party. The distinguished conservative commentator, one of the most respected – Norman Ornstein – describes today’s Republican Party as, in his words, “a radical insurgency – ideologically extreme, scornful of facts and compromise, dismissive of its political opposition” – a serious danger to the society, as he points out."
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it."
Game over.
Holy shit, we've seen it all today, Stu defending Blowin, Gaz calling Clinton a leftie, sypkan thinking Trump is out to get Wall St. You have to love Swellnet, just for the sheer diversity (not to mention perversity) of the opinions.
Sippy, Sippy, Sippy...
“I am worried about the National Security Council. Who are the members of it and who are the permanent members? The appointment of Mr. Bannon is something which is a radical departure from any National Security Council in history," John McCain.
Democrats offered much harsher criticism. House Minority Whip Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., called Bannon's inclusion an "outrageous, incompetent move" that sends the message that "ideology and partisan politics will be injected into the process of decision-making over questions of national security."
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said it is "dangerous and unprecedented. He must be removed."
President George W. Bush specifically excluded his chief political adviser Karl Rove from council meetings, but Trump's Press secretary Sean Spicer said on MSNBC that Bannon “isn’t playing Karl Rove’s part” in the Trump administration.
“Steve has an extensive military background, extensive background in geopolitical affairs, and the assumption that he's playing the same role as Karl Rove is just not accurate,” Spicer said on MSNBC. “And so, he brings to the table a much greater scope of the political landscape, vis-a-vis the world — the geopolitical landscape in national security affairs."
Well, he was in the navy. And executive producer on the film Titus, the adaptation of William Shakespeare's revenge tragedy Titus Andronicus, about the downfall of a Roman general, starring Anthony Hopkins.
Wooaaaahhh turkey slow it down. Lets simplify it again. Breathe. Back to the google machine young fella.
Step 1> type in "are the democrats left leaning"
Aaaaaand whats the first thing we learn today kids?
"In the UnitedStates of America, the Democratic Party is generally considered "LeftWing" and the Republican Party is considered "RightWing." However, there is substantial overlap between the actual views and policies of these two parties."
Now first, yes the democrats failed because Hillary is not a lefty and everyone knows that. No one here is referring to her as one that's ridiculous, only that she tried to inspire a party backed by voters that lean in that way and came up woefully short.
Now to quote your own research:
"The distinguished conservative commentator, one of the most respected – Norman Ornstein – describes today’s Republican Party as, in his words, “a radical insurgency – ideologically extreme, scornful of facts and compromise, dismissive of its political opposition” – a serious danger to the society, as he points out."
Are you joking?! That is the EXACT situation the democrats find themselves in today! Don't be throwing stones in glass houses people!
Busy day on Swellnet for sure blindboy.!
Gaz, Political Compass has the Democrats under both Obama and Clinton as centre-to-far- right.
By the way I highly recommend taking the test on the Political Compass site, very interesting.
I'd love to know where all the Swellnet regulars sit on that dual axis!
Gazza, are you serious, comrade? Hah! Type in that loaded question and grab the first thing that comes up?! From Wiki?!
And lemme get this straight, you think this is the Democrats?!
"a radical insurgency – ideologically extreme, scornful of facts and compromise, dismissive of its political opposition”
When?
Back to the books indeed!
Sippy, Mike Pence IS Ted Cruz! Impeachment..? Careful what you wish for.
Andy , just did your political compass test.
Landed just south of Ghandi with economic left/right : -4.75
And social libertarian/ Authoritarian : -4.62
A question that intrigued me was the one about whether land should be able to be bought and sold / possessed . Never really considered it.
Though I suppose ALL land is possessed regardless of culture.
Even the Aboriginies possessed tribal lands, maybe not bought and sold with an abstract currency but definitely bought and paid for with blood .
As respective nations (tribes ) defined their lands they must also defend them.
They just didn't count on the big white tribe coming along.
Blowin, good to hear - thought provoking isn't it?
Yeah I believe in land ownership for sure but not to the extent that it's the commodity it is now. Fucking travesty.
I ended up Left/Right -6.75
Libertarian/Authoritarian -5.33
It's pretty hard to imagine being in that top right quadrant, that's sociopath territory if you ask me.
Funny that the vast majority of the mainstream political parties are in there.
"One could even claim blindboy to be part of the media establishment ...." Missed that first time around but sippy, how did you know? Mal gets up most mornings goes " Bugger Fairfax, forget Murdoch. Alan Jones? Who's he? Get onto Swellnet, what's blindboy thinking, that's what I need to know!" And Shorten? "Jesus Bill, get off the phone will ya, tide's just right".
Left right -3.25
Authoritarian -6.36
Turkey. Come on old friend. Time for some political introspection.
The democrats and associated media/voters are hardly a radical insurgency, just like the republicans aren't either. However, if you try and tell me that though-out the whole campaign the Hillary side wasn't ideologically extreme, scornful of facts and compromise & dismissive of its political opposition I'm going to ask you how much you've had to drink. They flat out didn't give him a chance and ignored all that he gave a voice to. How'd that go?
Now, the democrat platform is based on social policies like universal healthcare, cheaper education, equal rights, climate change, tax the rich, globalization etc to name a few but you get the point. Regardless of what they do this is their core which similarly minded voters vote on. These policies reside to the left.
Just did the political compass test AndyM and I was also somewhere near Ghandi.
Economic Left/Right: -6.5
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.15
The question that made me think for a moment was "The businessperson and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and the artist."
I figured I could live without a business or manufacturing job but then what would I read?
Interesting point about where Republicans & Democrats sit on the compass compared to where people think they should sit. I wonder if this is a factor in the general disenfranchisement that seems to be in the air at the moment.
So far I am the least left of anyone. You will have to start calling me a radical centrist.
Not sure exactly what you mean with your last paragraph Gaz but I think part of the disenfranchisement relates to the increasing understanding that basically all parties (Liberal/Labor, Republican/Democrats, British Conservative/Labour) are a fair way to the right and no-one is really representing any true social democratic values, or, at least in Australia, the voting system in the Lower House makes it virtually impossible for anyone but the two major parties to participate in government.
And of course it's in the interests of the Liberals to demonise anything vaguely near the left - to call Labor "left" or the Greens "far left" is nonsense but people still see the word "socialism" in any context as bad to the point where people flinch when it's pointed out that Australia (for the time being) has a social democracy.
The right have won that war.
I wa saying the other day that things have shifted so far to the right that The Guardian looks left wing - I've thought about that a bit and I stand by my comment that it's centrist at best.
Blindboy I'm not angry, just disappointed...
No probs AndyM, I was alluding to the fact that a lot of political parties don't know who they actually represent anymore. In Aus the Liberals used to represent the middle class and the wealthy now they seem to not give a rats. Similarly Labor only seem to represent the unions and getting re-elected.
Heck, here in SA we have a labor government that is busy privatising everything and spruiking free market economics whilst blaming the opposition for doing the same thing a generation ago! But I digress, the point I meant to make was that both parties have core expectations needed in order to satisfy the rusted-on faithful and perhaps they have deviated slightly too far with their ambitions and stopped representing their constituents.
I think deep down everyone leans a bit to the left just very few have faith in the people tasked with delivering these policies.
Oh they know who they represent all right - it's basically an oligarchy.
But who they actually represent and who they try and manipulate for votes are two very different things - to use a popular phrase on here, talk about the turkeys voting for Thanksgiving.
Yep both parties have converged to very similar ideological positions and it ain't healthy, and it ain't going to be easy to fix.
.