No because the concerns of minorities actually have a legitimate premise behind it hence the word 'triggered' is not only illegitimate here but opens up rhetoric that all minority complaints are invalid because they are all triggered. Yes, there are cases of minorities who take advantage of this understanding and cry wolf. No doubt that there are individuals out there that exist. My discussion is about the overall rhetoric and narrative by a large segment of white male Americans who believe that the white man is systematically oppressed.
Yes and the very same people who believe Hillary has no sincere bone in her body which I agree with somehow magically assume that Trump doesn't pander.
I probably over-reached. "Conservatives" are not a monolith. There are some that will say local control is better. There will be people who will say all kinds of illogical things. But, picking one weak argument to ascribe to an entire group so you can knock it down is a strawman. "Local is better" is an easy target to pick on. Yes and no. The expansion of federal power in the 19th century probably will not materially reverse. In my opinion, it had to be done and we would not have been successful as a nation without it. But the Constitutional powers of the states won't be going away either, including the electoral college. They will remain until you can get the Constitution amended. And much like Congress won't pass term limits for congressmen, states won't approve Constitutional amendments that reduce their own powers. Not unless we're in one hell of a crisis.
I believe we've had this discussion before. I agree there has been oppression. Nobody in their right mind can deny that because it is the ugly truth, and in this day and age, there still are incidents of oppression of all races. From that point on, I'll step away and leave it at that.
what about all the people who didnt vote because they thought their vote wouldnt matter? how many people is that. you have no clue.
Here's another ugly truth. Majority of white male Trump supporters believe that the mere acknowledgement of what you just stated is oppression of their people. That's a pretty frighteningly large segment of the population. Minorities have every rational right to be concerned.
Forget vote count: how much did Hillary raise compared to Trump? I've heard $900 million to $250 million. Sucks for all those individuals, who are obviously not corporations because Hillary's a Democrat, that gave money to her campaign.
That's why I brought up Texan liberals and Californian Republicans. I think it's reasonable to assume due to immigration and transplants from other states that Texas has a larger population of voters who would have voted (D) than there are Californians who would have voted (R) if they knew their vote would matter. Then there are all the 'fly over states' where I'm pretty sure if you are left leaning you just don't bother with presidential election. I think there is solid evidence that Hillary would have still won the popular vote if everyone knew their vote mattered. I think the lead would actually increase. New York might be the state that throws my assumption off. Upstate New York is pretty solid red and now their vote would matter.
Where are you getting this information? Not to be disrespectful, it seems like when someone counters your argument you come up with this convenient statistic to help your case.
Veteran who knows PLENTY of other conservative veterans as acquaintances or friends or battle buddies. It's a pretty obvious narrative pushed by the alt-right. Minorities are oppressing the white majority. That's the underbelly of Trump's dog whistle message that PLENTY of white supremacists hear loud and well.
To be fair though, that is a small sample. I am not going to discount it fully either because it does exist. What's your take on minorities that did vote for Trump?
I suppose there's polling data on this. People usually look at likely voters for polling indicators, but if you instead looked at the polling of all respondents, you could get an approximation of where the votes would come out. Also, head-to-head polling would be better than multi-party polling because in a straight popular vote system third-party candidates would fare even worse than they do now.
Despite the questionability on the candidates' character, presidents have largely attempted to meet the majority of their campaign promises. Which is why you haven't seen a moderate shift in Trump nor his claim to stop on a dime from the rhetoric and be "more presidential" after the primaries. It's more than likely that Hillary would've commited to her concessions to the Bernie-ites than her flip flopping, but obviously the leaks destroyed or confirmed the dubiousness or authenticity of her character. She's a political dork, and if she is similar to her husband, she would've triangulated much like what she did during her Senate years.
The concerns of everyone have a legitimate premise behind it. Not just one group or section of our country, man. Let me break this election down for you in duder terms. Obama got elected on "Hope and Change", well, for a great many people that change never happened, in fact they saw the change go right out of their pockets and into the hands of insurance companies. Obamacare is quite possibly one of the worst failures in legislative history, man. It didn't help matters much that Obama basically threw the middle class into a cellar for 8 years and tossed away the key, either. Then, Hillary comes out and calls them all a bunch of deplorables. The rest is history.
Given that Michigan is saying it is having a problem with the machines in low-income area you'd think a recount would be valuable to understand what's going on. Why would Republican be against this? There's no chance the result will be overturned in fact it could move to their favor.
Most of the middle class is better of then they were 8 years ago. Most people get their insurance through employers so it didn't change that much. Basically we had Ohio and Florida I mean what does these states contribute to America except economic depression making the decision for the rest of the US.
I'd venture a guess that I know WAY more conservative veterans as acquaintances or friends or battle buddies. And none of them think what you wrote here.
