And if they say, to pick a relevant example, that they want you to crack down on illegal immigration? That they want to build a wall on the southern border?
How is building a wall a concern? It's a possible response to one, sure, but not more than that. Though I guess that's in relation to the whole immigration thing, in which case note previous comments about reality. I've noted how the response to that goes -- by and large we're not going to say something that won't actually do what they want it to do, is going to do what they want it to do. We apparently make the mistake of not lying to people.
And we
already hammer undocumented immigration, for all we're not going to go full gestapo on it (because, again, no, we're not going to screw over fellow americans for this, and don't need to). It's not ignored, obama's not somehow ended deportation efforts and the dems have no intention of changing that, and for all there's been talks of amnesty and whatnot to get some shit sorted out and under control -- which would be something that would
actually improve the situation, mind -- open borders and all that crap are just outright lies. We've been working on undocumented immigration. It was blatant that dems intended to continue doing so. We didn't lie to the people about the realities of what that entailed or how we were going to go about it, but it was happening. But apparently that's not addressing concerns. Neither was integration efforts, work to make the immigration system sane and functional, everything that would work towards addressing the problems involved with that sort of immigration or what was causing the concern in the first place.
But hell, yes, there's going to be some concerns that don't get a very satisfactory response, and substantially more proposed solutions that are rejected, either because a satisfactory response just doesn't exist or are the response, satisfactory or not, is so against the party's spirit that they're just not really an option. Which is why there's not a single effort, monofocused on one method, and why the democratic platform isn't actually single issue, but trying to address a whole hell of a lot of things.
Donald Trump gave some people hope, for the first time in a long time, that their concerns would be not only heard but acted upon. Whether he'll live up to it or not is something we'll have to wait and see.
Trump lied to people, repeatedly. Told them that their concerns could be fixed with shit that can't fix it. That was the hope you're talking about. Yeah, it worked, apparently, and better than the pile of stuff that's actually been
acting on their concerns. But the answer you're giving me is that we need to lie to the people, give them false hope, and take power with empty, impossible, or ineffective, promises. It's what the people want, it seems. Only answer these disaffected, apparently ignored, folks, are going to accept.
... really, I guess what I have to ask is what you see
as addressing their concerns. Are you actually talking about talking to them, working out a way to do something about their problems and not screw other things over, or what? Because that's what is
being done. I know the media says sod all about it and the populations being referred to barely notice it, but it's what's happening. That's what leads to all the bloody local initiatives that have been crawling across this country for the last long while. It's what leads to trying to attack the problems that are causing folks grief from multiple directions to see what sticks. It's what has been causing the left in this country to actually
do shit instead of say they will and then kneecap efforts to the moment someone turns their back.
S'just. Maybe you can answer the question, since you seem to be implying you're closer to understanding these folks and if anyone else actually tried to so far I missed it. If literal decades of effort to address someone's concerns, effort that has actually seen results, if not magical ones, is not seen as addressing someone's concerns, what the hell are you supposed to do?
Is their anything besides what Trump has shown us works, which is throw impossibilities and lies at them until something sticks?
Max: The lesson I was referring to learning was that perhaps they should focus on a candidate's policies, experience and character rather than trotting out the same tired 'Look! It's a woman/black/hispanic! Super progressive!' talking points. Identity politics are cancerous, and if the first thing to be said about your new prospective candidate is about her gender and race then it already feels like nothing that matters will really change.
Though seriously, this just keeps driving me up the wall. Do you really think that clinton didn't focus on experience, policies, and character? Because vast swaths of what she said this campaign was that. Huge amounts of what actually came out of the DNC, was that. And massive amounts of what was aimed at trump, was that. As massively screwed up as it is for it to be true, this POTUS campaign was more focused on policy, experience, and character, than just about any in recent history. Now, the media? Yeah, that wasn't what the media did
fuck the forth estate, seriously. But the lesson you're saying needs to be learned is the lesson that was being
read from this entire campaign.
Author
Topic: Doc Helgoland's Asylum for the Politically American: T+0 (Read 1391497 times)