Well yeah, people have been saying this from the beginning of the phenomenon. Trump's genius is making a large swath of the American public that feel like they are now second class citizens feel better about themselves.

It's about their status in US society.

The irony of it all is that capitalism has ardently failed these people as the wealth gap has widened and middle America has been hollowed out. These are the people who should be embracing the "European democratic socialist" model, for it is that model that would meaningfully improve their lives. But yet they think that it is a dirty word and the likes of Bernie Sanders are akin to the devil.

All of which is both hilarious and utterly depressing that people feel that way about the golden shitter conman, given how he's made a mint by stiffing the little guy contractors with nonpayment and threats of litigation while building his real estate "empire," such that it is.

But, hey, doesn't it work that way in a lot of dysfunctional relationships, people making others feel a certain way while every action in their history suggests something entirely different?

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Yeah, an interesting question about these folks is how many are just flat out being conned vs. see through his bullshit and just don't care.

I assume many if not most of the religious right, run of the mill Republicans and the like fall into the latter camp.

The old saga of falling in love with the "bad boys". Years later the conclusion that yes maybe the ugly old democratic socialist would have made for a better, longer lasting affair.

I agree on the second camp. The tired argument that Trump voters are knuckle dragging idiots from the backwoods who don't understand the smart folk in the big cities and are just too stupid to see Trump is a real bad dude is lazy and useless.

If the left keeps trotting this out, they will lose again.

It's more likely the majority of Trump voters don't care that he is a flawed person, perhaps a conman and a cheat but he sure as hell represents their ideals better than anyone on the left and there were only two people on the ballot. Not that hard to understand.

Yes, he's basically a useful idiot. I get that.

The one's I don't get are the one's who fall for his BS. I mean it is just so obvious I don't get how anyone can think it's legit.

So you trust the person possible conman and cheat? How do you trust he would be actually representing your ideals and not just conning you? Maybe he is just telling you what you want to hear and no doing anything to actually address your issues?

No trust required. You see what he is doing and make your own decision about if its closer to your goals. To argue Hillary would have been a better option for a traditional republican is a non-starter. How is this hard to understand?

do you think republicans are all crying in their soup that they did not vote for Hillary instead of Trump? that she would have better done the things conservatives or republicans wanted done? Trump could fart and fall down for 4 years and he would be better for republicans than what Hillary campaigned on.

https://www.theatlantic.com/...eaking-faith/517785/

In addition to folks feeling stigmatized, ignored and made fun of I believe another part of the puzzle is folks who embrace trump are those who are least connected to traditional institutions. So we get nationalism and populism. The above article explains this with respect the church. But it also applies to family and the breakdown of traditional institutions like labor unions. This seems to be the origin of a lot of populism that we see both in NA and Europe. This was the explanation of a Frenchman I talked to over Christmas with respect to the rise of the yellow jacket protestors.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Here is where you missed the point of the article. Understanding past choice simplicity as no brainer, then why the continued positive endorsement? It is not ideals alignment, but rather just an "I love you" that no one else will say. He is not mocking that they are second class citizens who go to McDonalds for a fine dining experience. A kinship through love.

Yes, the demise of the US labor union movement and it's weight removal from our politics did place a lot of these people in a no man's land without a surrogate advocate. Fox and friends just steered them over to other side with a lot of patriot and nationalism fervor. Not necessarily in their best interest as to their lot in life.

Yes, you are surely not being conned. I mean, marks always know they are being conned.

Yes, trump the notorious conservative. Doing conservative things like, giving billions of dollars to failing businesses, or increasing taxes, increasing regulations, ignoring the constitution, and so many of those normal conservative positions. Lets not forgot all the conservative moral positions, you agree he does not follow the normal conservative moral requirements for leader?

Sure his is a conman, but I am not being conned. I mean would a conman say things I want to hear? Surely I can trust a conman's actions to be for my benefit, would a conman trick me by appearing to do something I want?

Does he represent their ideals better than any of the other 15 republican candidates? The, "he's not Hillary" argument only goes so far. The right should own the fact that they got who they wanted.

you cite to an article about a Trump aide that said Trump is "thinking" about putting restrictions on Google Search engines when searching for articles about Trump as evidence that Trump is a big increase regulations guy? Nice support for your argument.

You still miss the point, traditional republicans and those that voted for Trump and hold conservative values are not now wishing if only I had voted for Hillary...

Trump could lie, cheat steal and have 10 women in the white house everynight and as long as he votes or pushes the agenda of conservative and republican ideals he is better than any DEM for republican voters.

It's possible that some folks that voted for trump did so because they thought he would help them out of their low lot in life but is true of any election...remember Obama phones and the poor sap that was happy when he got elected because he was going to take care of all her bills.

So you trust the person possible conman and cheat? How do you trust he would be actually representing your ideals and not just conning you? Maybe he is just telling you what you want to hear and no doing anything to actually address your issues?[/quote]
His supports focus on a few things.

His big selling points:

He promised Supreme Court Justices we would like - So far so good.
He promised a middle class tax break - Based on what a lot of us have seen - this did happen for a large percentage of people. Refer to the other thread on taxes or do some simple math.

All politicians are terrible and now you are now going to show all the things he has promised and not done. That's fine, but you need to look at what his supporters care about and that he is delivering on those items.

And as noted - option B was a much much worse on all fronts from his supporters standpoint.

The real question I have is why are low-income blue collar workers or lower middle class workers earning less than, say, $70k a year, hitched to Republican ideals? Why are unemployed middle-Americans supporting a man who has promised much but delivered little for them? Why are they not supporting a democratic-socialist model that would tax higher income earners more and provide a better social safety net for themselves?

I think the answers are varied and complicated (guns, religion, suspicion of "liberal elites", etc.), but on the face of it, it doesn't make sense.

These people are not right, not left not conservative, liberal..... They are poor and forgotten, they are our second class citizen. They are apolitical patriots and nationalists who are being loved by one man and who love their nation. They probably don't even know their grandparents were die hard union supporters and democrat.

Agree its all over the map why people vote the way they do. Some vote on only social issues or fiscal issues, some both.

Personally, I am starting to come in line with medicare or healthcare for all as well as more gun restrictions but I could never vote for a Dem due to their stance on abortion and particularly their swing to the left on partial birth and attempts to pass full term abortion bills. I have a friend that is similar. Posts on facebook all day about hating Trump but will never vote Dem as he posts everything on the lefts stance on abortion. That is just one example.

Know some Dems who want to vote Repub because of gun issues and they support the NRA but don't like the repub stance on gay marriage and entitlements etc.

And how was trump more conservative then Ted Cruz?

I don't remember seeing Ted Cruz on the ballot in the general. As for the primaries, I have no idea how Trump won, probably a confluence of factors including too many candidates pulling votes from each other and not having a really good candidate.

This was an odd post. It leads off implying that Trump voters are poor. (Not true, there are poor both in the Dem and Rep base) And the second statement that these people should embrace the European dem socialist system. But as you accurately noted a large part of his base is middle America. These people want to work and want to achieve and believe in self reliance. That is why they spit on Govt. providing for them.

The answer is further increased by propaganda. The fact that this subset of people dont want an estate tax is just crazy, especially given that the number is at like 10mil per family. Like the number impacted is like .1% percent.

His supports focus on a few things.

His big selling points:

He promised Supreme Court Justices we would like - So far so good.
He promised a middle class tax break - Based on what a lot of us have seen - this did happen for a large percentage of people. Refer to the other thread on taxes or do some simple math.

All politicians are terrible and now you are now going to show all the things he has promised and not done. That's fine, but you need to look at what his supporters care about and that he is delivering on those items.

And as noted - option B was a much much worse on all fronts from his supporters standpoint.[/quote]
Ahh yes, "conservative" judges that don't seem that conservative. It is almost like when they say they want to protecting religious freedom they only care about Christians. Wouldn't option B put the same judges on the court? Or do you think Cruz would have put liberal judges on the supreme court?

trump promised to increase taxes on the rich, but instead made a permanant tax cut on the rich, but a temporary small tax cut on the middle class. His tax cut is a win for the rich.

Maybe he is actually doing the things we want. Tax cut, Conservative Judges, Removal of regulations, Business Friendly, Working on Trade deals, Pulling out of Iran Deal. Yes there are things that are not getting done, but he has accomplished a lot of what he proposed. And probably would do more if Dems weren't doing to him what the Pubs did to Obama and obstructing.

trump won by getting more votes than the other candidates. Not exactly a mystery.

Your logic here can only go so far though. Trump won the nomination, among other republicans. Trump looks like he is going to go unopposed for re-election.

If people were comparing trump to hillary sure. But they took him over other members of the GOP as well. Sure it may have been a mathematical fluke. But if trump was to run against Romney he would win their too. If Trump was going to run against cruz, rubio, bush, etc. he has won against them. So logically, if you are comparing him against HRC you should also compare him against 1) why no one is opposing him, 2) other members of the GOP.

Because some combination of the old Southern Democrats and Teaparty (probably a huge overlap in the too) have taken over the party of the traditional conservative Republicans.

Yes, it never appears that a conman is doing what you want. A conman would never do that.

Good point. And I think many people from both parties dislike the options presented in their own party as well as the opposing party. I think Trump might have been able to win as a Dem if it weren't for the anointed one (HRC). Remember he was a dem in the past. I would like to blow up both parties. I'd love a good 3rd option (someone in the middle), but they don't exist. Not Cruz, not Kaisic, not Rubio. I'd like someone not affiliated with either party, but in the US, they would not stand a chance. Thus, I choose the person who talks about my ideals, rather than the person who openly says they won't represent my ideals.

Howard Schultz is an interesting prospect (though there are many things about him I'm not sure about).

I'm sure that is true for many but he seems to have the "poor white trash" types too. My son's girlfriends' mom and her boyfriend are big Trumpsters and they are your stereotypical living on welfare/disability, haven't worked in many years, rural family.

That is what I get for not providing the link in the OP. But it is that rural, poor or middle class, poorly educated, white dignity deficient slice of Trump's people that feel the love from Trump and ignore the flag hugging ridiculousness. Regardless of what Trump has been able, or not, to deliver to them for their financial well being, they have been on the receiving end of his love and caring. However sincere or insincere it is.

One could make argument that in PA, OH, Mich, Ind, and Wi. this would be the bloc of voters that decided the 2016 election.

Completely agree. But that is just where the arguments of "the GOP doesnt like trump, we just like anyone better than HRC" just falls short of logically thinking.

I know people (doctors, rich families, etc.) that like trump. They say things along the lines of:

1) tax is theft, so I like the tax plan because people like me shouldnt be taxed so others dont have to work.
2) It is a constitutional right to own guns, and the dems are trying to take our guns (just not the case),
3) trump is just telling it like it is. We have a huge immigration problem and he is the only one who wants to fix it (while hiring illegal immigrants as nannys, house cleaners, etc.).
4) Climate change is an issue, but we cant let that get in a way of people losing jobs.
5) PC cultural is just too out of hand.
6) We need more church.
7) I work hard so I dont want entitlement programs. If I could make it starting from nothing so can others. (all grad schools paid for, car given, etc., just not actually realizing how much of a head start their parents gave them).
8) When I give my stay at home wife money, it isnt taxed. So it shouldnt be taxed when I die.
9) Rich families end up spending their money over time, so although the income gap is the highest it is at all times, it isnt going to stay this way. So we shouldnt implement democratic tax increases on the rich, because it will work itself out.

The people I know who like trump are not knuckle draggers, they just drink the cool aide.

I'd take Kaisic over anyone else in the spotlight right now, from either party. I just wish he would be himself and not what he thinks he should be when he campaigns. It's by far the best version of him.

would they say the same things about any repub in office? Did they vote for trump in the primary out of all the choices there or only after he won the nomination?

Yes. They love trump. Its mainly because he says things that are not true. Then they interpret those statements as "while not being factually correct, have a lot of truth behind it."

During the election period they were pro-trump because "Trump isnt going to do the things he said he was going to do. He just needs to win the election." now its "Trump said he was going to do those things! thats why we voted for him!"

There was literally 17 people on the ballot. The GOP needs to explain why they rejected the other 16, OK 15 because NO ONE like Ted Cruz.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I don’t think that Trump’s base is that big. The problem was that the election only offered 2 choices, Trump or Hillary. Most republicans aren’t ever voting for Hillary. In fact, if the election were held again today with Trump v Hillary I wouldn’t vote for Hillary

The problem is that the primaries seem to be run by the extremes (on both sides)

We could end up with the next election being Bernie v Trump. Trump could win again

As others noted, Trump has delivered on things that pubs want like conservative judges and tax cuts

That was something I was saying as well. When the Democrats want to act high and mighty because the GOP got conned they need to be aware that it could have been them. And when people, mostly NOT in the Democratic party want to bitch about how the Democratic nomination takes place with super delegates they need to understand that it would also help to keep charlatans from hijacking the party.

If he tweaked his message just a little bit, e.g. pro-life, pro-gun control, drop the heavy religious stuff I think he very well could have won the Democratic nomination. And since he was all of those things before he decided to run as a Republican it would have made more sense than the stances he took.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

This argument is stupid. As stated above trump won the nomination against other republicans.

How do his supporters do that? Read his Twitter feed and watch Faux News? From those sources, they get the false impression that everything he's doing is to their benefit, when exactly the opposite is true. It's not like his supporters are the type who dive deeply (or even shallowly) into the policies, just like they didn't dive into Trump's history to see what a liar and conman he really is.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Did they also want the tax break to be paid for by massive borrowing against their future (that will come back to bite them in the ass), in order to give orders of magnitude more tax breaks to the wealthy? Do his supporters even know this, since they won't read it on his Twitter feed or from Faux News?


What about options C through Q that they opted out of in the primaries?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

His supports focus on a few things.

His big selling points:

He promised Supreme Court Justices we would like - So far so good.
He promised a middle class tax break - Based on what a lot of us have seen - this did happen for a large percentage of people. Refer to the other thread on taxes or do some simple math.

All politicians are terrible and now you are now going to show all the things he has promised and not done. That's fine, but you need to look at what his supporters care about and that he is delivering on those items.

And as noted - option B was a much much worse on all fronts from his supporters standpoint.[/quote]
I think any of the Republican candidates would have put up similar people up for nomination for the Supreme Court.

And yeah there were the tax cuts. Unpaid for. It's easy to give out money when you are borrowing more, even a Democrat can do that.

He nominated Kavanaugh: Do they like that decision or not?
He is pushing for a wall: Do they like decision or not?
He declared an emergency to get the wall. Do they like that or not?
He signed a tax break: Do they like decision or not?
He is meeting with Kim. Do they like that or not?
He moved the embassy to Jerusalem. Do they like that or not.

And a million other decision he has made while in office.
Who cares what he says, look at what he does.

[quote FishyJoe

And yeah there were the tax cuts. Unpaid for. It's easy to give out money when you are borrowing more, even a Democrat can do that.[/quote]
He is not giving out money by cutting taxes It’s OUR money he is letting the government take less of.

The answer is pretty clear actually if you would take off your anti Trump blinders for a few minutes. Call him what you want. The facts are voters were fed up with a Democratic led system that allowed foreign workers to be imported and take over fired Americans jobs. A system that protects illegal immigrant criminals. A system that is more concerned about the welfare of illegal immigrants than veterans sleeping on sidewalks, etc etc etc. Take a look at what this guy has accomplished......keep calling him a conman if you want but facts are facts and the vast majority of Americans are better off. Read the article and then get back to us with your fake news/conman comments. Whatever you want to spout.....he is pro America, he's keeping his promises, and the Dems realize he'll be elected again unless they can find another way to get him out. Now that they realize there is no "there" in the "soon to be released" Mueller report they need to go in a different direction and will be wasting taxpayer dollars for another two years instead of working for the American public.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...less-promise-keeping

Shouldn't conservatives be upset at at least half of those?

He is pushing for a wall: Do they like decision or not? Do "conservatives" like taking away private landowner's land?

He declared an emergency to get the wall. Do they like that or not? Weren't "conservatives" upset at Obama's executive orders? Don't "conservatives" want to protect the constitution?

He signed a tax break: Do they like decision or not? "Conservativves" like a huge budget deficit?

He is meeting with Kim. Do they like that or not? Weren't "conservatives" upset when Obama even mentioned that he would be open to meeting with Kim? Why would they be happy trump did twice with no per-conditions?

Why are these things suddenly good?

He is not giving out money by cutting taxes It’s OUR money he is letting the government take less of.[/quote]
By providing fewer of the services that mostly accrue to those supporters. Great plan.

"This tax cut takes far less in taxes from the wealthy who don't need government services than it does from the less-well-off who actually need the services. In addition, the tax cut on the wealthy is permanent, while the far more modest tax cut on the middle class is set to expire in the future. Finally, we plan on paying for it by pointing to the massive deficits it causes and claiming that we *now* need to balance the budget by cutting services."

Funny how I never heard this, the truth, from the Republicans.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

trump cares so much about illegal immigration, that he stopped employeeing them in January.

Man, one day you will realize how much you fell for it.

His approval rating I believe is fairly high with Repubs so I guess they like his decisions.

What about the white trash in the cities who are big Dem fans? I think you want to characterize rural with poor. I'll give you most rural people lean right. And there are rural people who are poor, but not all rural people are poor... In fact I would argue that most rural americans live a comfortable life. Probably more so than those in the big cities. Also, there are some very rich ranchers out there...

See, conservatives don't like trump because of his policies, they like trump's policies because they like him. How else have they totally flipped from something being bad under Obama, but good under trump?

Should it give you pause that this conman is doing things that conservatives were dead set against?

289 accomplishments and thats the best you can do? I'm sensing weakness. C'mon, you can do better. But use facts for a change and not just your opinion.

Your generalities are showing. They are for building a wall ( generally don't like eminent domain but in some specific circumstances, such as defending our sovereign border, they can accept it).

Declaring an emergency is constitutional as it has been done millions of times before by presidents. Only issue the left has is calling the border situation an emergency, which conservatives agree it is an emergency ( the soverign border thing again) so that's not an issue.

Tax break, are you kidding me. Give me back my money is a conservative virtue that outweights budget defecits...cut something else to balance the budget.

Obama was a mess bowing to world leaders all over the place so Trump can't do any worse with Kim.

Ahh, so you admit that trump doesn't think undocumented workers are a big deal?

How much is mexico paying for the wall?

You are just proving DJT is on his way to another election win. You got nothing. Dems have nothing but Kamala, Pocohontas, Booker, Bernie.....what a crew. Yep, I fell for those 289 accomplishments. What did you fall for? Benghazi was caused by a video? You can keep your doctor?

Ahh, taking away private property is ok if there is a good reason. Very conservative there.

Declaring a national emergency is constitutional, that is correct. Spending money congress appropriated to spend on something else to spend that money on something congress specifically did not approve, is not constitutional. Read Ariticle I of the constitution. And congress can't pass a law gives a constitutional responsibility to another branch, if not the whole constitution can be re-written without amendments. That is why this has never happened before. I thought conservatives cared about the constitutions?

Didn't conservatives always say that money has to be paid back sometime? So you are fine with those in the future having to pay MORE taxes?

trump saluted a NK general! trump bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia! So is trump a mess? Or is bowing a fine thing to do?

He is not giving out money by cutting taxes It’s OUR money he is letting the government take less of.[/quote]
The money is going to be taken, just in the future plus interest.

I see why you support trump now.

Do you or the other lefties ever realize how much of a condescending asshole you sound like? You obviously think you are smarter, better, more intellectual, know better, etc. etc. etc..... than the rest of us? But really we just see an talking ass...

I don't know what most any of that has to do with what I wrote. No i don't want to characterize rural with poor, I just want to say I think the rural poor described in a book like Hillbilly Elegy are disproportionately with Trump. IOW not all of Trump's base "want to work and want to achieve and believe in self-reliance".

I am a Web Developer in an online company that offers these cat supplies (toys, litter pan, beds, cages and many more). The power of love? Thos will be the last words I will be expecting from Trump. :)

Sort of reminds me of the smug faces on the celebrating left supporting media outlets at the start of election night 2016.......right up until about 1am. Priceless. You would have thought it was a lesson learned......but obviously not.

This should be understood in the context of taking the work seriously, not in lending legitimacy to a fringe faction of the right that doesn't deserve legitimacy in an American republic.

Let's be very clear that flat Earth, pizza-gate, anti-vax, crazy ass conspiracy theorist retards have no place at the table with the adults. The right thinks that when that's said, it applies to all of the right. It doesn't. It applies to maybe even just 5%. But, the right continuously allows that 5% an undeserved legitimacy. And the left doesn't take the threat seriously. It's clear, based on the Republican presidential primary, that the right didn't take it seriously either. You had two or three electable and palatable solutions on the table up against the left, and this is what we got.

Both sides fail miserably at addressing the power and voice of the fringe. I partly blame campaign finance laws for that, and corporations being people. Getting rich lunatics with money driving this stuff where the ideas normally would have stayed in mom's basement in front of a computer terminal where it belongs.

   

"

This. I have always considered myself right leaning. I was stupid and naive enough to think Obama would be good for the country when he was elected because he would be a unifying force and help to make disenfranchised minorities feel like they had a voice. Boy, was I wrong on that. Obama had a great opportunity that was squandered on fomenting even more division in more ways than I ever imagined. Along comes Hillary, who is ten times worse than Trump will ever be by any and all measures. She is the worst liar on the planet, the LEAST respectful of women no matter how much she holds herself out as a promoter, the biggest fake in our country regarding respect for minorities, she is completely willing to trade our country's interests for her own personal gains, flip-flops on major positions for political gains, and she is the most repulsive elitist that is so far removed from the middle class that she doesn't have a clue what is going on in America. Yet, lefties think that anyone that voted for Trump is a knuckle dragging idiot because Queen Hillary called them such and, apparently, not too many of her base have a brain to form their own opinions. They are all sheeple blindly following the party line and believing that anyone that disagrees with them is racist, misogynist...blah blah blah... And, we all must get together and HATE TRUMP. Nothing else matters, we must HATE TRUMP! This hatred has completely defined the Democratic party ever since the election and is the basis upon which all leadership decisions are made. Running the country and lawmaking are so far off of the Left's radar as to be irrelevant because it will sap energy for HATING TRUMP.

So, now, I have moved firmly into the Right. The Left's agenda has been fully revealed since the election and it makes me sick. Fortunately, the party is imploding right before our eyes. They are relying on funneling illegals into the country so they can count their votes even though the current leadership of their party and our last President called sealing the border a top priority. They have lurched so far toward extreme positions that they have somehow rationalized killing children that have been carried to full term. I am pro-choice, by the way, but with reasonable limits. Yet, they claim concern about children being separated from their families at the borders. Give me f'ing break with that. But, being outraged about that facilitates fomenting more hatred toward Trump among the non-thinking sheeple that have become the Democratic party that the leadership believes can be bought with 'free everything'. The fact that the Left is relying on hatred for Trump, turning illegal aliens into voters, and impeachment in order to win in 2020 just proves how desperate they have become. No workable policies to sell, no foreign affairs strategies, no economic knowledge or ability to implement rational fiscal policy (reference the number of Leftist cities and states that are essentially bankrupt), and no ability to silence or even muffle the freshman nut cases (and Maxine Waters) that got elected by the sheeple base.

Regarding Trump, he is a cheating husband and probably a scumbag businessman. But, I didn't vote for him to be married to him and I don't expect to be doing business with him. I voted for him because the alternative was Hillary and I thought Trump would live up to his campaign promises that I agreed with. So far, he has lived up to more of them than any other past President I can remember. Would I have a beer with him if he called me? Probably not. I personally don't like the guy because his ego is too big and in some ways, he is childish.

So, this knuckle dragging deplorable with two graduate degrees will vote for him in 2020 in the absence of any alternative. You Lefties can just keep on with the current strategy of a campaign completely based on hate for Trump and free stuff for everyone. All of us on the Right would love that.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

So would you encourage a primary opponent against trump?

Also your implosion comment makes no sense giving the results of the midterm elections.

So, to summarise, you like Trump as our president because you hate Hilary and Obama more, and so you're willing to look past his character flaws and mischaracterize the left and their policies to suit your per-determined narrative.

Don't ask logical questions. Of course he wouldn't. Trump is the only person who can Make America Great Again.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Anyone supporting far right Donnie is wrong as are folks pushing far left issues. Electing either extreme just perpetuates the divisions on 2 ends of bell curve. Hard to believe we have a degenerate for prez. History will prove trump's policies wrong (deficits, trade, climate, human rights, tax/wealth disparity) but going hard left not answer either (free college, eliminating hamburgers, reparations, etc). Back & forth.......small group at top loving it...

When folks believe Cohen more than Cadet bonespurs (50 to 35)...about says it all

Something I just dont understand. Is that many trump supporters here go from:

I was a slight leaning member of the GOP Iiked obama because I thought he would unify the nation, which led to Ok. ok. I love trump. Screw trying to unit the nation, and screw being a centrists. I now like strong policies on the right.

Obama "unifying" meant appeasing those uppity minorities and women so they stop the whining. Since that didn't work, well fuck 'em. And the illegal aliens are a great proxy to take those frustrations out on since the whole illegal thing makes it hard to defend them.

Saying that somewhat tongue in cheek.

Yes, I absolutely would consider a primary opponent against Trump. That said, they guy has been getting things done.

Just about all of my comments about implosion are the results of the mid term elections. It was those elections that have derailed the entire party. It is now lead by a 27 year old bartender. Until Nancy gets a grip on leadership of the party again, it is doomed for failure, and I never thought I would say that.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

See this is what doesnt make any sense. You said, that you were a leaning member of the GOP. Now you dislike trump as a person (so this isnt why you would vote for him) but you like trumps far right policies.

So at the end of the day, either you changed your political views from being closer to the middle to closer to the fringe (while also saying that people dont like trump just because of his far right policies, which is exactly why you like trump), or your political views have always been what they are.

This discussion is silly. Trump is a Birther. There is your unifying answer.

Kay, I guessed you missed the part bolded above. That pretty much summarizes the camp of Trump supporters (although I only have one graduate degree). You usually pick a narrative......we hate Hillary and Obama. Nope, not the case......they lied and were corrupt and had there own agenda that did not support working middle America. They got voted out. Has nothing to do with hate like you Trump "haters". How many people looked past Bill and Hillary's character flaws and continued to elect / place them in positions of power? Trump is trying to make America America again......bring back our values that made this country great. Contrary to Pelosi's "immigrants make America more American". That type of positioning won't get a Dem elected regardless of who it is. C'mon board the Trump train and enjoy the ride. You don't have to like him to reap the benefits. Stop with the hate.

I don't get why the damn lefties can't see this. Why else would God have sent Trump to save America?

What is Trump doing to support working middle America?

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Ok, you are either trolling or evidence it is the cult of trump.

I don't view Trump's policies as 'far right'. I have moved right, somewhat, as a result of the wackiness and dishonesty displayed by the left. If having some semblance over control of who enters our country is 'far right', I'll wear it. If putting limits on abortion so that perfectly healthy babies are protected makes me 'far right', put me down for that. If allowing people to practice their religion without being attacked and mocked makes me 'far right', again, put me down for that. So, I guess 'at the end of the day', being 'far right' is a subjective thing. Most lefties would say I am 'far right'. Whatever.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

The thing about trump is that he is doing nothing to actually help middle America.

However he talks a big game about helping middle America. He talks a big game about helping everyone. People who want to believe him stop there. This Is why people love trump because he tells people what they want to here.

Imagine you tell your kid the reason he didn’t get into Princeton isn’t because of his 1200 sat and b rate gpa. It is because 10 black kids took with similar grades took his spot.

People feel victimized by society, and trump tells them there problems are not because of themselves, but because of illegal immigrants, the dems, etc.

Trump tells people they are the best and he is helping them achieve their best. People want to believe so they do. Facts be damned. You can see people here saying trump keeps his promises. He doesn’t. Mexico was going to build the wall, Aca was going to be replaced with something beautiful and cheap, his tax plan wasn’t going to help him.

Nope. Didn't miss the bolded part. I specifically pointed out that Greg was mischaracterizing the Dem's stance on most of these issues, which was the bolded part. This is typical of Trump supporters these days. Mischaracterize Dem positions as being extreme when they're not (eg "Dems want open borders"), or take a fringe left-wing view and paint it as the party's policy.

As for Hilary and Obama - I can't stand Hilary and I was disappointed with some of Obama's partisanship when he campaigned on bringing more unity to Washington, though the Republican party did their utmost to ensure that wasn't going to happen. Obama did many good things though, including repairing the tarnished image of the US post-Bush, taking steps on the environment and climate change and reducing the deficit.

Its not a subjective thing. Far right, centrists, far left, are all based on a frame of reference. Nationally and historically, trumps policies are far right.

No one thinks they are a bad driver. Everyone thinks they are a centrist because they put themselves in the middle, my policies could be even MORE extreme.

At least you have come to terms that politically you align with the far right.

How's the govt. going to protect you from being attacked and mocked about your religion given that pesky first amendment? And who is doing this to you anyway?

There is no 'mischaracterization" on this subject. Pelosi's comments yesterday along with Al Green's shameful disgusting questioning of Nielsen yesterday pretty much cements Dems position on this......the more immigrants the better.....the only way they will keep future offices.....painfully obvious. Obama and the Dems had eight years to do something and he did nothing. Which is another reason why DJT will get elected again.
www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/03/06/green-to-nielsen-white-babies-would-not-be-treated-the-way-these-babies-of-color-are-being-treated/

My values align with traditional American values. If you view those as 'far right', I think it indicates how far left you have gone.

Good day to you...

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

I mean you yourself said that you have moved from "leaning right" to "firmly right." (And you had to do it because the left made you sick.)

Just own that your views are that are of the far right.

As pointed out by another respondent, I didn't mischaracterize anything. As to your last statement...

"...repairing the tarnished image of the US post-Bush..." No, he did not.

"...taking steps on the environment and climate change..." No, not really (remember Solyndra?).

"...reducing the deficit." Only because the economy, which he had absolutely NO control over slowly crawled it's way toward recoveru IN SPITE of his policies. The debt, in the meantime, multiplied.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

You are clearly desperate for some sort of 'gotcha' moment here. I suppose something in my original post really got under your skin.

You can view me any way you want to. I couldn't give a shit and it isn't you that will tell me what I need to 'own'. I have my 'own' compass, thank you.

I think we are through.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

Again, we do have a crisis at our southern border, but it's a humanitarian crisis. It is not a crisis that can be fixed by building a wall. We need to treat these asylum seekers humanely, process them, and then deport those ineligible to come. We need more resources to do that. We need to stop using metering to block their legal efforts to seek asylum. We need to stop turning them away from legal ports of entry and telling them they have to get on a list in Mexico and will be called in due course, which ends up pushing them to cross illegally and then presenting themselves to border agents. We also need to address the root causes of why they are coming (the "push factors"). We should spend more than the current USD750m per year on programs in central America to help lift people out of poverty, avoid getting into crime and giving vocational training, as well as doing what we can to help the governments clean up corruption. Their coffee crops are also failing due to long droughts likely caused by climate change. These are difficult challenges, but if we don't address them then the problems of these migrants coming will only grow.

To be honest I'm done with this discussion. You don't actually have an interest in honestly discussing the issues. Instead you're just looking to throw out partisan jabs based on the latest thing you've read on Breitbart or seen on Fox.

Never said you didn’t have your own moral compass. In fact earlier I said that everyone thinks their own moral compass points due north.

Wonder how he would feel if he was behind the fence?

Do they align with traditional American values? trump's foreign policy goes directly against traditional foreign policy. He attacks our alliance and specifically avoids talking about human rights. We have traditionally always had human rights as part of our foreign policy. Now you may argue that trump's foriegn policy is good, but there is no argument it is traditional American values. I mean attacking Canada and saying they are a threat to American national security is not traditional.

On domestic policy, why are these "traditional American values" so deeply unpopular? What are you thinking "traditional American values" even are? Are these the values that were shown by government before women and minorities could vote?

What are those traditional American values? You mean what was perceived as the traditional "Leave It To Beaver" American values? A time before the Civil Rights Movement? A time when homosexuals stayed in the closet? A time when creepy Uncle Bill came around and gave all the little girls extra long hugs? A time when priest were just moved from church to church instead of going to jail...wait, this is still being done.

Any way, this idea of "traditional American values" is just that, an idea and not reality. It was such a simpler life when we didn't know what was going on in the rest of the world and we could ignore what was happening right on our own street corners.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

........always the out of a liberal democrat when they know they have a losing argument. Disappointed you couldn't come up with something more original.

You keep saying this yet every DHS and NBP expert says a wall will be a big deterrent. Along with a change in our ridiculous laws. Who knows more about this issue.....your "sources' or DHS/NBP? And in case you really don't think Dems want open borders, just one of dozens of articles proving you are wrong. Yes, you can do down and help grow crops if you want, but first things first.
www.investors.com/politics/editorials/border-protection-democrats-open-borders/

You are so wrong in how you interpret the news its sad. Your moral compass is a nutsack.

I have been reluctant to join in the debate between you four and this may be a gotccha, but with regard to your above rebuttal about Obama's performance, in like fashion using the terms used above - deficit, economy, control, recovery, policies and debt; could you provide your assessment of Trump's performance.

I apologize in advance if in fact you have already stated same, but I grew weary scrolling through all the long posts.

Thank you for that insightful response.

By the way, SAD! is supposed to be in all caps and punctuated by an exclamation point.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

At least not a golden calf.

Fixed it for you. We'll see, there have always between a far left and moderate wing of the Democrat party. The last time that the far left candidate won the nomination was 1988. We'll see if Bernie (or Warren) wins this time.... I don't expect any shift in your narrative, regardless.

Traditional Values means a "Not a Kenyan in the White House."

Or a woman in the WH. Unless she's hot.

So generalized as to be meaningless. I struggle to understand how your ATV differ substantially from mine, or most of the people that I know (spanning a wide range of political viewpoints). From what we have seen, many of Trump's policies (to the extent that he has them) aren't consistently "far right" as much as they are incoherent and shortl-sighted. Anyway, I would love to hear about those ATV's, and how your's are so different from the vast number of folks who swung to Dems the last midterm.

Oh really? Which ones are those?

The lying? Shameless self-promotion? Scapegoating minorities? Passing tax cuts that primarily benefit yourself and your rich buddies? Using public office for personal enrichment? Schmoozing w/ dictators? Alienating our allies?

Wait, you're honestly dinging Obama for expanding the nat'l debt? That's fucking priceless ~ I'm sure you must really be up in arms now then since your guy just kicked that train into an even higher gear...

Hiring the best people.

Feel free to educate yourself.....in case you missed it. Try not to get too unhinged.......he's going to be around for a while.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...less-promise-keeping

Still not clear how your "values" are substantially different or better than mine, besides your insistence that they are. "bring back our values that made this country great" is completely meaningless. Name them, and please be specific.

This is the face of the values that makes America great. Get with the program.

https://www.foxnews.com/...nd-tax-fraud-charges

Ever take any US History or Civics classes? Tell us what you learned. Ever hear of "google"? Look up "traditional american values" and get back to us with your report. Not up to me to educate you.

I truly do not care at all about Manafort. You are just as bad about picking straw men. My question to Gregtryin or Gophin is specifically what they mean by "traditional American values" and how their specific viewpoints on that are better, or even different from other folks, including me. Where I live, the Dems and Reps are mostly indistinguishable, and quite "traditional" in their basic approach to policy. What makes their "TAV" so different from so many other folks that I know?

Sorry, cop out, and everyone can see it. I said that way in which you used "TAV" rendered it meaningless, and you proved my point. For the most part, you seem to pick and choose aspects of "TAV" to suit your particular bias. Almost everyone does, but you are too lazy to even attempt to rationalize it. You often select a wildly ideological approach, and quote it with no attachment to any specific issue or any reality. Pick something, anything, and attach it to a real policy debate. I have a couple thousand posts here, pretty much outlining my view on the real world balance of different aspects of my "values". You have nothing but endless generalities.

Relevant. A fundamental of American value is the assumption that people are good and will do their best to lift themselves, their family, their friends, their community, their country.

Okay, I'll humor you. There was a time when you had a chance to get into your preferred college based on your grades and accomplishments. You work hard and you have a chance to reach your goal.....a traditional value.......work hard.....be rewarded. Now, your skin color is a major determination with many universities. Here's another one.....real simple.....we honor the value of life. Now we have a political party that is ok with "having a discussion" to determine if a newborn baby makes it to another day. There you go......take it and run.

Wait, you don't think in the past your skin color was major determination for many universities?

I think you may need a us history class.

Typical response from someone who has nothing to add. You didn't disappoint.

You people have the mentality of kids on a playground. "I don't like what you have to say, so you are a racist!"

Fuck off.

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

You people have the mentality of kids on a playground. "I don't like what you have to say, so you are a misogynist!"

Fuck off.

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

Here's one even you might understand. Free speech on college campuses.......where is it?

He also is saying that the left wants to kill new born babies. Meaning after birth.

Thanks, I have a meeting, so this will have to be truncated until later. Regarding affirmative action, you are ignoring massive inequality of opportunity, which it is meant to address. There is something about "pursuit of happiness" which calls for efforts to in some ways acknowledge great inequality, especially when it is exacerbated by government policy. I would much prefer affirmative action based on socio-economic factors, until it was shown that opportunity was largely equal (to the extent practical). Of course, if you endlessly ignore obvious patterns regarding inequality of opportunity, affirmative action based on any non-merit criteria is wrong (whether by race or any other factor).

Regarding abortion, we also honor freedom and choice. There is the crux of the issue. I think that abortion should be largely legal AND very rare. I have little problem with limiting late-term abortions. However, the core of the pro-life movement opposes birth control (including RU486), and that is where I split ways with you, I favor freedom in that case. In both instances you listed, you only look at one side of the coin. I am fine examining both, and trying to balance them

Sorry, I just wanted to teach you something about history. Because you apparently have no idea what America was like.

Either you can't comprehend or you purposely avoided the issue. Where did I ever mention abortion? Your wordy answer about abortion completely avoids my example.. Avoid the issue.....typical. No need to answer.....pointless.
And by the way..... we've had "affirmative action".......also known as reverse discrimination for almost 50 years now. When is it time to get back to traditional values and end this discriminatory practice. how long?

to be fair, it is a pretty traditional American value to try to hold down minorities in the name of equality.

So no answer? Because it is hilarious that you are trying to argue there was a time race was not a factor in college admission.

I disagree, depending on how far back you want to go. Sure, prior to the 1960s, absolutely. But since Affirmative Action, which you might be able to consider an 'american tradition" for the past almost 50 years, I feel there has been more than 'equal opportunity" for "everyone".....and it's actually going past the point now of the original objective.

Yep racism in America is dead. In fact things have swung the other way. Where America is racists towards white people

Actually, if you want to add white "conservative", you would be pretty accurate. .Especially on college campuses.

Some say manafort got a little white wealth affirmative action yesterday.

Oh come on. Name one major University that is being over run by minorities taking slots from whites. Even if it is occurring you're probably talking about a fairly small number of students. If you're white and not getting into the University you wanted to the overwhelming likelihood is you just weren't good enough and/or a shit ton of Asians who were better qualified took your place :)

So you think that since the Civil Rights Law was passed a switch just flipped and bam, You get equality, you get equality and you get equality.

Blacks are a little over 12% of the population, since 1999 there have only been 16 black CEO in charge of Fortune 500 companies. Currently there are only 3 black CEO's. As of May 2018, there are 16 female CEO's, none of them are black, while females make up a little over 58% of the population.

This has been over 50 years and these are the current numbers. I think you're quite out of touch with reality.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Not really related to this per se but I wonder where things are now in football? Arguably sport being more merit based than something like business.

I'm old enough to remember when there were few if any black QBs and there were arguments about black QBs not being "leaders" or smart enough for the position. Not to mention coaches.

Dem blacks is too stupid to throw a football.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

You mean you are a teenager?

On Sept. 16, Onalaska (Texas) Independent School District superintendent Lynn Redden, who is white, responded to a Facebook post about the Houston Texans’ loss to the Tennessee Titans, which ended after an error by Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson on the final play, by stating: “When you need precision decision making you can’t count on a black quarterback.”

Exactly. White QBs never make poor decisions.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Let me guess, Lynn denied being a racist?

She has a black friend!!M

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

Paul LePage the ex-governor of Maine even went one better. They raised (maybe adopted?) a Jamaican kid. It was his go to when he was accused of being racist.

You may seen him in the news in recent weeks where, paraphrasing here, he basically said we need to maintain the Electoral College as is so whites can retain control of the country.

I don't think you know what the word accurate means, you seem to mean inaccurate.

And why do you think that is? Because those big bad white males still practice racial and sexist discrimination? Really? In this day and age with discrimination lawyers standing on every street corner and BLM just waiting to come in and demonstrate? Does the NFL with 70% black players still discriminate against blacks because there are only 6-7 black qbs and only 6-7 black coaches? Or do you think they practice the american tradition/value of hiring the most qualified person for the job......oh wait, you can't do that anymore. Who's going to be the first to tell me Kap doesn't have a job simply because he is black. Those NFL owner meanies.

I would agree with him if he considers "conservative" to mean "rural/poor."

I think studies show that whites/asians are over represented in college compasses vs. blacks/Hispanics (under represented).

However, I think this is due to social-economic standards just in general being harder for people with less means. More recently, minorities can get a bump on their application (whether there is this socio-economic divide or not), while white/poor america does not. I think colleges have adjusted "diversity" applications to include economic status.

If he is arguing that there are more liberal whites on college campuses vs. conservative whites on college campuses (which I dont know if this is true, most kids lean more liberal). Then I think that would be because liberal whites performed better than conservative whites, seeing how they are most likely grouped together and are competing against each other for X amount of slots. This would go against his arguments though of wanting things to be done for merit.

And some would say that the Judge recognized the witch hunt and recognized the harm the crime caused and penalized it appropriately.

Do you know about the Rooney Rule? You really have no clue of which you speak.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Traditional american values and google search. I continue to work may way through the google book of records so what I offer is still half assed.

The qualifier traditional so far has not been pinpointed into a standard accepted by some, all or many. Best I can come up with are the Bible, Ten Commandments, Our Constitution and Declaration of Independence as guides. For most part all values are of a social construct. There is a listing of 10 Core Republican values of which 3 are about government and the last 7 social.

Currently my take away with TAV is that it is Judeo-Christian centric exclusively, there is little discussion on morality and compassion except with distinction to the value human life, and one can read between the lines a racist code speak (see the above debate on college admissions).

I hope with continued study to become more enlightened about how I should accept traditional values as a standard I might want to re-adopt and cease evolving.

Seriously, if there is an author or group whose writings are best, could you please steer me in their direction. As you and the others are so well aware, the google is almost infinitely vast and there is some fake ass trolling within it. If one is not savvy, he can come up with bullshit propoganda as his bible.

Traditional American Values: Screw Multiple Porn Stars when your wife is home with your newborn, pay them off and then talk like this:

"I moved on her like a bitch. But I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look....I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything....Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.

Do know the Rooney rule.....so what? Actually, you may want to do some homework before you embarrass yourself again. There were 7 black head coaches in the NFL last year and 5 were fired at the end of the season. Are you going to try and say the NFL is racist? Or will you agree they just weren't performing their jobs? Please be explicit and don't do the liberal dance around the subject.

And some would say, karma is a bitch....and this is only round one for paulie

Get out of here with that mumbo jumbo.

We all know traditional american values are wives as property, only land owners can vote, slavery, asians in concentration camps, Native americans should be killed, Catholics are the devil, non-christians are worse

The purpose of the Rooney Rule was to create equity in the game. It's to realize there is a problem and it does need a solution. Did you read any of the page I posted. Did you see the reasoning behind the rule?

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Greetings gphin,

Continuing on the subject of TAV and internet searching: I have 2 more questions. But first allow me to correct my record above. My first internet search was Yahoo and not google. As I was working on finding my Google engine I happened onto a bing engine.

On both Bing and Yahoo on the first page was Dale Robbins authored explanations of American Values. But nowhere could I find the term Traditional American Value here. Should I ignore Dale?

Way back on page 12 or so on Bing I found a listing of the 10 American Core Values from Andrews.edu. They are as follows: Individualism-Equality-Materialism-Science and Technology-Progress and Change-Work and Leisure- Competition- Mobility- Volunteerism- Action and Achievement Oriented. I like these more than the Robbins' guy list. Let me guess, there might be a couple values in here that don't quite meet that, as yet imprecisely defined, Traditional American Values definition? Eh?

Still seeking edification from you beyond the quality of life of the newborn and racial preferences for college admissions? I got a full night in the bag, rarin' to have at it. Hopefully Google, when I find it, will help cause it seems I can't get either you or better educated Greg to pitch in in direct response. I can understand your reluctance given my smart ass bent. I promise to go straight in the future, just had to get it out of my system.

Are you saying that everyone had equal opportunities beginning in the '64 with the civil rights act? Hopefully not. For example, redlining didn't end until the 90's. There have been numerous studies comparing equal resumes of black versus white or male versus female job candidates and the white male has a greater advantage. Diversity did not become a common buzzword on college campuses until the mid 90's but, don't worry, because believe it or not there are still plenty of white conservative males attending college. When was the last time you walked on a college campus? Can you honestly say that you'd have a better or equal chance as a minority job candidate, than a white candidate?

https://hbr.org/...declined-in-25-years

Thanks for the help. Not! Your hyperbole, while funny and granular in truth, probably is not helping my effort to have an open debate on the subject of TAV. Keep you arm warmed up though, I tire easily and may not make 9 innings.

This TAV divide is at the crux of our current woes. Maybe we can get together and bridge the --black, white, brown, christian, muslim, hetero, homo, family unit, life unit, moral, amoral-- morass of beliefs into a revised Constitution or some other acceptable standard defining American Values. It sure beats the current pissin into the wind efforts to turn back the hands of time and ignore our short still evolving history.

Can you honestly say that you think that if someone is a better candidate that they should be discriminated against because they are not a minority?

Take this for instance. My wife works with many HS kids on SAT/ACT testing. We recently learned that a student on GreenCard from the UK (been here for 3 years, going on 4 for high school), has to pay international rates to go to college in Colorado, while an illegal alien gets in-state tuition. In other words, following the rules hurts you. What about was it Harvard that was sued by some Asian student who were denied entry because they said the already had enough Asians. It's not just a white thing. In many cases it should be the best candidate period.

The question then comes “who is the best candidate?.” You are assigning an objective score to a subjective task.

Straight standardized scores? Weighted with gpa? Weighted with class rank? Outside variables considered? Legacy? Socio economic? Out of state? How much are outside value things

I think most state schools have some parameters anyway. Like if you are top x percent you automatically get into state school y. Obviously then you have the question of if school a is equal to b.

Edit. Also being able to afford personalized tutoring for standardized testing shifts who is actually the best candidate.

That is a fair question. The reason behind SAT and ACT is because schools and education is not all the same. For instance my wife has 4.0 students at one school that only score around a 19 on ACT while 3.5 students at another school often score in the mid to high 20s (first time) on ACT.

The question is should someone less academically qualified be given a spot over a student who worked hard and is more academically qualified? Should the person who followed the rules be penalized?

You should remove the "worked hard" from that equation. hard work is going to be subjective, and doesnt reach the question of academically qualified. Regarding GPA every schools is different. I had a much harder time getting in top rated law schools because I had an engineering major where being in the top 1/25 of my class = around a 3.3 gpa, opposed to poly scis at the same school having a gpa of 3.8. Law schools looked at GPA and LSAT (then weighted things somewhat).

Should someone who is more academically qualified get admission vs. someone less academically qualified. The answer is no.

However, as stated before, what makes someone more academically qualified is going to be somewhat subjective.

I can agree that the term academically qualified can be subjective, but can you admit that using affirmative action removes part of the academically qualification? Accepting someone with lower scores to fill a racial or socio-economic slot. That is not to address potential.

n=2

Back before the suits, I worked in undergrad admission at Michigan. They used a point system. If you had a 4.0, you got 40 points. If you had a 1600 SAT you got 40 points. If you had a 1.5 you got zero points.
You also got 10 points as a Michigan resident. 10 points from a underrepresented county in Michigan. 10 points if a relative went to Michigan. 20 points as a direct legacy. 10 points as an underrepresented minority (i.e. not Asian or White).
There wasn't a cutoff. But there was about 7500 spaces available, so the top 7500 applicants got accepted.

The California system took a different approach. If you are in the top 9% of your graduating class from a California HS, you are supposed to get a place in a UC. If you are outside the top 9%, but have a 3.0+ you basically get free entry in to a Cal State campus

So now we are at the stage of academic qualifications are subjective.

After that, if the kids are in a certain range, you need to bring in the other subjective factors. If Timmy has a 1400 SAT and a 3.0 gpa but the average SAT of his school is 1500 (meaning more smart kids) vs. Sally who has a 1350 but a 3.5 GP at a school with an SAT of 1300, which kid is actually more academically qualified.

Even with these two metrics things are incredibly subjective. Then after that you can compare the kids with some form of point system (which what I think most schools do). If you dont meet a minimum number of points you are not getting in. If you have the maximum number of points you are getting in. So in the field of everyone else, should sociology-economic, how many other kids from your school/district are going to that school, diversity, location (in state v. out of state) make a difference in this subjective standard. I am in a firm yes. In a subjective world (which we have already stated we are working with), there has to be some way to distinguish candidates.

This is also widely different. If you have top marks, go to a technical school where things are going to be more geared towards straight qualifications.

The thing that confuses me is over and over I hear Trump fans say that one thing they like about him is that he talks like a regular person. He absolutely does not talk like a regular, rural American. Sarah Palin could pull that off OK. Mike Rowe, the Dirty Jobs guy has it down to perfection.

Trump has mannerisms, gestures, pet phrases, wardrobe, facial expressions, makeup, diction, and rambling self-infatuation that are just completely foreign to rugged, self-reliant, straight-talkin' American. He's certainly very far from typical Washington DC Slick Politician Drone. But he's equally far from "regular person."

You are right that Universities have a desire to be more diverse and this has influenced who they select as students. My response to gphin was about job place discrimination and his implication that everything has been fair since the 60's. But if you look at the link I posted, a white job applicant has a 50% greater chance to receive a call back than a black applicant and this has been constant for 25 years. Is this the way it should be? Would having more diverse campuses help change it?

A couple of the highly rated colleges ($$$) around me also accept and give a few scholarships to underprivileged students from the local area. Is this also wrong when they are likely bumping students from better school districts with better SAT's?

Yes, it is wrong. If you are going to base entry into your school on a competitive criteria, you don't say, "these people that won don't get their medal. Instead we'll give their medal that they worked for to someone who we think probably hasn't ever gotten a medal so they can feel better and we can feel better". If I'm a student that meets the criteria but then gets shafted for someone who doesn't meet the criteria, I'd be resentful and pissed off.

C'mon, it wasn't a factor back when those pesky brown folks were denied any proportionate representation, duh...

Forget it, he's rolling...

I think you're making a mistake in looking at college admissions simply through the lens of a competitive contest, which should somehow always hand out their 'awards' in a fair and consistent manner like whomever had the fastest time or jumped the farthest, etc.

Consider some of the UC system schools where white people (surely this'll blow gphin's mind) are actually given preference points over ethnic minorities, or else the student body would look too overwhelmingly Asian. The key point is that when a student is accepted for admission, you also become part of the 'product' (i.e., the classroom composition/environment) that is being sold to your peers as well. You don't just learn from only books & professors, right? So I can absolutely see the case as a hypothetical admissions officer that merely inserting test score A into slot B doesn't necessarily give you the optimum student body composition if you're pulling from too limited a demographic, such that you end up with classrooms that are too homogeneous. Diversity goals aren't just an endpoint for you, the minority applicant, to get in more easily; it's a starting point so that the overall educational product the school provides will be more well-rounded as long as you're there.

You're trying too hard to objectify (objectivize?) one component of a larger process which inherently has way more subjectivity baked in.

How far back do you want to go? Up until 1978 race wasn't a factor in college admissions. strictly based on several factors including achievement and recommendations. The Supreme Court ruling in 1978 gave colleges and universities the go ahead to include race in who gets admitted......basically reverse discriminating against whites who may have got better grades and SAT scores.....so for the past 40 years. You are not trying to say colleges discriminated (denied) against minorities prior to that.....are you?

Wait. So you think the Supreme Court allowed race to be a factor to proactively discriminate against white people?

Why should you have any say in their process? It's literally none of your business. Some of the spots are not based on the same competitive criteria. They are giving scholarships to underprivileged students in their area because they want to help improve their own community which in turn will benefit the colleges. It's called being a part of society and it's their decision to lose money because of this charity. You want control over how they support their local community? Should they have control over your charity? How do you feel about athletes getting preferential treatment?

Because if its a state school receiving a portion of your tax dollars.......you have every right to ensure they are not being discriminatory in their selection process.

I should have a say because they are often public universities getting public funds. And you act like without this society will fail. That is false. There are many educational opportunities that people with lower grades or test scores can attend. I didn't get great grades in HS, but still went and got 2 degrees and consider myself successful. And as for Athletes, they have a different competitive entry program. But of course they don't hold out a few spots for bad athletes to make sure everyone is represented.

And to address your final point. As far as I know there is not a requirement to be a minority or under achiever from the local neighborhood.

Did you not saw the Supreme courts ruling was basically reverse discrimination?

They are private schools.