What will/did Mueller say?

[_mikwut]

Hi Themis,

Trump being evil is somewhat accurate.

I usually reserve the word for other categories of individuals but mileage can vary depending on how you define the term. I am an independent and didn't vote for Trump but the rhetoric is so loose and sometimes unrestrained I try to not comment on personal descriptions but as I pointed out to honor - the fascinating issues and discussions that arise due to the polarized state of affairs.

Maybe this increased polarization it was has allowed someone as bad as Trump to get elected as president.

Could be, it is an interesting questions. He obviously tapped into something that others on both sides failed to.

This is also not a view that is contained in the US, but is well understood outside the US.

Yes. Discovering how our national values translate globally and the strain and tension that arises from that is surely at play.

I agree that polarization is getting worse, but I noticed you avoided my question in regards to this site. I see many I would put in the middle, most of which may lean a little to the left with few moderate conservatives here. Most though tend to be more to the far right with few of those who identity as liberal being that far to the left.

My observation was more in line with what honor said. My observation was that all the typical liberal issues line up quite tight and clean with liberals and vice versa. I also noticed that dissecting the historical, political, legal etc. aspects of particular goings seemingly is ignored for the typical talking points and a battle of who has the proper source becomes the conversation rather than a combination of factors that transcends typical political talking points. I would have thought such thoughtful posters would understand it's all a game.

mikwut

[_Jersey Girl]

My observation was more in line with what honor said. My observation was that all the typical liberal issues line up quite tight and clean with liberals and vice versa. I also noticed that dissecting the historical, political, legal etc. aspects of particular goings seemingly is ignored for the typical talking points and a battle of who has the proper source becomes the conversation rather than a combination of factors that transcends typical political talking points. I would have thought such thoughtful posters would understand it's all a game.

So what you're saying is that you see no evidence of thought.

[_mikwut]

Yah.

mik

[_moksha]

Trump being evil is somewhat accurate. It's something most liberals would not attach to most of the other past republican president's.

Trump is something new to American politics. He is in a category all his own and the only thing that can be said for sure is that he has converted the entire Republican party into Trumpettes.



"All lies and insults, a President hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. Lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie..."

[_Themis]

I usually reserve the word for other categories of individuals but mileage can vary depending on how you define the term. I am an independent and didn't vote for Trump but the rhetoric is so loose and sometimes unrestrained I try to not comment on personal descriptions but as I pointed out to honor - the fascinating issues and discussions that arise due to the polarized state of affairs.

I agree that the word is needs to be defined, and since you used the word you would need to provide a definition to helps others understand better what you mean.

Could be, it is an interesting questions. He obviously tapped into something that others on both sides failed to.

I think only one side can really benefit from tapping into feelings of racism, anti immigration and such. I suspect Trump may have realized this was an untapped source of people who were not voting.

Yes. Discovering how our national values translate globally and the strain and tension that arises from that is surely at play.

What I mean is that people, including most conservatives outside the US, could see how bad Trump is on so many levels. It was a shock to them all that someone as bad as Trump could get elected.

My observation was more in line with what honor said. My observation was that all the typical liberal issues line up quite tight and clean with liberals and vice versa.

I think there can be that tendency for people to line up with most of the positions of the tribe, but I still find quite a bit of differences. More so with liberals then conservatives as conservatives the tend to be more tribal in their thinking.

I would have thought such thoughtful posters would understand it's all a game.

I suspect most here understand it.

[_Themis]

Trump being evil is somewhat accurate. It's something most liberals would not attach to most of the other past republican president's.

Trump is something new to American politics. He is in a category all his own and the only thing that can be said for sure is that he has converted the entire Republican party into Trumpettes.

That is a huge concern when a party is taken over by personality and one that is as bad as Trump's.

[_Some Schmo]

...and racist being confused with substantive discourse.

Could you point out where a racist was confused with substantive discourse, please? I missed it.

[_mikwut]

Hello Perfume,

I might have used this thread to comment on my perusal of the politcal threads here in paradise. So if that is what your meaning, mea culpa. If you understood my comments as toward a general theme in all discussions in paradise aren't you who started the thread that any Republican is a racist because they support Trump who is a racist? Not very substantive.

mikwut

[_Some Schmo]

...aren't you who started the thread that any Republican is a racist because they support Trump who is a racist?

If you read that thread, you'd know I was saying that to be in the GOP these days is to make you at least a racism enabler (witting or not). There's little doubt that's true.

Not very substantive.

What's your definition of "substantive?"

[_mikwut]

If you read that thread, you'd know I was saying that to be in the GOP these days is to make you at least a racism enabler (witting or not). There's little doubt that's true.

There is tremendous doubt that is true. I am not Republican. But that is simply a ridiculous statement. From my perspective a more substantive thread would be how has the term racism changed over the last hundred years. How has its meaning today become what it is. Or how do we define a term that means one thing to one party and another thing to another party. The way your using it in that thread is the same thing as saying there is very little doubt my subjective perspective is true.

What's your definition of "substantive?"

I define it as having real importance or value as important, serious, or related to real facts just like the dictionary. I would claim that your interception of the word fact in regards to a subjectively held meaning of a word is misplaced at best.

mikwut