America's Crisis of Trust

that's our 23 year old son. He's never been insurable until the ACA,

Click to expand...

I've been called a damn socialist and worst because I firmly support universal healthcare that is NOT derived from any employer.
Why do all the wealthy nations have accessible affordable healthcare while millions of Americans have to clean out their savings, go bankrupt, or
mortgage their future? And I don't understand how the access to healthcare became a political football. Why does one party see the issue and
attempt to create a more inclusive law-- with no support from the other party? I know the ACA has problems. It needs serious revisions to control costs
and maximize user flexibility. But tens of millions gained coverage they did not have prior to ACA. Don't millions of young adults who keep their coverage
longer count to those who want to dismantle the law?

ttwtt78640 said:

On some issues, e.g. illegal immigration, compromise is seemingly impossible. One side wants to let foreign nationals who get inside the US be permitted stay as long as they wish and the other side wants only those invited in to be able to do so. I fail to see how a compromise on such an issue is possible.

Click to expand...

Many Trumpers don’t like immigrants or refugees. It’s not just a matter of legal status

Far too many republicans feign disgust at Trump and still don't act against or vote against his policies.

Click to expand...

You are right. But despite Moscow's ongoing efforts to apply their thumb to the scale, and impact our elections,
I still have faith in the ballot box.
Some Republican office holders realize they're dead meat if they run for re-election, so they've bailed.
Some Democrats understand that most states have pluralities of folks who are more moderate than either
party's extremists. God bless the electorate. I'm counting on the "New Silent Majority" to head to the polls
this November to deliver a message: "America deserves better!"

Many Trumpers don’t like immigrants or refugees. It’s not just a matter of legal status

Click to expand...

Some Americans don't much care for anyone who doesn't look and sound like them, period.
I'm happy to confront racist prejudice. It's a calling. We just read the Bible's New Testament and there it is...

Bottom line, hate is an evil thing. We are seeing way too much of it.

Describe the "traction gaining" process.

Click to expand...

In modern history American politics has seen few 3rd parties that gained more than a minor blip.
George Wallace managed to gain the highest vote count of any recent 3rd part presidential candiate,
but still only won a few states in the deep South. My fictional character builds a coalition strategy.
They open their campaign to all voters, seeking to build relationships across the political spectrum.
They offer cabinet and senior posts to office holders they respect from both parties. And their message is
honed strategically to appeal to a broad swath of voter attitudes without pandering to the extreme right or left.
They present a visionary strategy to address the Eastern alliance of China, Russia, and a host of other nations
willing to split from Western leadership. (part of the issue is the undermining of the EU and NATO, as both orgs
experience defections, such as Turkey leaving NATO). A major threat to the West and the US makes possible
unlikely bedfellows who unite for security.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

We're done. You don't get to teach me history, tovareesh.
Go kiss Putin's ring if that's what gets you off.

Click to expand...

We're not comrades, newsboy.

Harshaw said:

I don't have to "misquote you"; everything you said was blasting Republicans.

Click to expand...

Where were you when I "blasted" Bill Clinton and switched parties only to support a guy who invaded Iraq to settle a family debt?
If you take my comments as Republican bashing, I ain't gonna change your mind. But my novel is propelled by our need for a 3rd party.
One that let's thinking people leave both the Dems and GOP for a fresh start -- one without the tribal baggage.
You know, the fact that you bristle if I slam the GOP, cause that's your team. Meanwhile, I often slam the Dems, but since you don't
see that, you take offense at my posting. Oh well, I tried.

If a person is so entrenched in their version of the truth, and their view of the world, that they call me a fascist for what I've said here today,
we are not likely to become pen pals. But I keep hoping that some of my shared points might open up someone's thinking.

dcaraz said:

Where were you when I "blasted" Bill Clinton and switched parties only to support a guy who invaded Iraq to settle a family debt?

Click to expand...

I have no reason to think you did that. You've only been here since 2016 and hardly ever posted. I've never seen you before today.

You certainly didn't do it in this thread.

If you take my comments as Republican bashing, I ain't gonna change your mind. But my novel is propelled by our need for a 3rd party.
One that let's thinking people leave both the Dems and GOP for a fresh start -- one without the tribal baggage.
You know, the fact that you bristle if I slam the GOP, cause that's your team. Meanwhile, I often slam the Dems, but since you don't
see that, you take offense at my posting. Oh well, I tried.

Click to expand...

I'm not "bristling" about anything, and certainly not because the Republicans are "my team"; they aren't. I'm a Libertarian. (You know, a 3rd party?)

I'm simply pointing out the silly hypocrisy of your supposed thread topic and your entirely one-sided OP.

This is a fight.

(First – I apologize for this (very) late reply. I marked this when I had to leave Sat. evening and it got buried. I just noticed it this morning.)

Captain Adverse said:

1. Again, citing a few members of a rather large group as "examples" of purveyors of "Fake News" does not indict the entire press. The fact is, despite all attempts to mislead and misrepresent, and dressing it up any way you like Trump NEVER said "The PRESS is the enemy of the people."

Click to expand...

I quoted Trump accurately. He singled out major news outlets he doesn't like, which in that example (there are others) were most major networks and a few major newspapers. Did I use the global term “the press”? If so, please quote me. That was not intentional.

2. The list of incidents in your citation of "fake news" are just SOME of the many examples of how the MSM has mislead, misrepresented, and outright lied about things Mr. Trump said and did. Funny how so many people like to call the President a serial liar, yet constantly ignore or dismiss the many lies, exaggerations, and misleading stories posted by some prominent "News" organizations.

Click to expand...

Some of those examples of “fake news” used by the Trump admin. were debunked by politifact in the other link I posted. The Trump admin. has been peddling “alternative facts” since day one. There are no alternative facts. Much of what Trump says and tweets is for all intents and purposes, Fake News, so where does that leave us?
Trump and Fox purposely distort and mislead. Seemingly that's okay as long as it's in the service of DJT.

3. Wow, so he singles out FOX news for praise, but doesn't praise all the other major MSM organizations who spend all day and night attacking him on anything and everything and you think THAT proves HIS bias? :doh I do not know for a fact he has not "praised" other news sources, but not doing so is not evidence of his dislike either. Fake news exists, publishing fake news in a propaganda effort to undermine anyone, much less the leader of the nation is a "very bad thing," doing a disservice to the alleged Code of Ethics of a "Free Press" while still working within that guarantee. The latter is why publications like the National Inquirer can print it's fake stories and sell it's papers.

Click to expand...

The National Enquirer was the one American "newspaper" that endorsed Trump, and Trump is very tight with the owner of that publication. They have bought the rights to stories that were embarrassing to Trump and buried them. You sure you want to refer to the National Enquirer? Most people know it to be nothing but titillating garbage, but they are quite good to Trump.
As for Fox, their alliance with the Republican Party has been there since its inception. Murdoch didn’t hire a lifelong Republican operative named Roger Ailes to run a “fair and balanced” network. The alliance with Trump stems from that, but it seems a lot more personal for Hannity and Ingrahm. Fox is now Trump TV. Anything that doesn’t coddle and excuse Trump like Fox is the vile MSM. They have a market and they play to it – Trump’s loyal followers.

"Media" is profit driven. I wish they were a true 4th estate, but it seems that short term shareholder gain drives them harder than truth. That reality has been in play since at least Reagan. I simply figure out what filter an outlet uses and go from there. Some (like Fox and MSNBC) are an almost complete waste of time. I don’t watch MSNBC or CNN if I can help it, either.

cont...

cont from above...

4. So tens of millions of people have one opinion. I counter with the fact that tens of millions have an opposite opinion. So what?

Click to expand...

That’s true, and Fox and countless syndicated radio personalities and websites serve that market. They are not interested in facts, they are interested in profit which equates to market share - eyeballs for ads.

5. You have every right to your personal opinion as do I. But that does not give you or anyone else license to get away with misrepresenting what someone actually said via twisting it into something you prefer to believe he meant. THAT is intentional deception, something your side keeps accusing the President of.

Click to expand...

Does "the media" screw things up? Sure. Do they sometimes distort things to the point where they are basically false? Sure, but that's the exception, and the reputable outlets own up to it. There are hyperpartisan outlets on both sides that don’t play that way. I generally avoid them.

What's interesting about the syndicated radio shills and the shows and personalities on Fox that Trump praises is that they distort things deliberately to make Trump look good. That's clearly what Trump wants. A "press" full of Hannity clones, stroking and praising Trump while insulting all those who don’t. Trump would never call anything they say “Fake News”, even though much of it is distortion or outright BS.

I guess the bottom line is that BS that is favorable to Trump is not "Fake News". Anything, true or not, that Trump dislikes is "Fake News" and those who disseminate it are "the enemy of the people". This has nothing whatsoever to do with TRUTH or FACTS.

This just in............The White House has just announced the termination of associate justices Ellena Kagan, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayer and Ruth Ginsburg. When asked by the MSM why they were removed from the Bench of the United States Supreme Court, the White House said it was due to the fact that they are rapists. And when asked how the White House found out they were rapists, the answer was “ they were accused of being so “