Election Day

[Joe Fan]

A new post-election survey by YouGov shows that 69% of US voters do not believe the news media are honest and truthful
https://today.yougov.com/results/


And 78% of voters believe news coverage of the presidential race was biased per the Media Research Center,
http://www.mrc.org/about

 

[I35]

He doesnt know
He has already admitted as much in the alt.right thread -- which he started -- with the title of "What is the alt.right?"

I didn't notice that thread. I'll go read it to see what it's about.

 

[Seattle Husker]

He doesnt know
He has already admitted as much in the alt.right thread -- which he started -- with the title of "What is the alt.right?"

Thanks for speaking for me but I'll speak for myself, thank you. I've had an opportunity to study them since that post.

What is the alt-right in my own words? An online community of white nationalists who believe our European cultural heritage is superior to all others. This breeds a contempt for multi-culturalism, immigration and feminism. Race is at the center of this extreme brand of conservatism.

Given it's online roots, the alt-right is technology savvy, not particularly religious and has a vehement disdain for political correctness. Like anarchists, it revels in inciting animosity from the bearers of the 3 previously mentioned policies. I'm not sure it's truly anti-semetic but it enjoys the ethos of being a flamethrower and nobody is easier to troll than the Jewish community and they don't care what you or I think or say.

Though Brietbart has claimed to be a home for the alt-right, their real home is in 4chan, Twitter, Reddit and other darker places of the internet. We see it in the form of clever memes like those incessantly posted by Joe Fan.

What is the ultimate goal of the alt-right? To burn it all down. The establishment, political correctness, major parties, current political system, etc. are all targets. What do they want to replace it with? That's not defined but you can be sure that it would be based on white nationalism.

I think the alt-right is the internet equivalent of anarchists. They don't have an end in mind but hate the "now" and love the reaction to the fires they start. Here comes the hard part, now their "leaders" are actually in charge. What to do now? It's easy to take potshots at the establishment when you are on the outside but now they are the establishment. Good luck.

 

[mchammer]

So, someone is a deplorable if he or she is against multi-culturalism, immigration, and feminism? Where do I sign up?

 

[Seattle Husker]

So, someone is a deplorable if he or she is against multi-culturalism, immigration, and feminism? Where do I sign up?

That's not my word but if you ascribe to the targets, support the actions and generally have no end goal then you too may be alt-right.

 

[mchammer]

That's not my word but if you ascribe to the targets, support the actions and generally have no end goal then you too may be alt-right.

I think the target is cultural Marxism, not the establishment per se, but that is just an uninformed guess.

 

[Mr. Deez]

What is the alt-right in my own words? An online community of white nationalists who believe our European cultural heritage is superior to all others. This breeds a contempt for multi-culturalism, immigration and feminism. Race is at the center of this extreme brand of conservatism.

There are many strains of alt-right as there are of all political movements and ideologies, but I think it's important to specify why alt-righters are hostile to multiculturalism and immigration. Many conservatives oppose multiculturalism and immigration because of economics and a desire to assimilate present immigrants before taking in more, but that is pragmatic, not ideological. Like far right advocates in Europe, alt-righters tend to think that ethnicity is inseparable from culture. If you aren't of a Western European ethnicity, then you aren't part of Western civilization and can't be part of a Western culture. To an American conservative a Pakistani cab driver can be positive member of Western civilization. To an alt-righter, he can't be.

Also, unlike mainstream conservatives in the US and more like far right Europeans, I don't sense much hostility to an activist government or much preference for free enterprise from alt-righters. Their focus seems to be on social and cultural issues but not the same issues as the religious right tends to care about. In fact, some (such as the flamboyantly gay Milo Yiannopolous) mock them a little. It's more on social and cultural issues that relate to ethnic nationalism and protection.

 

[mchammer]

So they are western civ slobs that put down other cultures. God forbid!

 

[iatrogenic]

The alt-right is simply a way for disingenuous liberals to conflate conservative views with fringe members of society. Just read the post above; You can't be against multiculturalism, feminism, and immigration unless you're a racist. You can't be against those three political positions unless your an anarchist. In fact, being against something held near and dear by the left is "inciting" anarchy, as opposed to "disagreeing". This fictional but intentional grouping of individuals with different values and desires "may not be anti-Semitic, but they must be anti-Semitic." The goal of this newly invented group the left has conjured, conservatives+fringe, is to "destroy everything", not to put an end to the distasteful, faulty political positions of the left. Therefore, the liberals attempt conflate the best of society with the worst of society in hopes of advancing their repeatedly failed policies.

 

[Musburger1]

I voted for Trump, primarily because I thought he offered the best possibility to remove or diminish the Neocon leadership that has steered foreign policy since at least the late 90's. Our aggressive military interventions has reached the point where catastrophic conflict with Russia and/or China has become a strong possibility.

What scares me about Trump is the possibility that he not only does not remove the Neocons, but actually is co-opted by them. The potential selections of Bolton and Guliani as Secretary of State are concerning.

On top of this, as the economy struggles, the Alt-Right movements will gain strength and racial tensions increase. So you have an aggressive foreign policy combined with a more authoritarian domestic policy. Oh boy.

 

[mchammer]

I voted for Trump, primarily because I thought he offered the best possibility to remove or diminish the Neocon leadership that has steered foreign policy since at least the late 90's. Our aggressive military interventions has reached the point where catastrophic conflict with Russia and/or China has become a strong possibility.

What scares me about Trump is the possibility that he not only does not remove the Neocons, but actually is co-opted by them. The potential selections of Bolton and Guliani as Secretary of State are concerning.

On top of this, as the economy struggles, the Alt-Right movements will gain strength and racial tensions increase. So you have an aggressive foreign policy combined with a more authoritarian domestic policy. Oh boy.

Read this about Bannon's philosophy on this in his own words.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfede...entire-world?utm_term=.cbyyxpZLdn#.sdQ5N8bE6B

 

[Musburger1]

Read this about Bannon's philosophy on this in his own words.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfede...entire-world?utm_term=.cbyyxpZLdn#.sdQ5N8bE6B

I feel somewhat better about him. I haven't read the whole thing. I'd like to know his thoughts about international capital mobility. In other words, he seems to equate the failure of capitalism with cronyism (and I agree that's a huge problem) but places less emphasis on corporations ability to pack up and move to another country. In my opinion, that is also why capitalism has failed for many Americans.

 

[mchammer]

I feel somewhat better about him. I haven't read the whole thing. I'd like to know his thoughts about international capital mobility. In other words, he seems to equate the failure of capitalism with cronyism (and I agree that's a huge problem) but places less emphasis on corporations ability to pack up and move to another country. In my opinion, that is also why capitalism has failed for many Americans.

Yes he speaks to that as well. Called secularized capitalism that treats people like commodities.

 

[Clean]

The goal of this newly invented group the left has conjured

I think you hit the nail on the head. The alt right is just a boogey man that the Left raised up to replace their old boogey man, the Tea Party, since the Tea Party has pretty much faded away.

The Left sounded the warning siren for the alt right during the election because the Left always needs the threat of barbarians at the gate, from which only they can protect the decent common folk. The Left explains that the new boogey man is truly horrible and a serious threat to the common folk. It accuses them of all things bad; racism, xenophobia, misogyny, anti-Semitism, etc., etc. Then, of course, the Left associates its enemies with the new boogey man and claims that it's sins are Donald Trump's sins, or whoever they're attacking.

The alt right exists no where except on the internet. It has no formal ideology or membership. When it opposes something, some of its adherents post a few internet memes on the net, which they hope will go viral and spread the message. Scary stuff!

 

[Seattle Husker]

Yes he speaks to that as well. Called secularized capitalism that treats people like commodities.

Again, putting the religious lens on this makes little sense to me. Crony capitalism is crony capitalism. Capitalism unregulated and unfettered is what has resulted in the ever increasing wage gap in America and elsewhere. That has nothing to do with Christian, Muslim or Buddhist beliefs.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Clean Johnson is right about Iatrogenic Johnson being right!

 

[mchammer]

Again, putting the religious lens on this makes little sense to me. Crony capitalism is crony capitalism. Capitalism unregulated and unfettered is what has resulted in the ever increasing wage gap in America and elsewhere. That has nothing to do with Christian, Muslim or Buddhist beliefs.

Well he was speaking to a conference in the Vatican, so maybe that was his spin on it for the audience. Also, in a less secular age, the capitalists did not make as much money as today. What is your reason why?

 

[Seattle Husker]

Also, in a less secular age, the capitalists did not make as much money as today. What is your reason why?

Three reasons:

1) The market wasn't as evolved and interconnected globally. 150+ years ago you might make a single investment or simply invest in your own infrastructure. Now an investor can invest globally in hundreds of deals within the same day.
2) The size and scope of investments if far reaching. Gone is any incentive to store your savings in a coffee can or even in a savings account. Everyone with money is invested in some way whether that be their retirement savings, their home and a myriad of other ways.
3) The safety net for the big banks is so effin' huge that risk tolerance has reached its zenith.

I know that's a simplification but the economics and evolution of our capital markets is quite unencumbered by Judeo-Christian ethos.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Well he was speaking to a conference in the Vatican, so maybe that was his spin on it for the audience.

Like HRC when talking to Wallstreet?

 

[Musburger1]

Also, in a less secular age, the capitalists did not make as much money as today. What is your reason why?

I don't think that statement is accurate. It depends on the era. You look at the time pre-union, especially when anti-trust laws were either non-existent or not enforced. You have capitalists such as Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, Ghetty, etc. that were every bit as wealthy as Bill Gates is today. The monopolies and cartels were able to dictate prices and the lack of regulation (child labor, few safety controls) held down costs.

The enforcement of anti-trust laws, the growth of unions, and the pricing power held by labor following WWII until perhaps the 80's allowed for more equality. But as large populations (China, India, Latin American countries, Bangladesh) opened up their labor markets and globalization deals allowed companies to move their capital and production virtually anywhere on Earth, the pendulum swang back to the holders of capital and away from those who derive their living by supplying labor. If you don't like what we're paying you and the benefits we've taken away, tough ****, we're going to move to Mexico, China, or Vietnam.

That's where we are today, but the system is beginning to deteriorate as the combinations of high debt levels and low wages begins to weaken demand and dissatisfaction with the system grows as exemplified by Brexit and the popularity of Trump and Sanders.

If Trumps tariffs and reduction of corporate tax rates brings back companies, there are going to be new challenges. Automation and robotics are going to drive wages down further. Those people who have access to technology and come up with ways to use it will make out quite well. Those who don't - probably most people - aren't going to do very well.

 

[Joe Fan]

Looking back at these things is still fun
It will eventually wear off
But not yet

So now that its over and his candidate lost, David Corn (Mother Jones) has declared the election "rigged!"

But here he was not long ago .......

 

[mchammer]

It never gets old.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Joe Fan]

amazing how quickly the narrative can change
just 10 days ago, she was going to be President

 

[Seattle Husker]

amazing how quickly the narrative can change
just 10 days ago, she was going to be President

Was the National Enquirer every pro-HRC? Isn't the publisher a close friend of Donald? They launched the bogus stories about Ted Cruz to the benefit of Trump. You know, Cruz' dad was the shooter on the grassy knoll and Ted was a philanderer. Both of which Trump tweeted and gave a wink and a nod to their validity.

 

[Joe Fan]

....You know, Cruz' dad was the shooter on the grassy knoll and Ted was a philanderer. ....

If American liberal Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone, then Cuba has always my #1 conspiracy option of choice.
I thought it made the most sense given how many times the Kennedy Brothers tried to kill Fidel

 

[Joe Fan]

There is at least one exit poll out there that says 58% of hispanic voters favor Trump’s Immigration policies

http://www.fairus.org/news/exit-pol...unish-candidates-who-support-immigration-enfo

 

[Joe Fan]

Still funny

 

[mchammer]

Still funny

You know, if the regressives actually believed that, it puts their shock into proper context. However I have a hard time believing anyone is that stupid. I always assumed this was done to dampen Trump voters. Maybe some of it was but some on the left was too stupid to see that it was merely propaganda.

 

[Mr. Deez]

If American liberal Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone, then Cuba has always my #1 conspiracy option of choice.
I thought it made the most sense given how many times the Kennedy Brothers tried to kill Fidel

So where does Cruz's father fit into this? I guess if Judge Curiel can be unfair because he's a Mexican, then Rafael Cruz can be an accessory to a presidential assassination because he's a Cuban. I wonder where Desi Arnaz and Jose Canseco fit into the assassination.