From "Does John Hickenlooper Have a Secret Weapon? Maybe nice guys finish Trump" by Frank Bruni (NYT).
The second-most-up-voted comment is from someone with the insight to adopt the screen name "Me":
Just no.Bruni uses but doesn't delve into the phrase "happy warrior." To me, it means Hubert Humphrey:
I’m done with “happy”, “consensus-building” Democrats. I’m still young, and I want to see transformational change in this country before I’m dead— enough with the baby steps.
Time to bring the fire.
Humphrey's consistently cheerful and upbeat demeanor, and his forceful advocacy of liberal causes, led him to be nicknamed "The Happy Warrior" by many of his Senate colleagues and political journalists.... As Vice President, Humphrey was criticized for his complete and vocal loyalty to Johnson and the policies of the Johnson Administration, even as many of his liberal admirers opposed the president's policies with increasing fervor regarding the Vietnam War.... [H]is nickname, "the Happy Warrior", was used against him....And I see that William Safire wrote one of his "On Language" (NYT) columns about the phrase. This was back in 2004, when John Kerry was running for President. A WaPo columnist had just written that Kerry was "dour" and no one would call him "the happy warrior," and a Democratic Senator had just insulted President George W. Bush as "the happy warrior" who "strutted" about his military adventures.
Safire informs us that the phrase originated in a William Wordsworth poem, "Character of the Happy Warrior" (1807)(''Who is the happy Warrior? Who is he/That every man in arms should wish to be?.... Whose high endeavors are an inward light/That makes the path before him always bright:/ . . . But who, if he be called upon to face/Some awful moment to which Heaven has joined/Great issues, good or bad for human kind,/Is happy as a Lover'').
Safire tells the story of how the phrase got from the Wordsworth poem into American political discourse. In 1924, Franklin Roosevelt had the task of putting the name Al Smith up for nomination at the Democratic National Convention. Smith campaign manager Joseph Proskauer had written a speech using the phrase, and FDR rejected it — saying "You can't give poetry to a political convention." So FDR drafted his own speech, but it was worse, and he ended up giving in. Insisting that it would be "a flop," he gave Proskauer's "Happy Warrior speech." But it went well, so he claimed he'd given his own speech with that one bit from Proskauer ''stuck in.'' Proskauer sulked.
So much for happiness.
११५ टिप्पण्या:
Hope springs eternal in the Democrat breast.
Beto has cheery charisma but Hick doesn’t.
Trump is funny. Great humor and timing. He drives the left wing-nuts crazy.
Trump is The Happy Warrior.
I’m still young, and I want to see transformational change in this country
Yeah..the problem is you want the U.S. transformed into Venezuela.
So, let me get this straight ?
To combat Trump (a straight, WHITE, MALE, businessman)...
they propose
Hickenlooper (a straight, WHITE, MALE, OIL! businessman) ?
Happy + Warrior is OK. I don't think we need we need someone who smiles instead of defending our borders and our values.
> But I know which gives us a better chance at healing America
Physician, heal thyself.
I don't know who is more frightening. The radical know-nothing historically ignorant leftwing socialist-communist burn-it-down left, or their happy warrior leaders?
as mccullough said... Trump is The Happy Warrior.
Trump Loves his Job, and Trump LOVES America; that's Why the Left detests him so much
I’m still young, and I want to see transformational change in this country before I’m dead— enough with the baby steps.
If your transformational change means socialism you deserve all the misery of defeat until you are dead, or at least another four years of Trump nastiness towards you, crying in your $3 beer at some Brooklyn hole in the wall.
Maybe then hen you deserve a break from Trump nastiness. We'll give you the healing properties of Nikki Haley. I suspect that won't make you happy, either.
Whose the happiest politician today?
The answer is obvious.
Kyrsten Sinema
Google any other politician in image search and look for that many radiant smiles.
Does anyone else have a nominee?
"I’m still young, and I want to see transformational change in this country before I’m dead"
This is where we insert the Mencken quote about getting what you want, good and hard...
They’ll be crying in their $10 hipster craft beer brewed by Hick on election night. Hick will make losing great again.
"I’m still young, and I want to see transformational change in this country before I’m dead"
Says someone who has never missed a meal.
The leftists wanting “to bring the fire,” and saying that they want a fighter to bring down Trump sound exactly like...
...the Trump fans who comment on the Althouse blog. The ones who describe GOP leadership as “cucks” and who say they don’t care what Trump does or says since he won 2016.
I feel so fortunate right now. I don’t have to explain or defend Trump. I don’t have to explain or defend an Ocasio-Cortez or a Cory Booker or a Kamala Harris.
Thanks to American corporate power, an established rule of law with an independent federal judiciary, the greatest capital and equities markets in history, the United States of America is right now an almost unimaginably great place to live. Even Trump, or one of the left wing nut jobs, cannot fuck that up. Thank God for the American establishment.
I think they’re even a small part of the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez phenomenon — the part that leavens the stridency and purity tests.
I know no one wants to hear this, but there's some truth in it. It's not just the smile. It's the level of energy.
Trump has a much weirder energy thing going. He seems sluggish as he plods about his presidential duties, like a just-hibernated bear looking for dumpster.
But put him in a crowd and he lights up.
I like how jagoffs like Bruni who are polarizing lament the divisiveness they helped create. Hick ain’t curing the divisiveness.
I wonder about that phrase "transformational change." Obama used something similar - "fundamentally transforming" the USA.
Which begs the question - transform from what? To what? From a democratic republic to an authoritarian state? From a wealthy trading country to a miserable socialist satrap? "Fundamental" means no tinkering around the edges, it pretty much means scrapping the entire endeavor and starting over. So let's hear it out - what do you want to "fundamentally" change this nation into?
Great stuff. Miss William Safire.
Bruni's got something here. Though, like that commenter made clear, I don't see 'Happy Warrior' as an appealing trait to the upcoming generation who is full of hate, victimhood, and hand-wringing, world-ending fear. They want 'change', but they have no sense of history to know what that change is going to do to their coffee shops, tat parlors, and craft beer selections.
I have to second Chuck's sentiments - America is a great place to live, the place to which enormous numbers of people want desperately to migrate. "Make America Great Again" seems to set so many teeth on edge. What's their slogan? "Make America Suck?"
I want to see transformational change in this country
Who, what, when, where and why?
(The television will not be revolutionized?)
The ones who describe GOP leadership as “cucks”
The GOP leadership are cucks. They are happy to force down wages with unlimited immigration. They are happy to send manufacturing overseas under the fantasy of “free trade” as long as the big donors get their cut of moving the money around. the crumbs from the grand slices of cake. They are happy to move the center of the economy from manufacturing in the heartland to buying and selling in Chicago and New York, and to intrusive big data in California.
Your party is dead, Chuck. Dead. It was locked out of the presidency by the “blue wall” but cucks didn’t care as long as they got their crumbs from the Koch Bros and the other Chamber of Commerce types.
A 'happy' warrior won't work for parts of the Democrat base.
They want a 'boring' warrior.
The kind of warrior who can accuse a man of gang rapes with no substantiation, for example, but who can do it in a 'boring' manner.
The kind of warrior who can potificate about the evils of toxic masculinity, but keep it 'boring'.
You know: the kind of warrior that Gillette might make a razor commercial about.
I am Laslo.
I am past fed up with “transformational change”! What do you plan to change, and how do you plan to change it? Change for the sake of change is easy, even an ignorant dolt like Barack Obama could accomplish it with his pen and telephone. Which of those changes were in a good direction?
Sounds like Bruni still doesn’t “get” Trump. Why is that? I think it’s because Bruni is one of those angry gays.
People want happier gays, not the Frank Bruni type gays.
They're calculating the effect of soap opera women, their audience.
What's their slogan? "Make America Suck?"
Modify the Gates Rubber slogan - "Gates Rubber: We've done worse!"
They want Sweeden. Not the real Sweeden but what you imagine Sweeden to be if you’re a douchebag in Brooklyn.
Trump is the GOP leadership. He is the GOP.
He fundamentally transformed the party. They are no longer the party of open borders and selling out the country to China to get a handful of jagoffs rich. Paul Ryan — The Brains of the GOP — is gone to K Street to collect the money he is due from the guys whose water he carried for 20 years. And the Bushes are vanquished.
O-C and Bernie are transforming the Dems. They are keeping the open borders but are going from Crony Capitalism to Crony Socialism. The Woke Billionaires are pissed but they are no match for their Spoiled Socialist Children.
Bruni doesn’t get Trump for the same reason a lot of people don’t. He sees everything in black and white, in terms of good and evil, and does that without even looking into the details supporting his judgement.
No one named Hickenlooper will ever be President.
They say they want Sweden and Norway, but they advocate for Venezuela.
Bill Clinton was more of a Happy Ending Warrior.
Warrior? This bunch of candidates? Uh...no...Happy to be in the rear with the gear maybe...
I'm not especially interested in seeing a happy candidate for President, which I would think was just a sham anyway, but I think one who has more ninja like skills when it comes to attacking his/her opponents would be appealing. Trump reminds me of the Germanic tribe from the opening battle in the movie Gladiator... "ihr seid hunde!" as he swings the head of Jeff Sessions in one hand and his axe in the other...figuratively speaking.
And Reagan's congenial demeanor was only a part of why he was a successful politician. It was what he had to say as much as how he said it.
"Make America Great Again" seems to set so many teeth on edge.
When this started; What did the demos come back with?
It wasn't "American is Already Great!"
It was "America Never Was THAT Great"
Then, they wondered why they lost
The left want a thought-crime police state. The left want punitive action. The left want Bernie, and his government whore hypocrisy.
Around the time of his death, the media started claiming it was Reagan's optimism that made him so popular, and you could tell some politicians acted on that, in both senses of the word.
The older Dem candidates remind me more of Wordsworth's "Dry remnant of a garden flower" (hobo).
People like the commenter "Me" are very scary. He/she/it is admittedly young from which I infer probably knows next to nothing, and wants to upend the whole of society. And nobody stands up to people like that except Jordan Peterson who is only an academic and pundit.
Unless people with authority become the adults in the room, this will end very, very badly.
“America is already great!” was the cry of the wealthy areas that Hillary had sewn up in the election. Look at her unapologetic supporters like PeanutButters.
Who needs all of these gardeners and maids coming across the border anyway? The “America is already great!” types.
Shorter Bruni - "Orange Man bad, please, please somebody, ANYBODY, beat him for me"
The man suffers from repressed hysteria, and I would argue is helping Trump win (by repelling sane folks in the middle, forcing them to inch towards Trump).
Hickenlooper would likely give Trump a real electoral challenge. The problem is that the Democrats want someone more; female, ethnic and socialist. So Hickenlooper already has three strikes against him.
@Ignorance is Bliss,
"Bill Clinton was more of a Happy Ending Warrior."
Heh! Thanx for the pre-coffee, morning laugh!
Young people today, in spite of the fact that they are living in the most progressive, well off, healthy, affluent nation that has ever existed, allow themselves to fall victim to the siren song of socialism and the notion that humans are destroying the planet.
Whoever it may be that rises to win the Democrat nomination will not win the general election against Trump by acting like Trump. He is unique and will always be better at the game he has established than any imitator. The Democrat should be themselves. The part of Trump that they could imitate is his love for this country and his dedication to making it better. Of course imitating Trump in this way will require that they actually believe in those things, otherwise they will seem disingenuous, which will work against them.
Embracing open borders, proposing the elimination of ICE, constantly attacking Trump, leveling fake accusations at judicial nominees, smearing Trump supporters as racists and anti-(insert marginal group), are seen for the crass political opportunism and vote begging that they are. Shores up the base but shows that they have no real principles. That won't win anything beyond the nomination.
I had never heard of theis Hickenlooper fellow until recently.
Serious question: From a Dem appeal perspective, what does he have that Joe Biden doesn't have (other than being 10 years younger)?
There will be no healing. America is beyond that. The mediaswine, their Democrat puppets and the “Never Trumpers” will destroy the Trump Presidency. Effete Republican cowards will stand by and watch. The elites, socialists, genitalias, professional ethnics and Hardin’s soap opera women will elect a swamprat and will expect recompense. The recompense will be to repress the 40% of the population representing sanity and what used to be “normal.”
End of story.
"On Tuesday, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat, announced the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was dropping its action [against the Christian baker] Phillips...“After careful consideration of the facts, both sides agreed it was not in anyone’s best interest to move forward with these cases,” Weiser said "
I wonder if this is because of Hickenlooper's run.
Blogger mccullough said...
Trump is the GOP leadership. He is the GOP.
He fundamentally transformed the party.
He's working at it but it will take two more election cycles.
The Dems have bigger problems than mere political nuances. Namely, their substantive policies:
1. Post birth abortions
2. Massive illegal immigration
3. Abolish private health care
4. High taxes
5. Anti-Israel
6. Green New Deal
7. Racial Identity politics
The youth-left want the young red-lipped Venezuelan vampire. So exciting.
Blogger Michael K said...
Blogger mccullough said...
Trump is the GOP leadership. He is the GOP.
He fundamentally transformed the party.
He's working at it but it will take two more election cycles.
Transform = Cripple
"I am past fed up with “transformational change”! What do you plan to change, and how do you plan to change it? Change for the sake of change is easy ..."
And it's particularly easy if the goal is primarily "burn it all down" destruction, with little thought of what might replace it or whether it might even be possible to build it.
Because, when you hear yet another denunciation of the "racist, sexist, colonialist" West what you're hearing is that "burn it all down" meme. They sure know what they want to destroy, but, the post-destruction rebuilding phase remains TBD pipedreams.
And so, too, with "ban all use of fossil fuels within ten years." It's not as if those who make such demands have any technical knowledge of how they might be replaced, but, they sure know what they want to destroy.
"Transformational change" in this context can only mean massive, total destruction. Because our relatively comfortable, liberal world order simply cannot, must not, be allowed to exist: just burn it all down, it's Year Zero.
Bill Clinton was a Happy Smiling Warrior With a Cigar in His Hand.
The eventual, grinding-down destruction of a guy like Hickenlooper in the Democratic primary will act as a foil and convince people Trump is the sane, happy warrior.
"Happy Warriors. Come out to play-ay."
hombre is right, long term.
Maybe not in two years, but whenever the executive is back in the hands of the leadership caste, which is inevitable.
And the argument over personal style and charisma is short-sighted and ultimately irrelevant. Individuals matter less than people are accustomed to assume. They are blips in the trend. Its all about systems, cultures, castes.
Henry, I suggest you look at my replies to you in d with my tiny circle of 'friends.' They were angry, miserable people, who..." In addition to the first map, there are maps of Republican prejudice and Democrat prejudice. Massachusetts Democrats and Republicans appear to have similar levels of prejudice against each other, with one exception: Suffolk County (Boston). There are quite a few big city counties where Democrat prejudice is greater than Republican prejudice: New York City counties, Los Angeles County, Cook County (Chicago), Suffolk County (Boston), Miami-Dade, Philadelphia, Baltimore County, Washington DC (and overall the Baltimore-DC metropolitan area) for starters.
If you look at South Carolina, you see that there are more counties with highly prejudiced Democrats than there are counties with highly prejudiced Republicans. Ditto for Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi.
As such, I am surprised at the author's conclusion that Republicans are more highly prejudiced than Democrats- especially when he also observes that "the most politically intolerant Americans, according to the analysis, tend to be whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban..." Those would be Democrats.
I'm guessing "me" doesn't have any kids. Those of us who do are voting quite differently. Very interesting.
"Just no.
I’m done with “happy”, “consensus-building” Democrats. I’m still young, and I want to see transformational change in this country before I’m dead— enough with the baby steps.
Time to bring the fire."
Kim Jong-Un had the insight to adopt the screen name "Me"
"They want a 'boring' warrior. ... You know: the kind of warrior that Gillette might make a razor commercial about."
Yes, but the razor would have to be dull.
Bay Area Guy - but all will be made fair with FREE everything.
Wow is the remark about AOC ever clueless. She is the same kind of triumphalist that Trump is, or more so.
Its not "year zero". Nor is it transformational in the sense of changes in technological systems, nor about (immediate) risk to these systems. This is political noise.
The real point of all this is control, the extension of state-bureaucratic control over every bit of life, and the centralization of everything, plus of course the destruction of mediating institutions. It is the corporatist ideology of the modern elite, which itself was completely predictable, and long predicted. It is dressed up in various frills and flourishes, but under it all is essentially Mussolini's vision.
Mussolini is, today, underappreciated. He was a prophet, a man just short of his time, a man who failed mainly because of a single great error.
"On Tuesday, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat, announced the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was dropping its action [against the Christian baker] Phillips...“After careful consideration of the facts, both sides agreed it was not in anyone’s best interest to move forward with these cases,” Weiser said "
"Both sides agreed..." Now that's some funny stuff right there. How even handed. How shake hands and all be friends amicable. As if Phillip's would say "no no please keep tormenting me."
Nonapod said...
Serious question: From a Dem appeal perspective, what does he have that Joe Biden doesn't have
I'm not sure about DEM appeal, but
not nearly so much documented Plagiarism
not nearly so much documented Pedophilia
not nearly so much documented Racism
“Trump is the GOP leadership. He is the GOP.”
Yes indeed.
Elizabeth Warren lights up a crowd, has passion and drive and seems quite happy in ordinary circumstances.
Consider the difference between ideology and policy.
Ideology is what you use to justify policy.
Two polities with entirely opposed ideologies can implement identical policies, if the underlying systems demand it. This is why Nationalist Spain, theoretically "right wing", ended up creating the same or very similar welfare state that the preceding mainly leftist Republic wanted to.
Political ideologies are cultural expressions and political tools, they are derivative. They can also be manufactured.
“They want a 'boring' warrior. ... You know: the kind of warrior that Gillette might make a razor commercial about."
Who is “they”? Althouse is a moderate, moderates in large numbers aren’t going to vote for Trump in 2020. Some did in 2016, most regret it, just look at what happened in 2018. Moderates will go with Democrats, considering the alternative. I see more and more moderates stepping further away from Trumpism, while what used to be conservatives have been swallowed up by Trumpism
@RichardJohnson -- The Atlantic article is summarizing three different surveys and augmenting that with a bunch of studies. Most of the data -- particularly the data behind the maps -- is based on a survey conducted by a polling company called PredictWise. The statement "In general, Republicans seem to dislike Democrats more than Democrats dislike Republicans, PredictWise found" is a summation of the polling company based on their own data, not a conclusion by the author.
The other surveys include 1) 2014 Pew Research Center survey that indicates that Republicans were more likely than Democrats to want to live in a place where people shared their political views and 2) a 2018 survey that indicates that more Democrats would be "somewhat or very unhappy if their son or daughter married someone who was of the opposite party than Republicans.
The author's conclusion isn't that Democrats are worse than Republicans or vice versa. The author's conclusion is the cautious: it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on, but what’s clear is that both sides are becoming more hostile toward one another.
As for your statement, "'whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban..." Those would be Democrats'", all I can say is oh ye of little imagination! White & older correlates to more Republican. In 2018, education didn't correlate to either party. As for urban, I, like you, suspect that more urban means more Democratic, but it's worth remembering that there are a lot of cities in this country, not just the ones next to oceans or very big lakes.
Here's a demographic breakdown for the 2018 elections.
“And it's particularly easy if the goal is primarily "burn it all down" destruction, with little thought of what might replace it or whether it might even be possible to build it.”
How often we heard this phrase during the Trump campaign, “Burn it all down!” Steven Miller, Steve Bannon come to mind. The phrase “American Carnage” comes to mind also. Such a “happy” warrior who spouted it in an Inauguration address.
“Women favored the Democratic candidate in their district by 19 percentage points (59% to 40%) while men voted for the Republican 51% to 47%. (The exit polls offer the first look at the electorate; the portrait will be refined over time as additional data, such as state voter files, become available).”
Looks like women are going to save America.
> This is why Nationalist Spain, theoretically "right wing",
I read somewhere that Castro and Franco found a happy common ground in their dislike of the US.
> Mussolini is, today, underappreciated.
Absolutely. I have always wondered why he never shows up near the top in lists of the most influential 20'th century socialists. At various times such a list might have included Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, but in the end Mussolini beat them all for sheer longevity. Modern Europe is his gift to the future. Can the US be far behind?
Elizabeth Warren lights up a crowd
LOL
“The mediaswine, their Democrat puppets and the “Never Trumpers” will destroy the Trump Presidency.”
Trump destroyed his own Presidency, even before he started it.
I want the Dem nominee to talk about transformational change.
And I want Trump to nail it to their forehead.
They're going to give us transformational change alright. Peace will become war. A booming economy will stagnate and die,as will your job. Etc, etc, etc.
Take the peace and prosperity we have right now and make sure everyone knows we will lose it with a Dem president.
I wish writers would stop using Manichaean to mean dualist. Manichaeanism was one of many dualist religions and its dualism went much further than good v. evil, but was a whole complicated worldview revolving around light v. dark, spiritual v. physical and God v. the devil.
It's like saying you have a "Buddhist outlook" because you don't like to buy a lot of stuff or have an "atheist outlook" because you don't believe everything you hear.
If "Me" (Xim, Xer, They) thinks that it's "Time to bring the fire", then "Me" (Xim, Xer, They) will get it good and hard...
What exactly needs to be transformed in the U.S.?
We're the most successful economy in the world, the world leader in tech and the world leader in the arts.
Our popular music is revered and copied throughout the world.
The U.S. is the freest, fairest and least bigoted society in human history.
We're doing fine.
I don't particularly like Trump as a person, but it takes a particularly stupid person, or someone deep in the throes of TDS, not to realize that Trump IS a "happy warrior".
And it takes a great deal of stupidity, or total left-wing delusion, to miss that "progressive" and "social justice X" both mean "unhappy scold."
Which is why Trump is going to kick some Democrat's butt in 2020
Hey, Kids! The Democrats are throwing a party! Come for the anti-semitism, stay for the infanticide!
"We're doing fine."
You aren't.
You are hardly "free". There is no free speech for the vast majority of those with anything to say. Certainly your arts are not "free". They are in a straightjacket of conformity.
And to the extent that the US is influential in the world, it is a pernicious influence.
For the extremely coercive climate forced by the establishment and press, Trump has been uncommonly gay and forgiving his predecessor and bitter clingers, domestic and foreign. Perhaps due to his religion. Perhaps due to surviving and prospering the big apple.
yeah, the Democrat candidates are OK
When Obama won: I won, you bitter clingers lost.
When Trump won, the country needs to be healed.
Does anyone else have a nominee?
Lindsey Graham. Looking a little more serious now that he's chairman of the Judiciary Committee, but still the most chipper chipmunk in the congressional forest.
"Pew Research Center survey that indicates that Republicans were more likely than Democrats to want to live in a place where people shared their political views"
And yet reality is just the opposite. Hence Democrat attempts to change the way congressional districts work because Democrats are too geographically concentrated.
Certainly your arts are not "free". They are in a straightjacket of conformity.
How so?
To the extent to which artists are in a "straightjacket," that is their own choice.
Anybody can publish on the internet and they can say whatever they want.
Of course, they have to deal with the consequences, which can be very negative. Who said you ought to be free from that?
I suggest you listen to the Outlaw channel on Sirius Radio. Great country artists are speaking their minds without fear.
I had never heard of theis Hickenlooper fellow until recently
I know Mr. Looper is what Big Bird called Mr. Hooper, but Mr. Hick is...wait...you mean it's ONE GUY???
Young, collectivist, ahistorical authoritarians who think it's "time to bring the fire." That usually ends well for everyone.
"The statement "In general, Republicans seem to dislike Democrats more than Democrats dislike Republicans, PredictWise found" is a summation of the polling company based on their own data, not a conclusion by the author."
*****************
Yeah, sure.
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2018/07/05/rap-sheet-acts-of-media-approved-violence-and-harassment-against-trump-supporters/
639 acts of violence against Trump supporters vs.......?????
(as of last July, so it doesn't include Covington et al)
Inga said "Who is “they”? Althouse is a moderate..."
Thank you for asking for clarification.
I was indeed speaking about moderates who would very much prefer to vote for a Democrat.
My point was that what gets presented to them as 'moderate' candidates now comes with baggage that I would not consider moderate at all, i.e. all of the current Senator candidates came out in favor of the nine-month abortion 'window' that can feasibly include infanticide.
As such, I believe many of these seekers are making the internal decision that -- while possibly squeamish -- they are opening their personal parameters of 'moderate' in the hopes of getting someone pleasant and non-confrontational: they are trading pieces of their reasoning and soul for stable comfort.
The right gets envisioned as the Handmaid's Tale; however, the left seems to want to be the perfect inverse, where a woman's choices are never questioned or constrained in any circumstances, and abortion is the guiding star of their politics -- Moloch's Tale, as it were.
Calling someone moderate does not necessarily convey that status; however, if the person is 'boring' enough a lot of people WILL look the other way.
I am Laslo.
My thoughts here are that the Dems who drive their party want a fighter who can, and will stand up to Trump. They want a vicious street fighter. Maybe someone like Andrew Weissman. I hear that he will soon be looking for a job. But that sort of person is likely to get creamed by Trump in the general election. As a country, we might want that mean SOB, if we were in a major war. But the only real war going on right now is the Deep State against its subjects.
The other thing is that whoever runs against will require a thick skin, because they are going to be ridiculed no end by Trump, because that is how he fights. And will thus be laughed at by half the country. Not easy to handle. No one yet seems capable of holding their own against him and his verbal attacks. Crooked Hillary almost assuredly got livid, when the subject of these mocking attacks. But she was the front runner, so could just get drunk, throw and break things, and hide fro the public most of the time. But whoever gets the Dem nomination won’t have that luxury, because they will be facing Trump flying in on one of the most distinctive and majestic planes in the world, AF-1, and then leading tens of thousands in chants ridiculing his opponent. Keeping your cool and not going viciously negative in the face of that is going to be hard, and esp hard for anyone who isn’t normally a happy warrior.
Henry:
As for your statement, "'whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban..." Those would be Democrats'", all I can say is oh ye of little imagination! White & older correlates to more Republican.
Yes , but we are selecting within metrics that currently trend highly Democrat: more highly educated and more urban.
As for urban, I, like you, suspect that more urban means more Democratic, but it's worth remembering that there are a lot of cities in this country, not just the ones next to oceans or very big lakes.
You may not have noticed, but big cities in Texas now vote Democrat. Democrat Presidential candidate John Hickenlooper was Mayor of Denver. Nationwide:Exit polls of the 2016 presidential elections in the United States on November 9, 2016, percentage of votes by rural/urban area: Urban areas: Hillary Clinton 59%; Donald Trump 35%.
In 2018, education didn't correlate to either party.
Interesting you would say that when the link you provided pointed out that for both men and women, College-educated of either sex voted 15% or more for Democrats than the less educated of their sex. When the link didn't break down by sex, among younger voters (18-29?) , the breakdown went : College/Non-College 39% Republican/49% Republican. Education didn't correlate to either party? Tell me another one.
For a number of elections, I have noted that those with graduate degrees tended to vote Democrat. High school dropouts vote Democrat, but exit polls stopped mentioning them circa 2012. Here is a breakdown for the 2018 midterm. CNN 2018 Exit Poll.
Education/% pop. Dem Rep
HS or less23% 48% 51%
Some college25% 52% 47%
Associate's degree11% 47% 50%
Bachelor's degree24% 55% 43%
Advanced degree17% 65% 34%
Urban- tend towards Democrat. 59 to 35 corroborates me.
Exit polls on degrees also corroborates me. In more recent elections, this gap has increased. At one time Bachelor degrees were fairly evenly split. I suspect that this being an off-year election had an influence- more educated more likely to vote in off-year election.
Regarding my 12:18 comment; "My point was that what gets presented to them as 'moderate' candidates now comes with baggage that I would not consider moderate at all, i.e. all of the current Senator candidates came out in favor of the nine-month abortion 'window' that can feasibly include infanticide."
Amy Klobuchar -- of Althouse's "Why aren't the Democratic candidates better? I'm just going to be for Amy Klobuchar' December post -- recently voted in favor of the nine-month window.
Like I said: "if the person is 'boring' enough a lot of people WILL look the other way."
I am Laslo.
Time to bring the fire.
Careful what you wish for, leftist. You just might get it.
Since Hillary said she is not running for President, this is a good time to lock her up.
Trump destroyed his own Presidency, even before he started it.
It doesn’t change that I’m still not tired of winning!
The Geography of Partisan Prejudice:A guide to the most—and least—politically open-minded counties in America.
I was going to do this for the 20th largest counties, but I have to go.
Counties comprising New York City:
Democrats appear (somewhat to considerably) more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear considerably less prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Los Angeles County:
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear considerably less prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Cook County (Chicago)
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear somewhat less prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Harris County TX (Houston)
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere
Republicans appear to hold average levels of prejudice against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Denver County (Colorado)
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear considerably less prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Maricopa County (Phoenix)
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear somewhat more prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Jackson County (Kansas City)
Democrats appear somewhat more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear considerably more prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Bexar County TX (San Antonio)
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear somewhat more prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Suffolk County MA (Boston):
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear considerably less prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Miami-Dade County FL):
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere.
Republicans appear somewhat less prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Travis County TX (Austin)
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere
Republicans appear considerably more prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
Washington DC
Democrats appear considerably more prejudiced against Republicans than Democrats elsewhere
Republicans appear considerably less prejudiced against Democrats than Republicans elsewhere.
The advanced degree stat was always a bit of a crock, as this included things like teaching certificates, which are a very large part of the total.
When you write something like Yes , but we are selecting within metrics that currently trend highly Democrat: more highly educated and more urban., you are asserting a conclusion. The category of "white, older, educated, urban" (WOEU) is a coarse summary provided by the authors of the survey. Unless you use their data, you can only guess about how much weight is assigned to white, how much to older, what more educated means, and what urban means.
Remember that we're arguing about two summary statements from the same people. They said two things. First, that Republicans are slightly more prejudiced against Democrats than vice versa and second, that the most prejudiced people are the WOEUs. There are at least two ways that could be true. The first is that the WOEU filter is driven mainly by the white older cohort and it tilts slightly Republican. An alternate explanation is that the WOEUs actually tilt Democrat, but that across the country a run-of-the-mill Republican is slightly more partisan than a run-of-the-mill Democrat. The average does not have to have the same profile as the extreme.
But frankly, it really doesn't matter to me who's the meanest. Partisan people don't really bother me and finger-pointing is boring.
Boring is just another word for an argument is lost.
-almost Janet Joplin
I want a president who will kick the "liberal" Hive back to the part of Hell that spawned it.
For once, I partly agree with the Chuckster. It is true that Trump's appeal was that he would bring the fire. In my view, that's the only way to play. The amiable beer buddy countenance of W and his Connecticut heritage of noblesse were traits that were used very effectively against him. The libruls are nothing if not gut-punchers and if you don't punch back, you are a loser. They ate his and his daddy's lunch.
I voted for Trump (and will do so again without hesitation) because he punches back. Not that they need a reason to hate those with whom they disagree, but this is precisely why the lefties hate Trump at such a visceral level. The cucks never punched back.
- Krumhorn
BTW, Reagan punched back very effectively in a very Churchillian way:
The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.
Trump is no Reagan by any stretch of imagination, but he's all we've got at the moment.
- Krumhorn
> The GOP leadership are cucks.
They delivered Medicare part D entitlement, $17 trillion unfunded, a program nobody asked for.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoodman/2016/07/06/the-worst-entitlement-program-in-our-history
Heck McConnell is gonna pass a bill against declaring a national emergency to build the wall. Why?
There really is no difference other than degree between rep leadership and dem leadership.
Q: How can you tell a Happy Warrior?
A: The one with blood on his teeth
Trump: He's a Lover...and a Fighter !
from dole to lott to frist (who owned hca,) to mcconnell, not impressive in the least,
https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/06/cnn-cohen-house-intelligence/
Henry
But frankly, it really doesn't matter to me who's the meanest. Partisan people don't really bother me and finger-pointing is boring.
Which is why you brought up the issue in the first place, right? As in, "I'm not interested in the topic; I just begin comment on it."
As in, "I'm not interested in the topic; I just begin comment on it."
I'm interested in topics; less interested in conclusions.
I'm glad you linked to my comment. I say exactly what interests me.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा