• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trumpkins are gullible-ass SOBs, that or they're just purely ignorant partisans

In the same way it is best not to assign genius when there are more grounded explanations for success. I wouldn't assign to stupid that which can be explained by temperamental difference.

Everything you assigned to "trumpkins" although no doubt true in same cases can apply equally in other areas of politics to other sets of people regarding other politicians and policies. Only about 18% of actual Americans voted for Trump. Assuming only a 32% core base brings that down to 6%. Even in that small group the statical probability that they would signifgantly fall bellow the norm on intelligence or gullibility <1%. Chances are they are about average. Chances are your interest in politics puts you above average in intelligence especially in politcal knowledgeability though that also puts you at a higher then average probability of being swept up in certian political social manipulations[higher than average gullibility]. Chances are you give a lot more credit to supporters of your political causes than they are due credit and less to those you disagree.

End of the day. It is best to assume disagreement in policy or support of politicans has less to do with people moral character, intelligence or gullibility and more to do with their different culture, priorities, personal interests and temperament. You know measures that actualy are predictive of political postion.

The rubric poll for this thread contains two intellectual foundation questions that provide a high level basis for the key inference I, in the narrative portion of my OP, made about Trumpkins. One of those questions I noted in the OP and the other I merely referred to but didn't replicate. Had those two questions not been part of the poll, I wouldn't have been able to, using the poll's responses, make the inference I did.

The poll doesn't contain information that would support the assertion that Dems and Indies are the nitwits and that Trumpkins/GOP-ers alone aren't; thus I proffered no inferences to that effect.


Red:
That is possible; however, even if that phenomenon be versimilitudinous, its being so alters not that Trumpkins be, in the main, ill-informed nitwits. The acumen of members of a given political party has no bearing on that of members of another.


Blue:
While I have a position on Trumpkins' moral character, it isn't one I've shared in this thread. Perhaps the scare-quoted "mofo" made you think I was remarking, in part, on Trumpkins' moral fiber. If so, that's my dictional mistake. Making a one-word remark on an entire class of folks' moral qualities isn't my way of depicting people.
 
Part I of II



The rubric poll for this thread contains two intellectual foundation questions that provide a high level basis for the key inference I, in the narrative portion of my OP, made about Trumpkins. One of those questions I noted in the OP and the other I merely referred to but didn't replicate. Had those two questions not been part of the poll, I wouldn't have been able to, using the poll's responses, make the inference I did.


Red:
By "middle America," do you mean:
  • Americans who reside anywhere other than the two main coasts?
    • I don't think this is what you mean, but I'm asking to be sure.
  • "Middle ground" (something between Dem and GOP stated positions/approaches/outcomes), some might say "watered down," political stances with regard to "this and that" issue?

Blue:
That's to be expected.


Pink:
  • Q 34 --> The question of who preponderantly deserves blame for a given status or outcome has an existentially accurate answer. It's a positive question.
  • Q 18 --> This question is a normative one. Sure, rationally, one's answer to it must derive from one's calculus of whom to blame; one needs to know quite a lot about another's analysis of the totality of the topic to assess whether s/he has arrived at the existentially accurate answer to Q34. Absent that type of information, one's response to Q 18 just is what it is, a political or perhaps ethical data point. That piece of data informs one of what folks think, but it doesn't inform one of the quality of their thought, unless, of course, there's an obvious (given Western philosophical models) right/wrong stance.

(Cont'd due to character limit)

Middle America to me are those in-between the stances of both major parties. The Republicans are constantly moving right, the Democrats left. This leaves those who are in the middle of the two parties ideological. The center, center left and center right. The non-extremes. I was speaking more ideologically than geographically. But perhaps there is no real middle. I myself, I'm right on some issues, left on others. Maybe it's that way with most folks not ultra right or left. Good pick up.

As for right or wrong stances, that could be subjective according to one political view, philosophy or ideology. You might throw in morality. I'm sure the pro Trumpers think their stance is right in this while the anti Trumpers think their stance is right. Perhaps there is another question here. Do I believe in building the wall only because Trump wants it or am I against the wall only because the leaders of the Democratic Party are? Or is it that I, having made up my own mind, doing some research and digging into the subject, regardless of what the political parties think or want us to think, is that why I'm for or against?

Personally, I don't think the wall, one way or the other is worth the shutdown. Apparently, I'm in the minority here. But then again, I'm not all that ideological or partisan. I don't like Trump, the man. I really dislike his obnoxious, uncouth personality and his very unpresidential behavior. But as president, he has done somethings I'm for, somethings I was against. Just like every other president in my lifetime.
 
Per the poll noted below, Trumpkins and Independents get their news from roughly the same places, and in the same proportions. I mean, really. I expect Dems and GOP-ers to get info from different places and form diametrically different conclusions based on it. However, when folks lacking party allegiance consume basically the same content as GOP-ers (Indies reported consuming info in different patterns and from different sources from Dems) and arrive at materially different conclusions, ones that more nearly align with Dems, one has to ask WTF is going on in the minds of those GOP-ers. Is there even something going on in there?

What makes me say the above? Well, I read the below linked-to poll and I started thinking about what might drive, not the actual responses folks gave, but the difference in some of the answers, particularly the differences between Republicans and Independents. Seeing those differences, I realized there shouldn't be an exogenous information-oriented reason for the difference because those catalysts are essentially the same. That means the differences must preponderantly be driven by endogenous disparities among the respondents and how they process (or don't) information. That led me to posit that Trumpkins are some stupid, intransigent, gullible-ass "mofos."

Read the poll for yourself:


Some additional inferences I've drawn from the above noted poll:
  • Republicans who are well-informed about the shutdown are comparatively rare. More than half of Republicans know little or nothing about the shutdown. What do you want to wager that more than half of GOP-ers have an opinion on the matter, even as they aren't well-informed about it?
    • Poll: How much have you seen, heard or read about the recent shutdown of portions of the federal government?
      • A lot:
        • Dems --> 60%
        • GOP-ers --> 47%
        • Indies --> 53%
      • Xelor: Concomitant with their relative ignorance about the shutdown and apparent disregard for Trump's dissembling, Republicans found Trump's Oval Office address convincing about the verisimility of a southern border crisis, even though Trump didn't in his address reveal anything noteworthy and new.
        • Poll: President Trump's speech convinced me there is a crisis on the Southern border.
          • Dems --> 21% agree
          • GOP-ers --> 66% agree
          • Indies --> 32% agree
  • Trump's claim that the furloughed and unpaid-yet-essential workers are mostly Democrats appears not to hold water.
    • Poll: Are you, or someone in your immediate family a federal employee or contractor and was furloughed without pay?
      • Dems --> 5%
      • GOP-ers --> 5%
  • Republicans are relatively more insouciant than Dems about the consequences of the shutdown.
    • Poll: The government shutdown is going to hurt our country.
      • Dems --> 88% agree
      • GOP-ers --> 53% agree
      • Indies --> 71% agree

I have to say I've never seen such nonsensical BS couched in such erudite and eloquent terms. A mindless attack wrapped in dissertation level writing. You attribute GOP responses to blind loyalty to Trump or partisanship, yet make no reference to the distinct possibility that Dems may be subject to Acute Trump hate AND party loyalty. A one sided screen wrapped in scholastic obfuscation. Well done.
 
Last edited:
Part II of II




Tan and off-topic:
I'm indulging this question only because by your earlier substantive on-topic remarks, you've earned it...that said, I have no desire to here dwell on the wall/shutdown topic. I don't because the shutdown itself, and how it might be ended, is irrelevant to the thread topic. At your discretion, respond to my "tan" comments here, but know that in the interest of not deflecting this thread to another wall/shutdown "tirade," I won't reply to your response to this section...unless, of course, you materially connect your response to the thread's actual topic.
I don't think there is one. The only way out of the shutdown is for Congress to pass veto-proof appropriations.

  • Trump's stance: I want my wall! I want my wall!
    • He would sooner have the government not function than have it function without funding for his wall.
    • Border security is priority one, and it's impossible to achieve without the wall.
    • In the "Chuck & Nancy" meeting:
      • Trump attended that meeting aiming to get funding for his wall, not to keep the gov't up and running.
      • Trump unequivocally said he'd be proud to close the gov't over his wall's funding.
  • The Dems' stance: Our job and your job is to manage the government and keep it open so it can serve the American people.
    • The matter of wall funding must be decoupled from whether the government writ larger is funded or not funded.
    • Border security is priority one, and it's possible to achieve via myriad means.
    • In the "Chuck & Nancy" meeting:
      • Dems attended that meeting aiming to keep the gov't from shutting down, not to discuss wall funding.
      • Dems never wanted the gov't to shutdown.
Given those two positions, the amount of money to fund new border walling isn't a negotiating point. And, as you likely know, McConnell is the impediment to a veto-proof appropriations bill because his chamber already unanimously passed one such bill that he refuses to reintroduce.


Teal:
  • I think it's personal for Trump. He's comportmentally authoritative; he's lived his life relying on force and formal functional authority to get his way. He's got an "us and them" world view.
  • I don't think it's personal for Mrs. Pelosi. Nancy was born into a political family. As with any gov't official who realizes they serve, not rule, the people, she's long understood collaboration and has long since learned to separate one's politics from one's personhood.
  • I don't know whether it's personal for Chuck, but I'm not inclined to think it is because he's a traditional politician and US senator. US senators are quite fraternal in their political ethos. They have their policy differences, but they generally respect one another, their political opposites as individuals who merely have a different point of view.

Orange:
In some quarters, yes. In others it only appears that way.

End of post pair.

In order not to derail your thread, I'll just say I find it very hard to understand how an issue, subject etc. can gain so much importance to both major parties that both are willing to let the government shut down until, when ever it ends. For me, the wall is an idiotic reason one way or the other to shut down the government. I'll just add this, it seems to me that Trump supporters are pure supporters of the man, not of an ideology or a political philosophy, he doesn't have one.
 
It's not difficult to do, and not expensive, either. What's missing is political will. For some, controlling immigration is simply an exercise in political rhetoric of the kind we've witnessed for decades now.

Yet another example, one of a great many, where the political elite and federal bureaucracy have failed in stunning fashion.
 
Sorry but your polls dont support your idiotic assertions. But keep trying. Frankly, the idea that 88% democrats think the shutdown will 'hurt the country' only shows how stupid democrats are.

Congratulations. You just proved the OP.
 
In order not to derail your thread, I'll just say I find it very hard to understand how an issue, subject etc. can gain so much importance to both major parties that both are willing to let the government shut down until, when ever it ends. For me, the wall is an idiotic reason one way or the other to shut down the government. I'll just add this, it seems to me that Trump supporters are pure supporters of the man, not of an ideology or a political philosophy, he doesn't have one.

Red:
That has a lot to do with why I think them nitwits. That characteristic of their approbation of Trump may be inferable from the poll I referenced.
 
Middle America to me are those in-between the stances of both major parties. The Republicans are constantly moving right, the Democrats left. This leaves those who are in the middle of the two parties ideological. The center, center left and center right. The non-extremes. I was speaking more ideologically than geographically. But perhaps there is no real middle. I myself, I'm right on some issues, left on others. Maybe it's that way with most folks not ultra right or left. Good pick up.

As for right or wrong stances, that could be subjective according to one political view, philosophy or ideology. You might throw in morality. I'm sure the pro Trumpers think their stance is right in this while the anti Trumpers think their stance is right. Perhaps there is another question here. Do I believe in building the wall only because Trump wants it or am I against the wall only because the leaders of the Democratic Party are? Or is it that I, having made up my own mind, doing some research and digging into the subject, regardless of what the political parties think or want us to think, is that why I'm for or against?

Personally, I don't think the wall, one way or the other is worth the shutdown. Apparently, I'm in the minority here. But then again, I'm not all that ideological or partisan. I don't like Trump, the man. I really dislike his obnoxious, uncouth personality and his very unpresidential behavior. But as president, he has done somethings I'm for, somethings I was against. Just like every other president in my lifetime.

Red:
TY for the confirmation/clarification.



Blue:
Be that as it may, let me illustrate what I meant:
  • Theists think accurate their stance that there is a god.
  • Atheists think accurate their stance that there is no god.
Notwithstanding what each group thinks, the fact of the matter is that one of them is existentially accurate and the other isn't. The existentially accurate answer isn't going to change regardless of what theists and atheists think.

Who deserves the preponderant blame for a given happenstance is, like a god's existence, is a matter for which there is an existentially accurate answer. It differs from the "god existence" matter only in that we have the tools/resources needed to determine what be the existentially accurate answer. One needs to be well informed on a matter to arrive at the existentially accurate answer.

Now in a philosophically non-Western society, the existentially accurate answer may differ from what it is in Western societies, but reconciling between Western and non-Western philosophical systems isn't something one must do when evaluating culpability such as that for the shutdown. For other types of culpability, a reconciliation of some stripe may be necessary due to the heterogeneity of applicable philosophies for sub-national (i.e., lower-level) matters; however, no Western political philosophy gives approbation to approximations of anarchy and non-governance, other than the philosophy of anarchy itself, which the US doesn't ascribe to.
 
Yet another example, one of a great many, where the political elite and federal bureaucracy have failed in stunning fashion.

No kidding, but to hear those types expound on it, doing virtually anything beyond talking is immoral. They should be made to listen to their own words through loudspeakers for a very long time.
 
No kidding, but to hear those types expound on it, doing virtually anything beyond talking is immoral. They should be made to listen to their own words through loudspeakers for a very long time.

Like this:

1135340.jpg
 
In order not to derail your thread, I'll just say I find it very hard to understand how an issue, subject etc. can gain so much importance to both major parties that both are willing to let the government shut down until, when ever it ends. For me, the wall is an idiotic reason one way or the other to shut down the government. I'll just add this, it seems to me that Trump supporters are pure supporters of the man, not of an ideology or a political philosophy, he doesn't have one.

Trump does not have a governmental purpose nor a process. His intention is to grab as much cash for himself out of his term as he can and somehow avoid a life of criminal legal battles on the back end. His only activity: tweet....tweet....tweet.....tweet. He does not even pick judges. The Federalist Society has its list and the WH Counsel to this point has picked the Judges.

Trump: Tweet....tweet....tweet, tweet.....tweet....tweet.

Heck of a man the New Right picked to be their fearless leader. Where did they find him, waiting in line for a Big Mac?
 
Red:
That has a lot to do with why I think them nitwits. That characteristic of their approbation of Trump may be inferable from the poll I referenced.

On 23 January 2016, presidential candidate Donald Trump caused controversy when he stated the following during a campaign rally in Iowa:

I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.

The comment was part of a larger point Trump was making about the loyalty of his voting base:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-fifth-avenue-comment/

Trump was right. He has complete control over that group of supporters. Not all of his supporters are that blind and daft, but the number who are is scary. "Cult" is the right word.
 
Do you think there is an immigration crisis at the southern border?

I think that there is a continuation of the usual problems endemic to the border area, and a growing refugee crisis, and I think that it is convenient to blur the distinction between refugees and illegal immigration, while I stay mindful of the fact that we nor any other country can possibly save ALL the refugees. But most countries do not intentionally blur the distinction.

For the record, I am not against building more walls. I am, however, dead set against negotiating with hostage takers, particularly when the hostage taker is Donald Trump, who will no doubt use the tactic repeatedly and with great gusto if it succeeds this first time with the Democrats.
 
Originally Posted by Perotista
In order not to derail your thread, I'll just say I find it very hard to understand how an issue, subject etc. can gain so much importance to both major parties that both are willing to let the government shut down until, when ever it ends. For me, the wall is an idiotic reason one way or the other to shut down the government. I'll just add this, it seems to me that Trump supporters are pure supporters of the man, not of an ideology or a political philosophy, he doesn't have one.

Red:
That has a lot to do with why I think them nitwits. That characteristic of their approbation of Trump may be inferable from the poll I referenced.

I don't think they are nitwits. And they are not completely without philosophy or ideology. Don't underestimate them.

They are a powerful, visceral backlash against the decreasing cultural hegemony of white, Christian (protestant denominations, mostly), men in this country. They see this as a cultural war, and they feel under siege. That is the true underlying pivotal ideology and philosophy. It frightens them. And Donald Trump has done an admirable job talking to those fears and anxieties with dog whistles (and occasional bullhorns too!). They will support anyone who acknowledges those anxieties and fears, and whom they think will move the country in a direction back from the precipice of this nightmare of a truly pluralistic, tolerant, just, and equal society. The other stuff about deficits or healthcare or whatever other nonsense, don't really matter, as long as this main issue is addressed. All that other stuff is the ideologies and philosophies they could care less about.

Why do you think that all we are talking about today is "the wall", and we are no longer talking about healthcare, or the deficits, or the opioid crisis, or any of that other stuff? Why do you think they could care less if he changes his mind 7 times a day on any of those other issues? It's because all that other stuff was never the real issues they were truly concerned about to begin with. Donald Trump astutely and cleverly identified and addressed what the rest of us missed completely: This massive problem lying just underneath the surface, and the true source of the pain. And that's why he is now president and we are not.
 
Last edited:
Excuse me boss.. but trump is a putin asset first.... we have bigger problems in this country about people dying than on the border .. prescripition drugs , heath care costs, crazy American killers, bad water, work the numbers of people dying ,, not the hate of Mexicans then we can put up a fence......thats what we need to work on first!!!

Sounds like you have the elements of a deal listed.

Now, if only the Democrats would stop their blind hating and start negotiating, we might be able to get something done.

If only...

Human trafficking enslaves or kills more than 100,000 near the border. There are about 70,000 deaths due directly to drug overdoses from all sources. The illegal drug trade in Mexico and the US employs more people than any other major corporation.

Living in Indianapolis, nick named "Nap Town" for years, there is rarely a week that passes that does not have a story on local news about illegal drugs.

I'm continuously amused by people like you that hate Trump so completely that you can't see that he is trying to do things to slow, stop or eliminate misery among his people: The Citizens of the USA.

There are real world, actual problems causing real world misery for many at the border based on unregulated, un-legal and uncontrolled border crossings by many bad people.

That is, however, the truth of the matter and is, as a result, not reported to the leftist that oppose Trump.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.co...he-rise-in-border-region-2012jan12-story.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/16/us-drug-overdose-deaths-opioids-fentanyl-cdc

https://drugabuse.com/library/drug-trafficking-statistics/#recent-statistics-on-drug-trafficking
 
Some studies of the undocumented aliens in the US have found a net positive benefit for the economy. What I see as the best estimates of their numbers is in the range of 10.5 to 12 million.

Why estimates? What's the actual number of undocumenteds in the US? The US spends money on undocumenteds for education, health care and Social Security benefits, for examples, which is more than the 5 billion asked for the wall.

How about this? Completely stop the flow of undocumenteds and resultant drain on US economy and the wall won't be needed.

Can you explain, again, why there is no crisis at the southern border?
 
Sounds like you have the elements of a deal listed.

Now, if only the Democrats would stop their blind hating and start negotiating, we might be able to get something done.

If only...

Human trafficking enslaves or kills more than 100,000 near the border. There are about 70,000 deaths due directly to drug overdoses from all sources. The illegal drug trade in Mexico and the US employs more people than any other major corporation.

Living in Indianapolis, nick named "Nap Town" for years, there is rarely a week that passes that does not have a story on local news about illegal drugs.

I'm continuously amused by people like you that hate Trump so completely that you can't see that he is trying to do things to slow, stop or eliminate misery among his people: The Citizens of the USA.

There are real world, actual problems causing real world misery for many at the border based on unregulated, un-legal and uncontrolled border crossings by many bad people.

That is, however, the truth of the matter and is, as a result, not reported to the leftist that oppose Trump.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.co...he-rise-in-border-region-2012jan12-story.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/16/us-drug-overdose-deaths-opioids-fentanyl-cdc

https://drugabuse.com/library/drug-trafficking-statistics/#recent-statistics-on-drug-trafficking

Negotiating over what....a border wall that only exists between his ears and that he himself cannot even describe. Sorry....Trump can present an actual proposal to Congress and allow it to go through the Appropriations process if he wants his Wall. But hint hint...if he actually wanted a wall that is what he would have done when he had GOP majorities in House and Senate. Donald is not king. He does not get to subvert process.

Kindly leave the Obama false equivalencies behind. They don't count. A Deferred Action Exec Order is not Subverting the actual process of Appropriations and the power of the purse held by Congress. Not even close.
 
One can easily make the case that our failure to dissuade these people from making such an arduous and dangerous journey is immoral.

Yes. And that immorality would fall on the left in the US and elsewhere. Additionally, deaths of sick children and all molestation should fall on the shoulders of the left in the US and elsewhere.
 
Maybe you missed it - Trump accepted blame/credit for the shutdown, so "trump shutdown" is apt.

Excess taxes due to reducing carbon emissions is worthwhile to you. I can only deduce you don't think there is a crisis on the border, a crisis of illegal immigration.
 
Negotiating over what....a border wall that only exists between his ears and that he himself cannot even describe. Sorry....Trump can present an actual proposal to Congress and allow it to go through the Appropriations process if he wants his Wall. But hint hint...if he actually wanted a wall that is what he would have done when he had GOP majorities in House and Senate. Donald is not king. He does not get to subvert process.

Kindly leave the Obama false equivalencies behind. They don't count. A Deferred Action Exec Order is not Subverting the actual process of Appropriations and the power of the purse held by Congress. Not even close.

He proposed the funding for the wall but the Dems in the Senate blocked it.

I didn't mention Obama in any part of the post to which you responded. Are your meds balanced correctly?

There are real world problems based on issues at the border including human enslavement, deaths, drug addiction and illegal crossings.

Which of these are you saying is not happening?

The problem with our modern day leftists like you is that you live in a world that doesn't exist. Real problems are not worth looking at and imagined problems are in need of immediate solution.

Why is that?
 
Maybe you missed it - Trump accepted blame/credit for the shutdown, so "trump shutdown" is apt.

So, you admit the dems are resisting the wall just to make political points against Trump?
 
Back
Top Bottom