DNC Leadership:Israel Hating, Jew Hating, America Hating Muslim Named Deputy Chair

Deez I do think your personal dislike for Trump is going to cause you to hear it "bigly" because that reinforces your opinion of him as a moron who makes up words. I heard "Big League" because those are actual words, and I give him the benefit of the doubt because I do not think he is a moron. So there you go. Some folks are more predisposed to hear a non-word, I guess, even tho the use of actual words is more plausible, IMO.
 
Phil Elliott said:
Deez I do think your personal dislike for Trump is going to cause you to hear it "bigly" because that reinforces your opinion of him as a moron who makes up words. I heard "Big League" because those are actual words, and I give him the benefit of the doubt because I do not think he is a moron. So there you go. Some folks are more predisposed to hear a non-word, I guess, even tho the use of actual words is more plausible, IMO.
Click to expand...

First, I don't personally dislike Trump. If I did, I wouldn't take up for him when I think he's right and attack his critics when I think they're wrong. Second, I don't think he's a moron. I think he glosses over things, oversimplifies them, and jumps to conclusions. Third, I'm not actually the one who caught it. My wife did. We went back and listened to it repeatedly. It sounded like bigly, and again, in context, it made more sense.
 
djimaplon said:
Meaning with regards to the word itself or of the utterer? But hey everyone (here) seems love his lack of precision and nuance.
Click to expand...

I guess the utterer. When Trump said "bigly," I knew what he meant, even if it's not a word. As for his supporters, they fall into two camps. Some find his lack of precision and nuance charming because more literate people on the Left don't like it. Others think he's doing it on purpose to achieve some goal - like he's playing 4-D chess.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Others think he's doing it on purpose to achieve some goal - like he's playing 4-D chess.
Click to expand...

It's not 4-D chess (and i suspect the fact you said "like" you yourself are not convinced). It's a product of complete improvisation and gut instinct and diametrically opposite from his predecessor's somewhat over-deliberative nature. Some may view it as genius, I find it to be intellectually lazy. But that's because I happen to think words actually have meaning. I would like to think (hope, if I may channel Sen. McCain) that there are plenty of literate people on the right that don't like it also.
 
djimaplon said:
I would like to think (hope, if I may channel Sen. McCain) that there are plenty of literate people on the right that don't like it also.
Click to expand...

There are plenty on the Right who don't like it, but we are a dying breed and lost the primary election. The video of Ted Cruz arguing with the Trump supporter says it all. I didn't support Cruz, but he what he was saying was right. However, rather than addressing his point, the guy just started yelling, "Lyin' Ted!" That was a metaphor for the entire direction of the GOP. Logic, intellectualism, maturity, and ideological principles were cast aside and ridiculed while bluster and belligerence were admired as preferred traits. Or to use another metaphor, Trump was the high school bully on the football team, and Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich were the scrawny dorks with pocket protectors in the chess club that he gave wedgies to and shoved into lockers while others laughed and cheered him on.

What's remarkable is that I remember a day when conservatives used to lament elements of black culture that would ridicule (as "acting white") other blacks who became educated. Well, many within the GOP now do the same thing. If you're intelligent or even if you aren't particularly intelligent but just think the President should act like an adult, you're ridiculed as acting like a liberal elite.
 
djimaplon said:
Some may view it as genius, I find it to be intellectually lazy. But that's because I happen to think words actually have meaning.
Click to expand...

The statement that "words have meaning" is not disputed by anyone, and to hear a liberal criticize conservatives for lack of precision and nuance is ironic. The proper question is, "Who decides what that meaning is?" For example, do the words "freedom of speech" mean the freedom to express your opinion even if such opinion is in conflict with the view of others, or does freedom of speech mean that intellectually energetic liberals on college campuses should be allowed to cancel speeches from speakers with whom they disagree? Should liberal judicial activist judges be allowed to assign their own, sometimes diametrically opposite, special meaning to the words describing laws based on the judge's view of justice in the context of contemporaneous society, or should such improvisation and gut instinct be ignored in favor of what the words in the Constitution commonly meant to the framers of the document at the time the words were written? Should liberal P C police get to decide who, and to what degree, a liberal is offended by certain words and phrases according to the liberal's interpretation of the phrase, and then use such interpretations in an attempt to force P C speech, safe zones, and arbitrary notions and emotions on others with whom they are in conflict?
 
Joe Fan said:
Ellison spent years associated with and defending this guy ....
Click to expand...

Sounds like Obama's preacher; "Not God Bless America, God Damn America".

They hate the very country that made them rich (at least in Farrakhan's case) and infamous. Go figure.
 
Apparently Dems are seriously talking up a Booker-Warren ticket for 2020



giphy.gif
 
First let me acknowledge your changing the subject or at least expanding discussion. Not saying anything wrong with that, just stating it as fact, since the portion of the thread pertained to Trump. Perhaps it's a tactic or maybe you just dont have anything to add within scope. That said, I acknowledge that the Trump conversation is too off topic from your original post.

iatrogenic said:
... and to hear a liberal criticize conservatives for lack of precision and nuance is ironic. ?
Click to expand...

Ooh the dirty L word (or maybe I am misunderstanding your meaning). So whatever follows falls on deaf ears I suppose, but as long as I am what you say, at least in your mind, and seem to know "what is proper" I might as well "persist" and play the part.

Since we are talking about meaning, perhaps let's start with the definition of irony: the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic.

Out the gate, we start with ad hominen. Or maybe that's just the oversensitive PC liberal coming out.

iatrogenic said:
The proper question is, "Who decides what that meaning is?"
Click to expand...

The answer to your question as who decides what meaning is? I would say the lowest common denominator, the individual, assuming said individual is a rational adult capable of making such judgements and decisions. That said there are social norms and consensus that that form and influence meaning.

iatrogenic said:
For example, do the words "freedom of speech" mean the freedom to express your opinion even if such opinion is in conflict with the view of others, or does freedom of speech mean that intellectually energetic liberals on college campuses should be allowed to cancel speeches from speakers with whom they disagree?
Click to expand...

What are you arguing here? That because you believe me to be liberal I justify the cancellation of speeches from speakers with which I disagree? Or because you believe me to be a liberal, I support what these "intellectually energetic liberals" did? Your following questions are just a repeat of the same straw man.
 
Last edited:
The big difference with Trump is he purposely targeted and gave these less literate people on the right (which far outnumber the educated ones) a voice to bring them out of the woodwork. He's claimed he's the voice of the forgotten man many times.

Bush tapped in to that segment pretty well and it paid off, but McCain and Romney were politician types these folk related far less to.

It's easy to see this is DT's calculated strategy to rally the common man. Like I've said, I've seen very serious business interviews with Trump where his vocabulary is highly complex, precise, and intellectual. I've seen him speak the same when addressing the GOP congress members at their retreat.

Then he addresses the public and begins going off on tangents and dumbing down to basic everyday speech so as many people as possible can relate.

His strategy was never to inspire intellects on the right. Which is why most backed Cruz or joined the neverTrump faction. His calculation was right as we all saw the results.

The thing is, even intellectuals can understand this basic speech plus the common folk. However, when a politician like Cruz gets all Harvard chatty, he loses a big chunk of lower educated people in the word play. Common folk saw Cruz as a worm politician.

Trump is far more calculated than many 'intellects' wish to accept. None of this is done by accident. Everybody and their grandma gave him relentless advice how to change tone, direction, demeanor, etc for the last year. He refused and won the Presidency against the most stacked deck in history. No other GOP candidate would've survived that biased onslaught. His calculated rallying of the common man won the day.
 
Last edited:
Brad Austin said:
.....The thing is, even intellectuals can understand this basic speech plus the common folk. However, when a politician like Cruz gets all Harvard chatty, he loses a big chunk of lower educated people in the word play.....
Click to expand...

Cruz made an effort. For example, he brought the accent out (which, Ive read, amused his Harvard friends). But, yeah, it didnt work.
 
Joe Fan said:
Cruz made an effort. For example, he brought the accent out (which, Ive read, amused his Harvard friends). But, yeah, it didnt work.
Click to expand...

He also badly miscalculated labeling DT with having "New York values".

On the surface it would seem as a rally cry to Southerners. But his delivery came off as a smug, manipulative prick, IMHO. I felt bad for conservative, rural New Yorkers who listened to that. Then DT popped him with the 9-11 uppercut. :smile1:
 
Joe Fan said:
That line played well in Texas, but he already had Texas
Click to expand...

I'm all Texan to the bone and just saw it as a calculated, divisive stunt. We'd had so much division under BO, that's the last thing I wanted more of with the Rep candidate.

Division due to personality or policy preferences is understandable, but Cruz trying to make it geographical was a bad call.

Especially with key states like PA, OH, MI and such all nearby and their people relating more to New Yorkers than Texans.
 
Brad Austin said:
The big difference with Trump is he purposely targeted and gave these less literate people on the right (which far outnumber the educated ones) a voice to bring them out of the woodwork. He's claimed he's the voice of the forgotten man many times.
Click to expand...

This succinctly sums up the DT victory.
"...there is a dark side to American populism. Some people win elections tapping into it. I'm not one of those people" - John McCain, per Game Change
 
djimaplon said:
This succinctly sums up the DT victory.
"...there is a dark side to American populism. Some people win elections tapping into it. I'm not one of those people" - John McCain, per Game Change
Click to expand...

I don't think he did it with malicious or deceitful intent like a typical politician. His policies certainly back up his promises to help the common man.
 
Brad Austin said:
I don't think he did it with malicious or deceitful intent like a typical politician. His policies certainly back up his promises to help the common man.
Click to expand...

Maybe no political calculation on his part, but its the difference between true belief and knowledge (been wanting to get a Theatetus reference in) Bannon on the other hand...
 
Brad Austin said:
I'm all Texan to the bone and just saw it as a calculated, divisive stunt. We'd had so much division under BO, that's the last thing I wanted more of with the Rep candidate.
Click to expand...
One big problem - the GOP nominated the most divisive candidate available.

I was actually persuaded by the "New York values" accusation by Cruz. It was obviously a calculated and self-serving stunt but that doesn't mean he was incorrect. Trump has described himself as a New York Democrat. How any true conservative voted for him in the primary is mind boggling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top