General politics

[ewen21]

 

But here, just because I keep coming at this for some inexplicable reason, have another article that basically shoots a Trump-sized hole in your argument.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/08/17/no-one-third-of-african-americans-dont-support-trump-not-even-close/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6115c952e7d6

 

I read that, Brock.  I am well aware of the Rasmussen Poll and I do not cite it for reasons I already explained.  That link pokes a hole in nothing.

 

It is kind of telling that you use one of the most liberal papers in the land.  The same one that had to offer a mea cupla for ripping Nick Sandman for having a smug look on his face.  Not that I think EVERYTHING the Washington Post is garbage, but I am at least trying to find use somewhat neutral sources.

 

Try doing the same

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I read that, Brock.  I am well aware of the Rasmussen Poll and I do not cite it for reasons I already explained.  That link pokes a hole in nothing.

 

It is kind of telling that you use one of the most liberal papers in the land.  The same one that had to offer a mea cupla for ripping Nick Sandman for having a smug look on his face.  Not that I think EVERYTHING the Washington Post is garbage, but I am at least trying to find use somewhat neutral sources.

 

Try doing the same

I did find neutral sources, such as Pew Research, and you immediately discarded the data because you didn't like what it said.

[ewen21]

By the way, the NAACP conducted a poll where Trump's approval rating was 21% in August

https://www.naacp.org/latest/new-poll-nations-competitive-races-may-hinge-trumps-racism/

[ewen21]

 

I did find neutral sources, such as Pew Research, and you immediately discarded the data because you didn't like what it said.

 

No, I did not discard for that reason.  I discarded it because it was irrelevant.  One link was from 2016 (completely irrelevant) and the other outlined the results in gubernatorial races.  Not the same thing as Trump by a longshot (although I tried to make a concession and said maybe there is a connection)

 

Notice also how I have mocked anyone.

 

This has been interesting to say the least.  I vowed never to do this, but here I go.  It is time for dinner and I might not be back tonight.  Maybe we can pick this up again sometime.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I gave you your link, Brock.  The You Tube stuff exists and a few of you guys mock the videos, pretty much mocking the people who made them.  That's not cool.

 

Why is so outlandish to realize #walkaway and Blexit are real and blacks are moving toward conservatism?

What larger point are you even trying to make?  You have anecdotal evidence of Black conservatives, but you have nothing to demonstrate there's been any kind of recent trend in the aggregate.  

 

For someone who is self-professed as a moderate, you certainly seem to have an agenda in terms of pointing to this supposed phenomenon.  

 

Polls are shaky evidence of trends, but anecdotal evidence is totally meaningless in identifying trends in the aggregate.  No one is going to be convinced by that, and you shouldn't be either. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

No, I did not discard for that reason.  I discarded it because it was irrelevant.  One link was from 2016 (completely irrelevant) and the other outlined the results in gubernatorial races.  Not the same thing as Trump by a longshot (although I tried to make a concession and said maybe there is a connection)

Okay, you're not even listening to what you're saying. You have said a variation of this multiple times:

 

"Why is so outlandish to realize #walkaway and Blexit are real and blacks are moving toward conservatism?"

 

Let me break this down for you. For something to be moving, you need a minimum of two data points. That's how this works. I provided you with a link to 2016 (data point #1) and then another link to 2018 (data point #2). And if you read link #2, you'd see it talks about more than gubernatorial races. It also breaks down congressional races and they all say the same thing: black people are still not voting for the republican party. The difference between 2016 and 2018 (ie. "moving") is negligible to non-existent.

 

Second, you have said "conservatives" multiple times in this thread and are using it interchangeably with "Trump". Then you steer the conversation back to Trump when I post numbers that show how black people are not turning conservative. If you don't like my links and/or data, you should pay closer attention to the actual words you're using because that's what I'm responding to.

[PseudoSABR]

[Brock Beauchamp]

"Just a reminder that public opinion is complicated. "Socialist" goals (e.g. greater income redistribution) are often quite popular. But "socialism" as a brand or label is really unpopular."

 

I've known this for a long time and I'm not disputing Nate's take here, I only want to point out how much this kind of opinion split makes my brain hurt.

 

COME ON, AMERICA

[TheLeviathan]

 

"Just a reminder that public opinion is complicated. "Socialist" goals (e.g. greater income redistribution) are often quite popular. But "socialism" as a brand or label is really unpopular."

 

I've known this for a long time and I'm not disputing Nate's take here, I only want to point out how much this kind of opinion split makes my brain hurt.

 

COME ON, AMERICA

 

Yup, that's why it's not what you sell that's important, but how you sell it.  Dems have to resist branding their ideas as socialist if they want to win.

[ewen21]

 

Okay, you're not even listening to what you're saying. You have said a variation of this multiple times:

 

"Why is so outlandish to realize #walkaway and Blexit are real and blacks are moving toward conservatism?"

 

Let me break this down for you. For something to be moving, you need a minimum of two data points. That's how this works. I provided you with a link to 2016 (data point #1) and then another link to 2018 (data point #2). And if you read link #2, you'd see it talks about more than gubernatorial races. It also breaks down congressional races and they all say the same thing: black people are still not voting for the republican party. The difference between 2016 and 2018 (ie. "moving") is negligible to non-existent.

 

Second, you have said "conservatives" multiple times in this thread and are using it interchangeably with "Trump". Then you steer the conversation back to Trump when I post numbers that show how black people are not turning conservative. If you don't like my links and/or data, you should pay closer attention to the actual words you're using because that's what I'm responding to.

On one hand you've repeatedly scolded me for substituting "conservative" for Trump-- and that is fair.  Yet you use data for gubernatorial AND congressional elections to counter my assertion that the black approval rating HAS improved since Trump took office.  If you are going to demand 100% commitment to a single aspect of the discussion then why are you using data not directly related to Trump? 

 

You've also admitted to "spamming me with data"

Why is that?  No need to do that stuff

If we are going to have a reasonable discussion let's try and find some common ground and take it from there.  

[ewen21]

 

Yup, that's why it's not what you sell that's important, but how you sell it.  Dems have to resist branding their ideas as socialist if they want to win.

 

I don't agree with "branding" a political party as if it is a product and we are consumers.  That is what happened in public education across America.  You had high placed administrators calling members of their community/constituency "customers" as if they actually had a choice as to whether or not they could pay school taxes.

 

As far as the socialist tag goes, you may want to take Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez aside and and talk to about it.  I, for one, applaud Joe Lieberman:

MR. SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (I-CT): Really the point was, what is the Democratic party going to be? I am still a Democrat and when I see somebody that really says she is a Socialist, she is a very charismatic, captivating candidate but if you look at the policies, those are not policies that will be supported very many places across America. If her win makes her into what Kellyanne Conway calls it “the new face of the Democratic party”, the Democratic party will not have a bright future...

 

[PseudoSABR]

 

I don't agree with "branding" a political party as if it is a product and we are consumers.  That is what happened in public education across America.  You had high placed administrators calling members of their community/constituency "customers" as if they actually had a choice as to whether or not they could pay school taxes.

 

As far as the socialist tag goes, you may want to take Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez aside and and talk to about it.  I, for one, applaud Joe Lieberman:

MR. SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (I-CT): Really the point was, what is the Democratic party going to be? I am still a Democrat and when I see somebody that really says she is a Socialist, she is a very charismatic, captivating candidate but if you look at the policies, those are not policies that will be supported very many places across America. If her win makes her into what Kellyanne Conway calls it “the new face of the Democratic party”, the Democratic party will not have a bright future...

Well, Joe is wrong, because the policies are popular, and that's what Nate Silver's tweet is about.  Although I agree, branding isn't quite the right word when comes to how Americans feel about socialism, because the Democrats don't really own the product of socialism, but, I think for obvious reasons (the cold war, McCarthistic tendencies) socialism has been something of a dirty word in our culture.  (For my part, Joe Lieberman is exactly the kind of establishment democrat that the party should leave behind.)

 

Although if the Democrats want to embrace these policies, they either need to find a more palatable way of characterizing those policies or change how Americans think of socialism, which perhaps can be done through something like branding.  Democrats should realize however, that whatever policy they adopt, they will be labeled socialists and crazy lefties by the right, no matter how reasonable they are.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

On one hand you've repeatedly scolded me for substituting "conservative" for Trump-- and that is fair.  Yet you use data for gubernatorial AND congressional elections to counter my assertion that the black approval rating HAS improved since Trump took office.  If you are going to demand 100% commitment to a single aspect of the discussion then why are you using data not directly related to Trump? 

 

You've also admitted to "spamming me with data"

Why is that?  No need to do that stuff

If we are going to have a reasonable discussion let's try and find some common ground and take it from there.  

I use actual election data because that's the most reliable data we have available to us. Approval rating waxes and wanes on almost a daily basis because there's nothing substantial on the line about saying you approve/disapprove of a person in the middle of February. On the other hand, polling people immediately after they cast an actual ballot means something because the person actually invested in something right there in the moment. Their decision is more informed and they just made a decision one way or the other; if a person is ever going to not be indecisive about politics, the ballot box is where it will happen.

 

And did you honestly just ask why I'm link-spamming data and suggest that it's somehow disruptive to our conversation?

 

If you don't want me to link spam you with data, stop making factually inaccurate statements based on a handful of YouTube videos. You don't get to use anecdotal evidence to form an opinion and then declare that I'm being mean because I rebut your point with actual numbers.

 

You have actually declared the following in this thread:

 

"Have your views, but don't pretend for a second that there isn't a movement toward conservatism for African Americans during this last year."

 

There is no ambiguity in that statement. You are declaring definitively that a thing is happening and the rest of us are somehow deluded to believe otherwise.

 

You post nothing beyond anecdotes from YouTube. I post actual large-sweeping numbers in response. Your gut feelings do not hold the same weight as actual voting data. Full stop.

[ewen21]

 

 

 

You have actually declared the following in this thread:

 

"Have your views, but don't pretend for a second that there isn't a movement toward conservatism for African Americans during this last year."

 

 

Blexit and #walkaway are not movements toward conservatism on the part of African Americans?

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Blexit and #walkaway are not movements toward conservatism on the part of African Americans?

Dude, do you seriously not understand what I'm saying at this point?

 

Yes, those movements exist. Black Americans, who number in the tens of millions, do not have a homogenous belief system. Shocking, I know, but it's true.

 

Those movements can exist and still be irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Like I said in one of my first posts of this conversation, there are YouTube videos of black people defending slavery.

 

But it'd be pretty irrational to watch one of those videos and form an opinion about the other tens of millions of black Americans because one pro-slavery video had 1753 likes.

 

Which is what you've done consistently in this discussion.

[MMMordabito]

 

Although if the Democrats want to embrace these policies, they either need to find a more palatable way of characterizing those policies or change how Americans think of socialism, which perhaps can be done through something like branding.  Democrats should realize however, that whatever policy they adopt, they will be labeled socialists and crazy lefties by the right, no matter how reasonable they are.

 

They also have to figure out in advance what to do when the producers decide that they have had enough of paying for other people to not produce and either leave the system or simply stop producing themselves.

[ewen21]

 

Well, Joe is wrong, because the policies are popular, and that's what Nate Silver's tweet is about.  Although I agree, branding isn't quite the right word when comes to how Americans feel about socialism, because the Democrats don't really own the product of socialism, but, I think for obvious reasons (the cold war, McCarthistic tendencies) socialism has been something of a dirty word in our culture.  (For my part, Joe Lieberman is exactly the kind of establishment democrat that the party should leave behind.)

 

Although if the Democrats want to embrace these policies, they either need to find a more palatable way of characterizing those policies or change how Americans think of socialism, which perhaps can be done through something like branding.  Democrats should realize however, that whatever policy they adopt, they will be labeled socialists and crazy lefties by the right, no matter how reasonable they are.

Name me a country where a socialist government actually worked.  Better yet, explain to me your impression of how many Americans emigrated to socialist nations as compared to those who emigrated to the US from socialist nations.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Name me a country where a socialist government actually worked. 

Finland. Norway. Denmark. Britain. Germany. Japan.

 

I can keep going if you like.

[ewen21]

 

Dude, do you seriously not understand what I'm saying at this point?

 

Yes, those movements exist. Black Americans, who number in the tens of millions, do not have a homogenous belief system. Shocking, I know, but it's true.

 

Those movements can exist and still be irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Like I said in one of my first posts of this conversation, there are YouTube videos of black people defending slavery.

 

.

 

You put these #walkway videos on the same level as those videos from African American's defending slavery.  The way you put them together suggests you view both as being equally as dumb.  Please explain why you have mentioned these two things together at least twice.  I find it to be blatantly disrespectful to African Americans who have made a choice not to align themselves with the democrat party for you to mention them with those "defending slavery"

 

[PseudoSABR]

 

They also have to figure out in advance what to do when the producers decide that they have had enough of paying for other people to not produce and either leave the system or simply stop producing themselves.

Empty threat.  As long as those producers still make profit they will do so, and if they cannot make profit, the should be replaced with someone who can.   Corporations have been making record profits.  I don't buy that Wal-Mart will suddenly close it's doors because their substantial piece of the pie got a bit smaller.

 

And really, socialism shouldn't be reduced to "paying for other people to not produce," that's just nonsense.   If we want to attach welfare with job training, and organize work for them to do, I am all about it, but that will be pricier in the long run (but welfare isn't new or even at issue in this election).   Paying for health care, education isn't paying people to not produce, in fact its an investment, and frees up a lot dollars to buy goods, which is what producers should actually want.

 

How do you feel about corporate structure and limited liability? Those are government enforced non-natural market conditions that allows debts to go unpaid (and externalities unaccounted for), or put another way it privatizes the profits of a company while socializing the risk of its business.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

You put these #walkway videos on the same level as those videos from African American's defending slavery.  The way you put them together suggests you view both as being equally as dumb.  Please explain why you have mentioned these two things together at least twice.  I find it to be blatantly disrespectful to African Americans who have made a choice not to align themselves with the democrat party for you to mention them with those "defending slavery"

*bangs face on table*

No, they're not the same thing. I am not disrespecting black Republicans in the slightest bit. Every individual has the right to their own opinion.

 

What I'm doing is acknowledging they exist but not in substantial enough numbers to matter when looking at the big picture.

 

Because, when it comes to the actual ballot box, black Americans are still voting pretty much the same way they've been voting for the past couple of decades (and actually, the numbers have mostly trended more to the Democrat side, not against it).

[PseudoSABR]

 

 

Finland. Norway. Denmark. Britain. Germany. Japan.

 

I can keep going if you like.

America.  Our military, police, firefighters, our schools, our post office, our national parks, arguably our utilities on and on. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Empty threat.  As long as those producers still make profit they will do so, and if they cannot make profit, the should be replaced with someone who can.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm terrified of pissing off my 21st century producer overlord.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

America.  Our military, police, firefighters, our schools, our post office, our national parks, arguably our utilities on and on. 

 

Yeah, I was going to post something about that but it felt so obviously snarky that I refrained from doing it. 

[NumberThree]

Well, Joe is wrong, because the policies are popular, and that's what Nate Silver's tweet is about. Although I agree, branding isn't quite the right word when comes to how Americans feel about socialism, because the Democrats don't really own the product of socialism, but, I think for obvious reasons (the cold war, McCarthistic tendencies) socialism has been something of a dirty word in our culture. (For my part, Joe Lieberman is exactly the kind of establishment democrat that the party should leave behind.)

 

Although if the Democrats want to embrace these policies, they either need to find a more palatable way of characterizing those policies or change how Americans think of socialism, which perhaps can be done through something like branding. Democrats should realize however, that whatever policy they adopt, they will be labeled socialists and crazy lefties by the right, no matter how reasonable they are.

Joe Lieberman isn’t a Democrat. He left the party years ago to become an independent but caucuses with the Republicans. So, there is no leaving him behind because he removed himself.

[Vanimal46]

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm terrified of pissing off my 21st century producer overlord.

 

Producers are more than just assembly line robots... As a sales guy, if my future compensation is capped or my hard earned commission is shared with others that are not producing I'm going to be upset.

[MMMordabito]

 

Finland. Norway. Denmark. Britain. Germany. Japan.

 

I can keep going if you like.

 

While I probably wouldn't have even asked the question, because there are versions of socialism that have worked, I'm not sure all of those countries can have their situations fairly compared to the US.

 

Finland has 5-6 million people.  I find it difficult to project their situation to the US.

 

Denmark and Japan have lots of policies in place that either keep everything homogeneous or force values to promote assimilation.

 

Britain is quite the mess itself right now, so I don't think they would be a good example of what to do.

 

I'm not quite as schooled on Germany on Norway, but I do know that you are dealing with significantly less population. 

[PseudoSABR]

 

 

You put these #walkway videos on the same level as those videos from African American's defending slavery.  The way you put them together suggests you view both as being equally as dumb.  Please explain why you have mentioned these two things together at least twice.  I find it to be blatantly disrespectful to African Americans who have made a choice not to align themselves with the democrat party for you to mention them with those "defending slavery"

You are still trying to use anecdotal evidence (youtube videos and websites) as a fact showing a TREND in Black Americans flocking to conservative values.   That's not a trend, it's a trickle.  We all accept that Black Conservatives exist, but you've pointed to no object facts that there is a trend in the aggregate. 

 

There's a recent example of how anecdotal evidence to prove/disprove a claim, see Rep. Meadows from Cohen's hearing. 

 

Likewise, I'm sure we've all seen those Trump supporters who are upset about their tax returns from twitter and else where, yet his base report is unchanged.  Anecdotal evidence is largely meaningless, especially, when the same pieces of evidence get recycled by the groups whose narrative that bit of evidence backs.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Producers are more than just assembly line robots... As a sales guy, if my future compensation is capped or my hard earned commission is shared with others that are not producing I'm going to be upset.

You miss my point. Automation has been sapping labor's influence for decades. Our slow, steady slide away from wealth equity isn't merely from tax reform. The bulk of that slide away from a strong middle class lays squarely on the shoulders of automation. What once took three middle class jobs now takes just one. Up and down industry, across various fields of work, automation is sucking the life out of the middle class.

 

For example, the old Packard plant from the 1950s took 45,000 employees to build ~150,000 cars a year.

 

Mazda (and Toyota? can't remember their partner in the deal) just built a plant that will produce ~300,000 cars a year and requires only 3,000 employees to do it.

[PseudoSABR]

 

 

While I probably wouldn't have even asked the question, because there are versions of socialism that have worked, I'm not sure all of those countries can have their situations fairly compared to the US.

 

Finland has 5-6 million people.  I find it difficult to project their situation to the US.

 

Denmark and Japan have lots of policies in place that either keep everything homogeneous or force values to promote assimilation.

 

Britain is quite the mess itself right now, so I don't think they would be a good example of what to do.

 

I'm not quite as schooled on Germany on Norway, but I do know that you are dealing with significantly less population. 

You're right there's no good cognate.  Maybe Germany with it's education system (free college for foreigners? how do they manage that?); I don't know how they run their healthcare over there.

 

I don't think we should be afraid to experiment, and then abandoned a socialist project if it proves untenable.   (If we can survive bailing out the banks, and these recent tax cuts, we can survive the cost of higher taxes over the short run to pay for even ill-fated programs).