- Joined
- Mar 5, 2008
- Messages
- 112,993
- Reaction score
- 60,557
- Location
- Sarasota Fla
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
1.
Washington isn’t fooling anyone -- Neither political party works. They bicker like children about tiny things, and yet they can’t even identify the biggest issues we face. They’re like a couple arguing about what color to paint the living room, and meanwhile, their house is on fire. They resort to character attacks as step one because they think voters are too dumb for a real debate. They very often prioritize the agendas of lobbyists (for whom many of them will eventually work) over the urgent needs of Main Street America. I signed up for the Party of Abraham Lincoln -- and I will work to reform and restore the GOP -- but let’s tell the plain truth that right now both parties lack vision.
2.
As a result, normal Americans don’t like either party. If you ask Americans if they identify as Democrat or Republican, almost half of the nation interrupts to say: “Neither.”
3.
Young people despise the two parties even more than the general electorate. And why shouldn’t they? The main thing that unites most Democrats is being anti-Republican; the main thing that unites most Republicans is being anti-Democrat. No one knows what either party is for -- but almost everyone knows neither party has any solutions for our problems. “Unproductive” doesn’t begin to summarize how messed up this is.
4.
Our problems are huge right now, but one of the most obvious is that we’ve not passed along the meaning of America to the next generation. If we don’t get them to re-engage -- thinking about how we defend a free society in the face of global jihadis, or how we balance our budgets after baby boomers have dishonestly over-promised for decades, or how we protect First Amendment values in the face of the safe-space movement – then all will indeed have been lost. One of the bright spots with the rising generation, though, is that they really would like to rethink the often knee-jerk partisanship of their parents and grandparents. We should encourage this rethinking.
Honestly, if I were a Democrat, I'd be annoyed with Republicans trying to tell me what to think of my party.
Ben Sasse is a senator from Nebraska. I saw this open letter, and some of the reactions to it, and thought I would pass it along and see what folks here think of it. It contains a whole lot of the angst we are seeing right now with Trump as the GOP nominee. https://www.facebook.com/sassefornebraska/posts/593031420862025
In part, he says:
He goes on at some length. Some of his points are good and interesting, some are really stupid(complaining that politicians think voters are too dumb for policy discussion when the candidates that discussed policy washed out early). I find myself torn between irritation at his cynical use of the angst many are feeling over this election to push his agenda, and agreeing with the idea of less bickering, more solutions, combined with amusement of his reasoning for not having ideological purity tests.
Ben Sasse is a senator from Nebraska. I saw this open letter, and some of the reactions to it, and thought I would pass it along and see what folks here think of it. It contains a whole lot of the angst we are seeing right now with Trump as the GOP nominee. https://www.facebook.com/sassefornebraska/posts/593031420862025
In part, he says:
He goes on at some length. Some of his points are good and interesting, some are really stupid(complaining that politicians think voters are too dumb for policy discussion when the candidates that discussed policy washed out early). I find myself torn between irritation at his cynical use of the angst many are feeling over this election to push his agenda, and agreeing with the idea of less bickering, more solutions, combined with amusement of his reasoning for not having ideological purity tests.
I am not following your point, which may be entirely my own fault, but could you elaborate on what you are talking about please.
Sen. Sasse is a conservative Republican.
First - let me start off by saying that I'm a fan of Ben Sasse. So I'll agree that I approach this with bias, but
Second - however, I think you are wrongfully attributing cynical manipulation to his actual beliefs and opinions.
I agree with you that Sasse is overestimating the intelligence and attention span of the typical voter, but one of the things he argues is that it's not that voters are brilliant so much as it is that politicians aren't - that DC isn't the center of the country, and politics aren't the center of America, etc. So I see how he comes to that conclusion - I'm just still pretty convinced that a Poll Test based on the Citizenship Exam would A) sharply reduce the voter rolls and B) be extremely healthy for the country. I think he is additionally wrong in overestimating the percentage of Americans who want honest accounting of our entitlement programs - that would force us to make hard and complex decisions, and we don't like hard and complex, we like simple, shiny, solutions that screw over the [insert outgroup].
On twitter Sasse threw out Coburn as an option for the role he was discussing, but then also stated he'd be fine with pretty much anyone in the Competent/Moderate/Decent Venn Diagram overlap. I have no idea who would stand up in that role, myself, nor do I think they would actually have a prayer of winning, absent multiple exogenous crises in the two campaigns.
I think a lot of Repubs try to soothe their ruffled feelings at the complete mess the GOP is in now by saying the Dem party is just the same way. Shoot, I think I've done that, but Repubs really have zero to say about how Dems feel or should feel about their party or their candidates.
I think a lot of Repubs try to soothe their ruffled feelings at the complete mess the GOP is in now by saying the Dem party is just the same way. Shoot, I think I've done that, but Repubs really have zero to say about how Dems feel or should feel about their party or their candidates.
Bias is fine. I make no bones about my own.
I am not suggesting he does not believe what he says, only that he is engaging in using that angst to push his personal agenda.
I do not think that the issue is the intelligence of voters.
Attacks work on smart voters too. It is simply easier to create a caricature of others than it is to define your own complex stances. So in a world of limited resources available to candidates, especially time, and the knowledge that if you do not get elected, you have no chance to do the good you think your policies would do, what else are candidates going to do? If it works, of course they use it, and character attacks work.
And I would stand against you in any attempt to enact any kind of poll test.
Tom Coburn?
I really do not have a problem with republicans stating their opinions on what democrats should do. I take it with the appropriate grain of salt, just as I expect any one to take any comments I make about the republican party. In addition, his comments where aimed at both parties.
Over the last few decades, the Democrats never got close to the various nutty fringe groups in the way that the Republicans did. Even if neither party is loved, the GOP is certainly paying a higher price for the company they've kept.
Ben Sasse is a senator from Nebraska. I saw this open letter, and some of the reactions to it, and thought I would pass it along and see what folks here think of it. It contains a whole lot of the angst we are seeing right now with Trump as the GOP nominee. https://www.facebook.com/sassefornebraska/posts/593031420862025
In part, he says:
He goes on at some length. Some of his points are good and interesting, some are really stupid(complaining that politicians think voters are too dumb for policy discussion when the candidates that discussed policy washed out early). I find myself torn between irritation at his cynical use of the angst many are feeling over this election to push his agenda, and agreeing with the idea of less bickering, more solutions, combined with amusement of his reasoning for not having ideological purity tests.
I would say that he probably thinks that agenda is - as he put it - a 70% agenda, not his "personal" one, and that you are probably reacting because it is not yours. :shrug:
Um. How many of them, outside of this place, do you talk to?
Character attacks do work. But they work best with those of lower intelligence who are less policy-oriented. We need a way to begin to filter them out.
:shrug: as most folks will. It's a lonely hill to stand on
Yup. He's beaten the Cancer that he retired to fight, I understand, and has a reputation both of being fiscally conservative (he used to put out those "giant books of wasteful spending your government did this year" products), but also a decent human being.
Possible, but I also think that if he thinks his agenda is a "70 % agenda", he is incredibly wrong.
What, you mean real people...that **** is scary, I avoid it.
They may work best with low intelligence voters, but they do work on all voters to some extent.
I know that feeling. One example is that I support mandatory national service for all 18 year olds(military or civilian).
I can think of alot of words to describe Tom Coburn, and some are complimentary, but moderate would in no way be one of them.
Right. No "nutty fringe" groups on the left.
Thanks for posting this.
His comments are pretty similar to what I heard from various clients this past year. Most folks seem to be looking for a less invasive government. Liberals and Conservatives have different issues they'd like government to be less invasive with but a general scaling back should be pretty popular. On the whole folks are content to fend for themselves and most even prefer to do so. They know that if they push the government to limit one right that just gives the other side a reason to have government limit another right. It all turns into a silly pissing contest and the end result is that we get absurdly partisan candidates running for president.
In another thread someone asked what the definition of Conservatism is and my take is that it's a general focus on using the least political force necessary to achieve the greatest results. It's a matter of understanding that the concerns of one individual are no less significant than the concerns of another and because of that we really shouldn't push grand ideas on the public. It's much better if we allow the public to enjoy their own grand ideas.
He's simply trying to keep his own position with his own state alive. If Trump wins his state he's one of those on the list of establishment gadflies. He's young and has upward political aspirations. He doesn't know enough yet to hold his water and so he mouthed off thinking Trump would go away. Now he's stuck and doubling down because that's the only course he has left.
I would concur. The American people have almost no interest whatsoever in honest accounting, or making difficult decisions.
I like how the Trump folks blithely assume that, because they do not hold to political principles or core beliefs, that no one else does as well.
I like how the Trump folks blithely assume that, because they do not hold to political principles or core beliefs, that no one else does as well.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?