A History of Demagogues

[Lafayette]

Elizabeth Warren Warns:

There's a history of demagogues calling those they disagree with "terrorists" and using that as justification for intimidation and violence – and that history is ugly and dangerous.

There's also a history of people staying quiet for too long, hoping for the best but watching silently as the threat metastasizes. Donald Trump is a bigger, uglier threat every day that goes by – and it’s time for decent people everywhere – Republican, Democrat, Independent – to say No More Donald.

There's no virtue in silence.

Rarely in the history of US presidential elections has the campaign rhetoric stooped so low as with The Donald.

Would you want to trust your life and that of your family to an empassioned demagogue ... ?

 

[Centrehalf]

Elizabeth Warren Warns:

Rarely in the history of US presidential elections has the campaign rhetoric stooped so low as with The Donald.

Would you want to trust your life and that of your family to an empassioned demagogue ... ?

If Warren wants to be honest she should be calling out a lot more people than Trump. Bernie Sanders is a textbook example of a demagogue.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Elizabeth Warren Warns:

Rarely in the history of US presidential elections has the campaign rhetoric stooped so low as with The Donald.

Would you want to trust your life and that of your family to an empassioned demagogue ... ?

I think to many Warren would be considered a demogogue, a political leader who tries to get support by making false claims and promises and using arguments based on emotion rather than reason. She, because she is of a different politic stripe, does not like many of the issues that Trump is, by virtue of the force of his individual personality, bringing into the forefront. He is going around the mainstream agenda and using their underlying greed [they want viewers to watch their stations and Trump brings that] to get the media to do what he wants. Impressive if not brilliant.

Not a big Trump fan, but for a politician to take time to draw attention to this when she could/should more be concentrating on doing her own job is pure partisan silliness. That's what we send our elected legislators to do, not to start trying to play on the people's inordinate fears. There is so much bad, some downright evil, going on in the world that should be her focus...and she draws attention to Trump?

It is what it is, pure partisan demagoguery.

 

[Lafayette]

TRUMPERY!

I think to many Warren would be considered a demogogue, a political leader who tries to get support by making false claims and promises and using arguments based on emotion rather than reason.

Nice try, and very "Trumpian Trickery". You are turning the admonition upon the person who gave it. Won't work.

Trump is an excellent orator, and seems to have captured the attention of some American voters. But, his oratory is baleful.

See What Language Experts Find So Strange About Donald Trump

What you hear is not what you get, but with the American public bedazzled by the BoobTube, almost anything goes with his present "trumpery*".

If Trump becomes PotUS, the American people will have deserved him. And the consequences will be all theirs and nobody else's.

*And in case you did not go to the "trumpery" link above, here is its definition: Articles, practices, or beliefs of superficial appeal but little real value or worth.

 

[ocean515]

Elizabeth Warren Warns:

Rarely in the history of US presidential elections has the campaign rhetoric stooped so low as with The Donald.

Would you want to trust your life and that of your family to an empassioned demagogue ... ?

And what would Warren say about the demagogues running the Progressive Machine she is a party to?

However, pushing her Progressive blather aside, I think what is being seen in politics today is exactly what she is referring to. People have stayed quiet for too long.

They've watched radical Socialist Progressive agenda's becoming laws of the land, and done nothing.

They've watched the Progressive Machine take over media messaging, and have done little to counter the fabricated propaganda it produces daily.

They've stayed silent as liberal/progressive influence has empowered regulatory agencies tasked with controlling citizens who have little recourse.

And via Trumps rise in the polls, they are beginning to find a voice to counter lame propaganda dog whistles like this "bigger, uglier threat" nonsense Warren is trying to get the pack to bark at.

So Warren has a point, although she unknowingly shot herself in the foot with it.

 

[Lafayette]

A SAD HISTORY OF RECENT AMERICAN POLITICS

They've watched radical Socialist Progressive agenda's becoming laws of the land, and done nothing..

Pure, unadulterated bullsh*t.

What progressive agenda became a law of the land? I'll tell you the one and only, it was called ARRA, a bill passed in 2009 by Obama & Co (meaning a Dem HofR) that spent close to a billion dollars to stimulate a brain-dead economy. The consequence of which was to spike a spiraling Unemployment Rate at 10% in 2009 (see here: BLS Employment-to-population Ratio) that could otherwise have exploded to 15%.

Then, to thank Obama for that quick action to restart an economy brought to a halt by the Great Recession (spiked by the Toxic Waste Mess under a Replicant PotUS by the name of Bush), the American electorate - with consummate stoopidity - gave the HofR over to the Replicants in the 2010-midterms. (Of course, barely 38% of the electorate turned out to dump the HofR into the hands of the Replicant Party.)

And what did the Replicants do? Very quickly, we, the sheeple, were hearing a lot of talk about "Austerity Budgeting", meaning a complete refusal to employ more Stimulus-Spending to bring down quicker the Unemployment Rate. And why? A wicked electoral strategy the purpose of which was to that high-employment would remain in time for Obama's reelection in 2012. THAT is the kind of politics that the Replicants have played since they lost the White House - which they THINK is their natural preserve.

We have thus been in a Great Recession that took at the very least 3 years more to exit than would have been otherwise necessary had Obama been able to continue with Stimulus Spending!

HOW DID THE ROT HAPPEN?

Reckless Ronnie whilst in office made another gift to his rich friends. He reduced during his term upper-income taxation from 70% to below 30%.

See here: Historical Marginal Tax Rate for Highest and Lowest Income Earners (after deductions). Which simply fueled the gusher of wealth that was accumulating within a tiny percentage of the American public. See Prof Domhoff's (U of Cal.) research results: America's Net Worth and Financial Wealth.

Meaning what? This: Only 20% of Americans own around 90% of America's Net Worth! (Net Worth = Wealth minus Debt.)

MY POINT?

The Replicant Party is the bane of America, with its witless knee-jerking at the altar of the God of Mammon, and led by a handful of plutocrats who control the party's mechanism by means of their election funding.

To the regret of millions of Americans who remain incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold. (Fifteen percent of the population - or that of the states of California and Illinois combined).

What progressive agenda? You've never even seen one.

Had you done so, we might be able to have an exchange on equitable terms ...

 

[tres borrachos]

I would have thought Warren would love Trump. She made a career out of teaching lawyers how to ensure they stick it to the creditors, and pass unpaid debt on to the rest of us. You'd think the 4 bankruptcies of the Trump companies would excite her.

 

[ocean515]

A SAD HISTORY OF RECENT AMERICAN POLITICS



Pure, unadulterated bullsh*t.

What progressive agenda became a law of the land? I'll tell you the one and only, it was called ARRA, a bill passed in 2009 by Obama & Co (meaning a Dem HofR) that spent close to a billion dollars to stimulate a brain-dead economy. The consequence of which was to spike a spiraling Unemployment Rate at 10% in 2009 (see here: BLS Employment-to-population Ratio) that could otherwise have exploded to 15%.

Then, to thank Obama for that quick action to restart an economy brought to a halt by the Great Recession (spiked by the Toxic Waste Mess under a Replicant PotUS by the name of Bush), the American electorate - with consummate stoopidity - gave the HofR over to the Replicants in the 2010-midterms. (Of course, barely 38% of the electorate turned out to dump the HofR into the hands of the Replicant Party.)

And what did the Replicants do? Very quickly, we, the sheeple, were hearing a lot of talk about "Austerity Budgeting", meaning a complete refusal to employ more Stimulus-Spending to bring down quicker the Unemployment Rate. And why? A wicked electoral strategy the purpose of which was to that high-employment would remain in time for Obama's reelection in 2012. THAT is the kind of politics that the Replicants have played since they lost the White House - which they THINK is their natural preserve.

We have thus been in a Great Recession that took at the very least 3 years more to exit than would have been otherwise necessary had Obama been able to continue with Stimulus Spending!

HOW DID THE ROT HAPPEN?

Reckless Ronnie whilst in office made another gift to his rich friends. He reduced during his term upper-income taxation from 70% to below 30%.

See here: Historical Marginal Tax Rate for Highest and Lowest Income Earners (after deductions). Which simply fueled the gusher of wealth that was accumulating within a tiny percentage of the American public. See Prof Domhoff's (U of Cal.) research results: America's Net Worth and Financial Wealth.

Meaning what? This: Only 20% of Americans own around 90% of America's Net Worth! (Net Worth = Wealth minus Debt.)

MY POINT?

The Replicant Party is the bane of America, with its witless knee-jerking at the altar of the God of Mammon, and led by a handful of plutocrats who control the party's mechanism by means of their election funding.

To the regret of millions of Americans who remain incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold. (Fifteen percent of the population - or that of the states of California and Illinois combined).

What progressive agenda? You've never even seen one.

Had you done so, we might be able to have an exchange on equitable terms ...

Thank you for posting your propaganda. I'm quite familiar with it, as I am also quite familiar with the central organizations that promote it and direct it's dissemination among it's followers.

Posting evidence of it's endorsement among select people was really unnecessary.

Given the context of your post, I am most certain we would never find an equitable place to exchange anything.

 

[Lafayette]

De gustibus non disputandum est

 

[Lafayette]

Thank you for posting your propaganda.

I dare you to dispute any one of those facts presented.

I must admit I do like relating "historical facts", especially regarding America. They explain evolution admirably well.

Particularly in a nation where history is five minutes ago, and yesterday is "ancient history".

The good times are ancient history, and it aint The Donald who's going to bring them back ...

 

[ocean515]

I dare you to dispute any one of those facts presented.

I must admit I do like relating "historical facts", especially regarding America. They explain evolution admirably well.

Particularly in a nation where history is five minutes ago, and yesterday is "ancient history".

The good times are ancient history, and it aint The Donald who's going to bring them back ...

:2wave:

Vive la France!

 

[Lafayette]

Que vive les Etats-unis - si Hillary soit élue ... ! ;^)

 

[Lafayette]

Bernie Sanders is a textbook example of a demagogue.

Why/how? Substantiate this statement. Let's see a reasoned argument/justification.

Otherwise you're just bleating-in-a-blog ...

PS: This is a debate forum. Get it?

 

[Centrehalf]

Why/how? Substantiate this statement. Let's see a reasoned argument/justification.

Otherwise you're just blathering ...

Bernie routinely talks about "us vs, them", every radio commercial I've heard from him talks about the 1% screwing everyone else. No actual examples of that, just Bernie saying we're getting screwed. That's demagoguery.

 

[Lafayette]

THIS BLESSED COUNTRY

Bernie routinely talks about "us vs, them", every radio commercial I've heard from him talks about the 1% screwing everyone else. No actual examples of that, just Bernie saying we're getting screwed. That's demagoguery.

Perhaps you are devoid of any notion of "fairness", and you need an explanation of the basic economic facts of Our Nation as regards Income and Wealth?

Have a look at the definition of Income Disparity:

The difference between the incomes of the richer and poorer parts of society. The more unequal the distribution of wealth in an economy, the greater the income disparity.

And how do me measure the value of Income Inequality (same thing, btw)?

Here is what economists have come up with as a measure:
*Piketty's History Top 10Percent Pre-Tax Income Share – Europe and US, where you will note that only 10% of American households take home nearly half of all the income generated within the American economy, or,
*The Gini Coefficient since WW2 Diagram - the coefficient being the general distribution of income within an economy. We see that the US is on a par with China, and has the highest coefficient of any developed economy.

Why does this occur? Because of upper-income taxation that was brought down by Reckless Ronnie in the 1980s. (In fact, first by LBJ of all people.) See the History of US income tax-rate levels, which clearly demonstrates the wholesale reduction of upper-income tax-rates from the 70% to the 30% level during his administration.

And finally, a look at those tax-rate levels: Upper-Income Total Effective Tax Rates (after deductions). Note how above $105K per year for a household, the rate becomes a flat-tax of around 30%. The "rip-off" that Bernie is talking about is the fact that a "progressive" tax should be uniform throughout the income scale - as it is in most developed countries - but not the US.

And what happens to Income that is not taxed fairly? It gushes up into Wealth, the distribution of which was studied by yet another professor (at the UofCal) - see here: Prof. Domhoff’s Net Worth and Financial Wealth Infographic. Which is precisely what has happened in the US, where we have created Dynastic Families like the Waltons or the Kochs (the list is long) who will simply by means of inheritance transfer their riches from generation to generation of individuals who never worked a day of their lives to earn it.

Please explain how any of the above scenarios can be interpreted as fair or equitable in a nation of more than 320 million people, 15% of which are incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold. (Btw, that's 50 million American men, women and children, or the combined populations of California and Illinois.) And the US has been doing it for a long, long time: The History of the US Poverty Rate

MY POINT

And we are supposed to disregard all the above because ours is a "blessed country and God is our side"? Think again - throughout the history of mankind such Unfair Regimes - where one group plunder another - have come down with tragic consequence. (Most notably in France in 1786.)

 

[Lafayette]

She made a career out of teaching lawyers how to ensure they stick it to the creditors. You'd think the 4 bankruptcies of the Trump companies would excite her.

Cheap shot. Is that all you're good for, insult?

And since you impugn her academic credentials, it is right and proper to post them, here.

EW is a smarter lady than you and I and a good many others combined. That bothers you? Not me.

(Or is it the fact that she's a female?)

And I'd feel even more comfortable were she running for PotUS! Still, she will have her time up-at-bat.

And heaven help America if the Replicants have any say in running the county for the next 15-years that it will take to correct the economic dysfunction brought about by Reckless Ronnie's Tax Reduction Rip-off in the 1980s - on behalf his rich and super-rich friends ...

 

[Lafayette]

And here's one of Elizabeth Warren's more famous quotes:

There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.

Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

EW decries in this statement the fact that taxation is unfair and grossly exaggerated at the upper-income levels.

That fateful error, committed during the 1980s Reckless-Ronnie administration, must be corrected if the US is to be once again a Fair and Equitable Nation of which we can be collectively proud to hand on to our children ...

 

[tres borrachos]

Cheap shot. Is that all you're good for, insult?

And since you impugn her academic credentials, it is right and proper to post them, here.

EW is a smarter lady than you and I and a good many others combined. That bothers you? Not me.

(Or is it the fact that she's a female?)

And I'd feel even more comfortable were she running for PotUS! Still, she will have her time up-at-bat.

And heaven help America if the Replicants have any say in running the county for the next 15-years that it will take to correct the economic dysfunction brought about by Reckless Ronnie's Tax Reduction Rip-off in the 1980s - on behalf his rich and super-rich friends ...

Reading is fundamental. I didn't mention her academic credentials. Do you understand the post that you quoted? Rhetorical question, as you obviously did not.

 

[Lafayette]

Do you understand the post that you quoted? Rhetorical question, as you obviously did not.

Unless you wish to banter in unsubstantiated rhetoric yourself, I suggest you take the time and effort, think cogently, and then respond.

Otherwise, you are just blathering-in-a-blog like some many around here.

Waste of bandwidth - moving right along ...

 

[Eric7216]

It is so easy to throw around labels and calling people names. Most successful politicians would be demagogues to some extent. Certainly Sanders, Clinton, Cruz, and Trump could be called demagogues but that doesn't get us very far. The people furthest from being demagogues were Martin O'Malley and Kasich. And look where they are.

 

[Centrehalf]

MY POINT

And we are supposed to disregard all the above because ours is a "blessed country and God is our side"? Think again - throughout the history of mankind such Unfair Regimes - where one group plunder another - have come down with tragic consequence. (Most notably in France in 1786.)

Now I know you don't know what you're talking about, where did I mention God? Are you going to Godwin me next? I'd like to point out to you, since you apparently didn't think of it, that everything you mentioned couldn't have been done without the government. The rich don't set tax rates, the rich don't deregulate anything, the rich don't force people to re-fi their homes, the rich don't make anyone purchase things they don't need. All you've done is show that there is wealth disparity, you've made no effort to explain how anyone is being screwed by anyone else. Neither does Bernie.

 

[SHOOTER]

i am still laughing,you know she sounds like the RNC ,and liying TED,i can not tell the bleeding heart republicans from the liberals,any more.


run don run

 

[Lafayette]

All you've done is show that there is wealth disparity, you've made no effort to explain how anyone is being screwed by anyone else. Neither does Bernie.

Understandable that you can't comprehend the meanings of Income Disparity and Wealth Unfairness.

Half the income generated by the American economy goes to only 10% of households and you think that's hunky-dory?

Twenty-percent of households possess 88% of the Wealth, and you think that is just fine?

You've got a warped sense of fairness ...

 

[cabse5]

If Warren wants to be honest she should be calling out a lot more people than Trump. Bernie Sanders is a textbook example of a demagogue.

How about barking Hillary? And BO?

 

[Centrehalf]

Understandable that you can't understand Income Disparity and Wealth Unfairness.

Half the income generated by the American economy goes to only 10% of households and you think that's hunky-dory?

Twenty-percent of households possess 88% of the Wealth, and you think that is just fine?

You've got a warped sense of fairness ...

Did I say it was hunky-dory? I understand why it's happening though and when I hear Sanders boil it all down to "the rich are screwing all of you" I know he's full of it and I know he's a demagogue. So are you, you still haven't done anything but give your opinion that the distribution isn't fair.