no she called all Trump voters different parts of the "basket of deplorables"
we took it and ran with it. "Lets go Brandon" much the same
Democrats and Rural Voters
- Thread starter Mina
- Start date
we took it and ran with it. "Lets go Brandon" much the same
They got a lot of “working class” areas in rural America?
Admittedly, Clinton was an awful campaigner, was back in 2008 and again in 2016, plus just being a women she was against it from the jump, but Trump didn’t campaign on issues, his focus was scapegoating such as China plus appealing to the bitterness and hate many felt because the America they wanted no longer existed
cawacko
Well-known member
This is some serious revisionist history. A very small portion of the right? She called half of Trump supporters deplorables. And it's a term used regularly by the left to describe Republicans. (And I say Republicans because even I've been called it and I'm not a Trump voter.)
I'm basically the opposite of a rural person so I'm not going to pretend to speak for rural voters. But I can surmise being told you're a deplorable, redneck and we disapprove of your lifestyle is generally not a recommended way to win people over to your side. (Again, read what Mott has written previously. It's good stuff.)
You kept thinking we had no money. USC is a blue blood located in the center of Los Angeles, CA and we have the 7th most billionaires of any University. We don't lack for funds.
Pardon my french here but it is almost orgasmic to see the national meltdown. The SEC and others have been buying players forever but hardly a word about. Now that 'SC is back in the game and using N.I.L. to our advantage and folks are having aneurisms.
(How the NCAA still exists after our penalty for Bush's family taking money from a wanna be agent is still mind boggling. That corrupt organization is on its death knell.)
scapegoating China?
you have no clue as to Chinese malign trade practices
forced disclosure of R&D and IP for joint ventures , Chinese tariffs, State Owned Enterprises, dumping
Trump went into great detail on these,and then hired Robert Lighthizer as US trade rep
to force China to negotiate -which Biden abandoned even though his own trade rep wanted to continue talks
and yes rural America is a lot of working class - it's certainly not a bastion of elites like cities hold
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic. He has lifted them up. She said the other half of Trump’s supporters feel that the government has let them down and are desperate for change”
https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript/
She never cast the entire right as “deplorable” as was portrayed, in fact, given Trump had less than fifty percent of the vote, that would be twenty five percent, and she was correct
OK she only insulted HALF of Trump voters.
How do you think the other half took that? ( well she wasnt talking about me?)
we all embraced being Deplorable.. got the T-shirts etc
They missed the part where Clinton talked all that shit, but was getting $500 hair-dos. Also insulting half the country didn't go well for her.
"Deplorables" and "Flyover country" people seem to be held in disdain by Democrats.
First, obviously, I'm responding to a very specific claim: that Clinton didn't talk about working people at the convention. She did. Repeatedly and in depth -- to a much greater extent than Trump. So, it was a lie... objectively and clearly a lie, which the NYT chose to amplify, without providing any kind of reality check on it.
Second, the voter in question didn't call out Clinton for $500 hair dos. But, obviously, if anger over high-priced hairstyling had been the deciding factor, she'd have gone with Clinton, not Trump, given the fact that Trump spent $5,000 per year on his hair, and actually claimed that as a tax deduction!
Also, she didn't insult half the country. That's just something that really stupid people think, based on a misreporting of her comments by Fox News and the rest of the media-for-morons offerings. Hillary Clinton wasn't referring to half the country, OBVIOUSLY. She was referring to half of Trump's supporters. As a reminder, in 2016, Trump got just under 63 million votes. That's less than a fifth of the population. So when she talk about the half of that group that was a basket of deplorables, she was talking about less than a tenth of the population.
Of course, the racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes, and Islamophobes saw her comment and naturally thought "hey, that's me!" and so took umbrage, effectively telling on themselves. But that doesn't make them half the country, no matter how much they wish they were.
As for the other half of the Trump supporters, the same speech where she spoke of the deplorables was remarkably sympathetic to them. She said that they were just people desperate for a change, because they felt government had let them down. She was speaking to a group of liberals and was urging them to understand and empathize with the Trump supporters who weren't deplorables:
But the other basket — and I know this because I see friends from all over America here — I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas — as well as, you know, New York and California — but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from. They don’t buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroine, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.
But, of course, the corporate media never mentioned that in their coverage of her speech. They carefully selected out just the basket of deplorables line and made it sound like she was dismissing Trump voters as irredeemable, when the whole point of the comment was the exact opposite -- to convince a crowd of liberals that, in fact, they shouldn't write off the Trump voters, because half of them were good people with serious concerns that deserved to be addressed.
That's what I'm talking about when I thrash the NYT for this kind of story. They're utterly devoted to this idea that Democrats ignore, neglect, or hold in contempt rural people and working people, and so they trumpet any comments by anyone, no matter how demonstrably false, that support that view, even as they carefully censor material from actual Democrats like Clinton that would fly in the face of that caricature.
No. Maine is basically two states in one. Along the southern half of the coast, and up through the Bangor area, it's a relatively well-educated place that tends to vote liberal. Farther Downeast and in the vast, sparsely-populated interior, it's a very low-educated place that fits in better, economically, culturally, and politically, with the Deep South. Especially in the Kittery-through-August stretch, you may as well be in Massachusetts, but once you're in the interior past Bangor, you may as well be in Mississippi.
Also, Canada isn't anywhere close to "all-white."
https://www.catalyst.org/research/people-of-colour-in-canada/
In some ways, Canada is more diverse than the US (e.g., larger share of immigrants).
Last edited:
Hillary Clinton parties with fellow millionaires while the masked plebes attend to her gown
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-while-masked-help-attend-to-her-couture-gown
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-while-masked-help-attend-to-her-couture-gown
Regardless of which side spoke about it more, Democrats have been losing the white working class vote that was once an important part of the New Deal coalition.
I think Democrats are cutting their own throats by demeaning these people. Clinton's description of "deplorables" and the characterization as "uneducated," "hillbillies," "racists", etc. contributes to this problem.
You may believe that is an accurate description of Trump supporters, but it certainly is going to alienate them and lose their vote.
Sounds like a touch of paranoia, and all I am saying is that it was not a theme of the Democrats in the election, more so, again as I said, it did played right into the martyr complex felt by many on the right, so the right wing media reinforced it
No, just thought USC, being a private institution with a reputation wasn’t going to sink to the depths that the SEC and other schools were doing to buy championships, you know, the student athlete, amateur competition thing. Appears that now that it is quasilegal to say, they are one of the biggest to take advantage, as I said, changes my opinion, of the school and their football prospects
So what happens down the road when all these billionaire alumni conflict with the school over the program? Does the school maintain control or the NIL collective? Would a “recruited” player have to go to class? Maintain a certain grade point average?
Durham raises FEC ruling against Clinton and DNC in attorney-client privilege battle
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...n-and-dnc-in-attorney-client-privilege-battle
he prosecutor submitted a filing in federal court Monday pointing to a Federal Election Commission ruling that fined those Democrats for violating rules with the funding of research that became a central part of the effort to accuse Clinton's rival, Donald Trump, of collusion with Russia. The submission is part of the case against Michael Sussmann, a lawyer who was indicted in September for allegedly concealing his clients — Clinton's campaign and “Tech Executive-1,” Rodney Joffe — from FBI general counsel James Baker in September 2016 when he presented internet data that suggested a now-discredited back channel link between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa-Bank. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...n-and-dnc-in-attorney-client-privilege-battle
he prosecutor submitted a filing in federal court Monday pointing to a Federal Election Commission ruling that fined those Democrats for violating rules with the funding of research that became a central part of the effort to accuse Clinton's rival, Donald Trump, of collusion with Russia. The submission is part of the case against Michael Sussmann, a lawyer who was indicted in September for allegedly concealing his clients — Clinton's campaign and “Tech Executive-1,” Rodney Joffe — from FBI general counsel James Baker in September 2016 when he presented internet data that suggested a now-discredited back channel link between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa-Bank. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.
NYC isn’t Topeka, Kansas, nor is the MET your local library, it is what New Yorkers do on that night, an event Trump attended many times and tries to imitate in his Mara logo Xanadu
cawacko
Well-known member
We see how Republican (voters) tend to sh*t on urban areas, well it's pretty much the same with liberals and rural areas. Again, Mott is a Democrat but he's from rural Ohio and has written great stuff on this board about how Democrats don't pay attention to/don't care about rural voters. (He's saying this as a Democrat wanting to see change, not as a Republican simply sh*tting on Democrats.)
I can't proclaim to be a N.I.L. expert but it's not USC, to my knowledge, putting together the N.I.L. packages. It's alumni and outside groups. And yes, kids still have to maintain eligibility.
To supporters, the kids were being exploited for decades. Now they are getting an opportunity to receive compensation for what they do.
Here we go with the Durham bullshit again, do us a favor, when Durham actually proves something, not what the Examiner, NYP, or Fox opinionates as something, but actual proof beyond innuendo, get back to us.
You got to get real, it has been over three years, twice the time Mueller took, and all Durham has done has convicted some obscure individual of lying to the FBI, to which he got three months, and started another case of again supposedly lying to the FBI
As I said, of course Democrats don’t appeal to rural voters, never have, and with a shrinking already small rural vote, probably never will, unlikely a Democrat will win Kansas any time soon.
School isn’t putting the packages together, the alumni groups are, but the school is encouraging them and letting them take charge. The question becomes what happens when the two entities clash, when one groups wants player X and the school says he doesn’t meet their standards? Do you think those billionaires are going to accept some Academic Dean’s decision? At some point, the program will represent the school in name only, perhaps not at USC, but at the State schools and USC will have to doe the same to compete
Yes. She said half were deplorable and half were decent people with real concerns that should be responded to. At the time, knowledgeable people faulted her for wildly overestimating the number of Trump supporters who WEREN'T deplorable. Around the time Trumpsters were buying up "deplorable" merchandise, it become clear that was correct.
you dont want to read it -dont bother..these are pre-trial motions
I had to listen to 3 years of Russian collusion crap - man up
we were mocking her- we all became Deplorables.. fuck her and her elitists plebs holding her gown
cawacko
Well-known member
I guess I can't speak to how N.I.L. could change academic admissions. On the surface I don't think that it would change. In the past big donors could in theory threaten to withhold donations if a kid who didn't qualify wasn't granted admissions. I've read nothing to indicate admissions policies would change or that kids don't have to maintain eligibility.