Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the simple fact is that 99% of liberals (notice I said liberals not democrats ) are so far left that they are fascists(socialism lite) or full pledged socialists
fascism comes from progressivism
fascism is leftist
fascism is left wing...American liberals are fascists...big government bring tyranny
hitler (german fascism), fascism, socialism, communism, Naziism, Marxism are all progressive left
liberals (ie progressives) were the one here IN AMERICA that were supporting hitler in the 1930's
Progressives also believed that industrialization had led to social “disintegration” and materialistic decadence throughout America.
progressives looked favorably on the policies and ideals of Italian and German fascism in the 1920s and 1930s;
As an ardent admirer of Marx, Benito Mussolini (1883-1945) called his version of Marxist socialism "Fascism". Instead of nationalization--government ownership--of private business, Mussolini advocated government control of business via complete bureaucratic regulation.
hmm high taxes...super control (authoritarian) by regulations...sounds like the American liberals to anyone with common sense
Zbigniew Brzezinski advisor to carter, clinton and obama.....""This is a form of Socialism known as fascism, and it will be the type of world government the power elite plans ultimately to bring about and control. In this government, the power elite will control politicians who will become government leaders who will promulgate laws, rules and regulations favorable to certain transnational corporations"""
simple things like 'nationalizing' corporations, nationalization of all trusts(banks),social security, emanate domain(agrarian reform) , removing the guns from the people, demand the end of capitalism, state(country) provided education, blame the jews (or the modern version 'the zionists'),.. 'fairness doctrine"( censorship of talk radio),, singlepayer health, redistribution of wealth).....COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD
DO THESE SOUND FAMILIAR, YES THE ARE THE TALKING POINTS OF THE LIBERALS, THE DNC AND MOVEON.ORG...............................THEY ARE ALSO A LARGE PART OF HITLERS 25 POINTS
fascism came to America under progressive Wilson, and the fascist liberal FDR..
Interesting this rant is. They are talking about the extreme left when he/she is extreme right and should look in the mirror. One is just as bad as the other even more so when they are far removed to one side their hate gets in the way of everything.
For the life of me, I'll never understand why being a "polished" speaker (i.e. sounding intelligent) is considered a character flaw in the US. Why do we Americans think being a rude loudmouth is a sign of strength? It's anything but.
Being a polished speaker isn't the same as being intelligent. Many not so intelligent people are polished speakers, particularly in the political world. Add being a lawyer to decades of political experience and you get someone polished enough to speak from both sides of their mouth, slice and dice language, obfuscate with no problem.
The point was that Trump lacks that skill or flaw.
Being a polished speaker isn't the same as being intelligent. Many not so intelligent people are polished speakers, particularly in the political world. Add being a lawyer to decades of political experience and you get someone polished enough to speak from both sides of their mouth, slice and dice language, obfuscate with no problem.
The point was that Trump lacks that skill or flaw.
True, to a point...
However, I think you are confusing the ability to speak well with how one might choose to use that ability. The question was why being a "polished" speaker (i.e. sounding intelligent) is considered a character flaw in the US."
Obviously, no one much appreciates the "smooth talker" that wants to sell us a used car that doesn't run, or the greasy lawyer who can make a case for the Devil, and will if it suits him/her...
The question is why so many Americans will dismiss a "polished" speaker out of hand, like so many did Obama for example. As if to speak well is a character flaw. As if to sound intelligent is a bad thing.
I have at least one theory or answer as already explained...
As for Trump. I cannot call Trump a bad speaker. I don't see that Trump is a bad speaker if speaking well means getting your message across, generating support, inspiring followers. At the same time, I would not call Trump a "polished" speaker, as in one who better considers what words they choose to communicate their message in an intelligent, careful and thoughtful manner.
Simply put, Trump is more a barker, one who "shoots from the hip," seems to speak first and rather than think later, Trump simply moves on apparently without much thinking or reflection at all. If/when he detects criticism, he "doubles down" with more of the same, because he strongly believes "the best defense is a strong offense."
Especially for those who could care less what words are used, for whom being PC is some form of elitist code, insults and mouth-breathing is inspiring, Trump appeals. Those are not characteristics anyone can attribute to Obama, for example, or Hillary, or most professionals who have learned that words DO matter, for people who want better than a ringleader in a circus act anyway...
After that, beyond the words well spoken or not, the message is just as important if not more so. I'd rather have someone who can't speak that well but communicates the RIGHT message than someone who speaks very eloquently and promotes the WRONG message. That's why we have to listen to what people say all the more carefully and understand the message all the more intelligently, or we get snookered, no matter what kind of speaker we make our leader...
Didn't vote for him the first time, and someone would literally have to threaten physical harm to my family to get me to vote for him in '20
Well that tells us little about your thought process for not voting for him in 2016. Granted we can assume you are a (D) and/or a liberal and liked Hillary.
For myself, Trump was not my cup of tea, but voting for Hillary would be like drinking poison. Looking ahead to 2020, my vote will be based in large part to how effective Trump is, and of course who is running against him.
That will include if he has a primary (R) challenger, and whom the (D) nominee is. So it is way too early to know such things, but in answer to the OP's question, it is way too soon to tell.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,592,398 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1
Well that tells us little about your thought process for not voting for him in 2016. Granted we can assume you are a (D) and/or a liberal and liked Hillary.
For myself, Trump was not my cup of tea, but voting for Hillary would be like drinking poison. Looking ahead to 2020, my vote will be based in large part to how effective Trump is, and of course who is running against him.
That will include if he has a primary (R) challenger, and whom the (D) nominee is. So it is way too early to know such things, but in answer to the OP's question, it is way too soon to tell.
`
I truly wanted Sanders, and only voted for Clinton because I completely disagree with Repub's on policy, will never vote R as long as I live
However, I think you are confusing the ability to speak well with how one might choose to use that ability. The question was why being a "polished" speaker (i.e. sounding intelligent) is considered a character flaw in the US."
snip...
its not a character flaw
the point is that many who are polished speakers are also not so intelligent, or are so polished that the are exceptional liars
That former President Obama....great speaker...very polished....when he was in front of a speech cue
when he was out in the open, without a cue card....he was a bunch of uhm, er, hmm
and plenty of gaffs too ...57 states, beer summit, "he could have been my son", you will save 3k on your ins....you can keep your plan if you like it.. etc
President Trump, speaks straight from the heart, lots of gaffs, but atleast he is real (or seems to be)....I would rather have a guy/gal who is blunt, speaks from the heart, full of gaffs, but honest...than a snake-oil salesman like Obama was
Well that tells us little about your thought process for not voting for him in 2016. Granted we can assume you are a (D) and/or a liberal and liked Hillary.
For myself, Trump was not my cup of tea, but voting for Hillary would be like drinking poison. Looking ahead to 2020, my vote will be based in large part to how effective Trump is, and of course who is running against him.
That will include if he has a primary (R) challenger, and whom the (D) nominee is. So it is way too early to know such things, but in answer to the OP's question, it is way too soon to tell.
`
You and others who take the wait-and-see choice of not voting in this thread/poll have been addressed in this thread before...
Of course the simple "Yes" or "No" choice is complicated by who might run against Trump, and/or that it was Hillary this last time around, and/or if Trump even runs again...
Maybe a better poll question would have been whether you would be more or less inclined to vote for Trump now as compared to before given what you know now.
If no matter what Trump has done as POTUS, the answer is still for Trump if Hillary is the alternative, then I suppose that suggests a bias against Hillary no less powerful than the bias for Trump, regardless the actual positive and negatives related to the two.
All that said, interesting to note (again) how many people CAN pick an answer in this poll despite all the obvious caveats. Interesting to me anyway...
I truly wanted Sanders, and only voted for Clinton because I completely disagree with Repub's on policy, will never vote R as long as I live
Funny how this logic is lost on so many people, but makes awfully good sense to me...
One thing is the personality, qualifications and/or baggage of any particular candidate, but then there are the policies, direction and vision that the two parties represent, so different from one another. Which is most important when deciding who should lead the country as POTUS?
If it is the hair color or the sound of the voice or even some of the "sticky" issues regarding a candidate's history, you've got to believe that if any candidate makes it to the point of being the party nominee, they really can't be the "lying criminal" or "son of Satan" that so many people insist on believing.
At least there is the consideration of all else that is a part of how our government works (or is supposed to work), all the checks and balances that SHOULD make the party direction and policy more important than the individual POTUS after all is considered. Right? I mean there is always the legislative branch of government there too. Right?
Makes the simple question about whether to re-elect Trump less difficult for me anyway, when all else is considered into the mix...
the point is that many who are polished speakers are also not so intelligent, or are so polished that the are exceptional liars
That former President Obama....great speaker...very polished....when he was in front of a speech cue
when he was out in the open, without a cue card....he was a bunch of uhm, er, hmm
and plenty of gaffs too ...57 states, beer summit, "he could have been my son", you will save 3k on your ins....you can keep your plan if you like it.. etc
President Trump, speaks straight from the heart, lots of gaffs, but atleast he is real (or seems to be)....I would rather have a guy/gal who is blunt, speaks from the heart, full of gaffs, but honest...than a snake-oil salesman like Obama was
Your opinion, and I get it. Agreed to be a "polished" speaker is not a character flaw, but the issue raised is that so many people seem to have an automatic aversion to "polished" speakers AKA well educated, well spoken, like pretty much everyone recognized of Obama...
The teleprompter helps, but it does not ultimately make Obama the caliber of speaker he was/is in general.
Nor does the teleprompter help a speaker, like Trump, come across much differently than who he/they are...
Me thinks you have not given Obama credit for what got him to where he got in the first place, especially when it comes to this particular talent. Clearly Obama had an ability to speak more eloquently than most, and of course there is the approved speech itself that no teleprompter can take credit for.
No doubt Obama doesn't walk on water in this regard either. Of course speakers can sometimes get tripped up and include the uhms and ers you have a selective hearing for. Obama always struck me as someone who wanted to think about his chosen words more than most, as most people of legal background are trained to do. This too is not a bad thing, even if there are the uhms and ers to endure before the words come out.
We could all do well to think before we speak...
This "speaking from the heart" that you and others just love to attribute to Trump is altogether a sort of rhetoric that all things Trump tends to include, much like "making America great again." Sounds good but doesn't really mean the same thing to any two people. Trump "speaks from the heart," or is it more like out his arse? Or both sides of his mouth? Or who knows what is REALLY in Trump's heart no matter what he says...? Does Trump love women, for example, or what he says women will let you do if you are famous? What's REALLY in that heart of his regardless what he says?
Hard to really know what a politician thinks and feels given what they are required to do in order to win office in our political system, but I never really had those questions about Obama anywhere near the depth I do when it comes to Trump. Nothing like the same sort of issues and concerns about what the men say and what's really in their heart...
Comparing Obama to Trump in these regards, whether "from the heart" or seat of the pants, measured and intelligent or mouth-breathing barker, you might as well be trying to make it sound like Laurel and Hardy are comparable to Woodward and Bernstein.
the point is that many who are polished speakers are also not so intelligent, or are so polished that the are exceptional liars
That former President Obama....great speaker...very polished.
President Trump, speaks straight from the heart, lots of gaffs, but atleast he is real (or seems to be)....I would rather have a guy/gal who is blunt, speaks from the heart, full of gaffs, but honest...than a snake-oil salesman like Obama was
Yes it is. There is a time to speak from the heart but also there should be a time to bite your tongue and shut your pie hole. As president or ANY elected official you can't say whatever you want and expect people/those you work with to help get things done. Nor can you insult another president from another country because he has no filter. The world doesn't work that way nor does the U.S.
Trump used peoples anger to get office, what does that tell you about those who voted for him?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
