Can Conservatives ever quit the Southern Strategy?

[stomination]

It's not an exact art, just pointing out that big ol' space in between the true far left and US liberals.

And stalin was pretty far on the left just to far on the UP.

[Mormolyce]

It's not an exact art, just pointing out that big ol' space in between the true far left and US liberals.

I mean, quick illustration, Bernie the pinko commie is currently proposing the unthinkable socialism of universal health care, something the rest of the civilised world has had for 60 years.

[Flarelaine]

The Southern Strategy is growing stronger. Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin and beginning to show signs that they are voting more like southern states. Trump flipped those in 2016 but that was actually flipping them early. They had been trending republican for some time. The general theory is that states move right (or left) by first electing more and more republicans to state offices and then in 10 years or so the entire state tilts right.

Not entirely independent of the fact that there is redistricting every 10 years.

Just sayin'.

[Scathbais]

and instead all of that is happening under Trump, GG.

Minus the public corruption and the self enrichment at the public's expense (he is already rich).

[Glorious Leader]

Minus the public corruption and the self enrichment at the public's expense (he is already rich).

Thats ridiculous. Trump is enriching himself and his family at tax payer expense every day.

[Sky High]

Minus the public corruption and the self enrichment at the public's expense (he is already rich).

Uuuuuh except he's doing just that? You think weekend golf trips and having events at Mara Lagos doesn't count? We know that CEO's and lobbyists go to those places so they can get confidential face time with him, this isn't some mystery.

[Felya]

That is a really good point. There are more people getting engaged politics. It will be interesting to see if both sides can get new blood to replace the politicians that no longer represent the new generation.

How long have these forums existed? And they only recently got the politics section. Probably because the people visiting got older, and more political.

It got created because politics were overwhelming gen-ot and people were upset not enough viewers were responding to their wafu fan fic... I mean dates. It's similar to folks constantly demanding this to be an anti-Trump forum, because it ignores politics that are positive or don't include Trump.

It can be argued that the creation of the subforum is to get away from politics, not embracing it. My news feed usually includes at least one article on how to deal with stress caused by politics. I think the general opinion is that politics has overwhelmed pop culture. Think of it this way... both, the people who support Trump and want all the negativity to go away and those who want Trump out, so negativity can go away, both want the same outcome. The difference is in how it's achieved, but in both cases, people want less politics.

[Scathbais]

Uuuuuh except he's doing just that? You think weekend golf trips and having events at Mara Lagos doesn't count? We know that CEO's and lobbyists go to those places so they can get confidential face time with him, this isn't some mystery.

Now you are just making up "facts" to fit your opinions. Nice try though

Edit: the facts are, that he doesn't need the money, so how exactly can a lobbyist or CEO buy influence like they did with Hillary?

[Sky High]

Now you are just making up "facts" to fit your opinions. Nice try though

I mean, are you even trying here?

[unfilteredJW]

Now you are just making up "facts" to fit your opinions. Nice try though

Edit: the facts are, that he doesn't need the money, so how exactly can a lobbyist or CEO buy influence like they did with Hillary?

It's not about need. It's about greed.

This are incredibly simple concepts to understand.

[Sky High]

Edit: the facts are, that he doesn't need the money, so how exactly can a lobbyist or CEO buy influence like they did with Hillary?

says who? you? pfffft, /fuck outta here

[Glorious Leader]

Now you are just making up "facts" to fit your opinions. Nice try though

Edit: the facts are, that he doesn't need the money, so how exactly can a lobbyist or CEO buy influence like they did with Hillary?

The clintons didnt need the money either theyre also extremely wealthy. Which we know cause hillary released her tax returns. Trump has had to declare multiple bankruptcies in the past and refused to disclosr his tax information so we have no idea who hes in hock to.

Fact is though all of that is irellevant. Trump could have the best finances. The greatest believe me and it wouldnt matter he could still be and is enriching himself further at tax payer expense. Its an obvious conflict of interest, a potential violation of the emoluments clause and if trump supporters werent such cucks theyd stand up to it.

[Scathbais]

says who? you? pfffft, /fuck outta here

Says common sense? How can you bribe a billionaire? He has everything he could ever want.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not about need. It's about greed.

This are incredibly simple concepts to understand.

You assume based on zero facts. The only facts are that he is wealthy beyond the need to allow people to buy his favor.

- - - Updated - - -

Thats ridiculous. Trump is enriching himself and his family at tax payer expense every day.

You have zero factual information so support this statement.

- - - Updated - - -

says who? you? pfffft, /fuck outta here

Says common sense? How can you bribe a billionaire? He has everything he could ever want.

- - - Updated - - -

The clintons didnt need the money either theyre also extremely wealthy. Which we know cause hillary released her tax returns. Trump has had to declare multiple bankruptcies in the past and refused to disclosr his tax information so we have no idea who hes in hock to.

Your convenient ignorance regarding the Clinton's finances is astounding. Remember they were dead broke when they left the white house and then used their foundation and Hillary's position as secretary of state to trade influence for millions of dollars. That is why they are now extremely wealthy.

[Fugus]

Says common sense? How can you bribe a billionaire? He has everything he could ever want.
<SNIP>

1) We don't know for sure if he even is a Billionaire, no economist worth a damn believes he is worth near what he claims and by all accounts, he is worth less than if he had never worked a day in his life and just invested it.

2) Fake billionaires can actually be bribed fairly easily with large amounts as it helps to help fund that lie and to get them closer to turning that lie into a reality.

3) Even real billionaires can be bribed with large amounts of money, especially if they already feel untouchable. They passed the point of needing the money a LONG time before that point and they are just running up the high score at that point.

Remember this is a guy who tries to use his charity to purchase stuff for him instead of spending his own money and is actively trying to funnel taxpayer money into his businesses. Bribing him is still possible, especially if he is lying about his overall worth.

[Theodarzna]

I'd love it if identity politics was not the main focus of either platform, and instead be concerned with actual polices. But who am I kidding?

Identity politics is ultimately going to be the essence of politics in any society that is heterogeneous.

[Sky High]

Says common sense? How can you bribe a billionaire? He has everything he could ever want.

So are the Clintons, but I'm SURE you feel the same way about them, oh wait.

[Theodarzna]

Or we could get to the point that we all realize we aren't so different and the difference we see are the same ones we share with our direct family.

We are likely never to reach that point because identity is something all have, and identity by nature is exclusive. An identity that encompasses all is an identity that really doesn't mean anything.

I mean you could argue for a kind of Civic Patriotism, but with globalization being the goal of the elite and thus every state slated to be made Liberal Secular Democracies like America, Canada, or Denmark with multicultural or cosmopolitan composition (Or that is the goal I assume) why would you be loyal to any state in particular? The only identity that can have much meaning will likely be ethnic. I mean look at America now, its largely racial/ethnic. The GOP has the Southern Strategy and the DNC hopes for the decline and shrinking of White Americans.

[Zython]

Nah, the right is in WAY too deep at this point, and probably has been since 1994, or even earlier. They're going to ride this to its natural conclusion.

Welcome to the Fourth Reich.

[PC2]

Identity politics is ultimately going to be the essence of politics in any society that is heterogeneous.

Maybe as a temporary phase. Societies driven by attributes are going to decline relative to the ones driven by behavior. Even a heterogeneous society will eventually realize that identity has no bearing on whether or not a policy is beneficial or harmful to the society.

[Theodarzna]

Maybe as a temporary phase. Any society driven by attributes is going to decline to the ones that are driven by behavior. Even a heterogeneous society will eventually realize that identity has no bearing on whether or not a policy is beneficial or harmful to the society.

Why? The effects of identity in politics are extremely beneficial to group cohesion and group success. After all the Black Community has achieved a great deal from its identity based politics, the White Working Class and Hispanics, as well as pretty much every group has achieved its ends and interests only through that and at the end of the day people want to belong to something and have some sense of community. If ones Civic polity is meaningless, indistinct or otherwise just a sterile bureaucratic instrument, ethnic identity becomes the only anchor of identity left and the only thing left standing for people to orient around for any sort of political action or mass movements.