Obama on Trump

[Revoltingest]

I keep hearing the "with little education" being sighted on this forum for those that support the non-liberal/progressive mandates. I was just wondering what is meant by "with little education". Now I admit that I do not have one of them thar highfaluten college degrees in Art History, Communications, Theater, Philosophy, or Creative Writing, but I know I can skin an buck, bait a hook, drive a truck, and know who Jack Daniels is. Why I'm even darn good at reloading my own ammunition for them thar semi-automatic rifles, pistols and wheel guns that I have in my arsenal . All I got is this here high school diploma. Heck I can even write a C++ source code to trouble shoot a failed component in one of them thar massively parallel computing machines. But I guess I just don't have the education it takes to be a progressive liberal.

Here are some of the nation's best & brightest....

 

[Shadow Wolf]

A more likely scenario in which he loses is that the novelty wears off.

He can't win the Hispanic vote, we won't win over additional female votes, and those are two key minority votes the GOP need to win because other minority groups (such as the youth vote, which is another large voter demograph) tend to vote democrat. But, it could set them up for their image overhaul in 2020 to go from Palin's nuttiness, Romney's crony capitalism, and Trump just being Trump, to that new-face of the GOP that can reach out to Hispanics, who can get behind younger voters, and not make women feel like their health is being controlled by a man.

I was just wondering what is meant by "with little education".

The majority of Trump supporters do not have a college degree.

Now I admit that I do not have one of them thar highfaluten college degrees in Art History, Communications, Theater, Philosophy, or Creative Writing

College degrees also include physics, biology, medicine, geology, cosmology, engineering - these, the ones you mention, and more, Trump supporters tend to not have them. They also tend to be Midwestern Conservatives, and tend to have the least favorable views of Mexican immigrants. They also tend to be poorer (which may be skewed as the Midwest in general tends to be rural and poorer).

I know I can skin an buck, bait a hook, drive a truck, and know who Jack Daniels is.

Me too. I grew up out in the country where there are a bunch of farms and a bunch of people who learned how to do those things young (including driving a truck).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Here are some of the nation's best & brightest....

Republican voters are more likely to deny evolution, believe in a human virgin birth and a dead guy coming back to life, and that Jesus probably or definitely will return during their life time. And be more likely to support military intervention.

 

[Revoltingest]

Republican voters are more likely to deny evolution, believe in a human virgin birth and a dead guy coming back to life, and that Jesus probably or definitely will return during their life time. And be more likely to support military intervention.

I notice that many here focus upon minor differences between groups,
& paint themselves as the smarter & better group. The other side becomes
dumb & evil. All candidates then become one extreme or the other.
This blinds them to nuance & shared traits. Any discussion of it is met with
quick cries of "False equivalence!".
Examining these groups, I'm entirely unimpressed with both Dems & Pubs.
Take a look at Kennedy's, Johnson's & Nixon's records on the Viet Nam war.
The party of war considers itself the party of peace, & doesn't face its
own candidates being pro-war. Just look at the Democratic Party now....
....the hawk is being anointed without serious opposition.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This blinds them to nuance & shared traits. Any discussion of it is met with
quick cries of "False equivalence!".

It was more meant as an offering of evidence that both sides have their nut cases.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This blinds them to nuance & shared traits. Any discussion of it is met with
quick cries of "False equivalence!".

It was more meant as an offering of evidence that both sides have their nut cases.

 

[Revoltingest]

It was more meant as an offering of evidence that both sides have their nut cases.

True dat.

 

[metis]

Any discussion of it is met with
quick cries of "False equivalence!".

Are you denying that there can be "false equivalencies"?

Even though there certainly are some similarities between Democrats and Republicans, there are also some differences, and the same would hold true of those who may be more inclined to vote Libertarian. If I said that the Libertarian Party was the same as the Democrat or Republican Party and that there are no real differences between them, would you agree to that?

The reality is that there can be and generally are at least some differences, so there can indeed be "false equivalencies" made by those who try and deny some of these differences.

 

[Revoltingest]

Are you denying that there can be "false equivalencies"?

Did I claim that anywhere?

Even though there certainly are some similarities between Democrats and Republicans, there are also some differences, and the same would hold true of those who may be more inclined to vote Libertarian. If I said that the Libertarian Party was the same as the Democrat or Republican Party and that there are no real differences between them, would you agree to that?

I'd not agree.

The reality is that there can be and generally are at least some differences, so there can indeed be "false equivalencies" made by those who try and deny some of these differences.

The problem with the recurring cry of "False equivalency!" is that it's so
often used incorrectly (or mischievously) to avoid facing traits in common.
This makes opposing camps more extreme in their perceptions of the other.

 

[metis]

The problem with the recurring cry of "False equivalency!" is that it's so
often used incorrectly (or mischievously) to avoid facing traits in common.

And did I say otherwise? But what I have seen done by some here is to draw equivalencies where there simply is/are some significant differences. Only rarely are two or more things exactly equal-- thus my grape/bowling ball analogy in my response to one of your previous "equivalencies".

BTW, how did that large, hard "grape" taste?

 

[Revoltingest]

And did I say otherwise?

Not that I noticed.
But I was speaking generally all along, not about you.

But what I have seen done by some here is to draw equivalencies where there simply is/are some significant differences. Only rarely are two or more things exactly equal-- thus my grape/bowling ball analogy in my response to one of your previous "equivalencies".
BTW, how did that large, hard "grape" taste?

I don't recall anything about grapes & bowling balls.
It must've been a forgettable analogy.

 

[metis]

I don't recall anything about grapes & bowling balls.
It must've been a forgettable analogy.

Or an indication of your A-G-E, evidenced by your selfie that you use for your avatar here. Notice how young and vibrant mine is.

 

[Underhill]

Or an indication of your A-G-E, evidenced by your selfie that you use for your avatar here. Notice how young and vibrant mine is.

That's a low blow there. You have to be more subtle in your insults.

But you are probably okay. After all, it's not like he will remember the conversation.

 

[metis]

That's a low blow there. You have to be more subtle in your insults.

But you are probably okay. After all, it's not like he will remember the conversation.

^^Good point.^^

 

[Revoltingest]

Or an indication of your A-G-E, evidenced by your selfie that you use for your avatar here. Notice how young and vibrant mine is.

Analogies can be useful, but are risky.
If they illuminate a situation, then they're wonderful.
But if they're artfully crafted to create a straw man, then they merely annoy.
I tend to forget the latter type.

 

[Underhill]

Analogies can be useful, but are risky.
If they illuminate a situation, then they're wonderful.
But if they're artfully crafted to create a straw man, then they merely annoy.
I tend to forget the latter type.

My grandfather often said something similar. I simply called it a senior moment.

 

[metis]

Analogies can be useful, but are risky.
If they illuminate a situation, then they're wonderful.
But if they're artfully crafted to create a straw man, then they merely annoy.
I tend to forget the latter type.

Nah, it's still just an age thingy.

 

[Revoltingest]

My grandfather often said something similar. I simply called it a senior moment.

I believe in active forgetting.
When something is valueless, I don't put it in long term memory.
I've too many important things to remember, such as the names of the actors on Leave It To Beaver.

 

[esmith]

but I know I can skin an buck, bait a hook, drive a truck, and know who Jack Daniels is.

Me too. I grew up out in the country where there are a bunch of farms and a bunch of people who learned how to do those things young (including driving a truck).

I wasn't going to respond to your reply to my post, but I couldn't let the opportunity pass. First I hope you can recognize satire when you read it because that is exactly what it was. Now for a little more "satire"

To your point that you grew up in the country I will not contest. However, I have a suspicion you don't listen to Country Western music. Why you ask.. Well let's put it this way. I somewhat used Justin Moore's lyrics from his song "Bait A Hook" in my little satirical post. So I guess you could probably say "yeah another dumb hick from the fly-over states" . Yep, Y'all have a good day now.
From Bait A Hook

He can't even bait a hook
He can't even skin a buck
He don't know who Jack Daniels is
He ain't ever drove a truck
Knows how to throw out a line,
But not the kind in a field and stream book
No darlin' I ain't even worried, you'll come runnin' back
He can't even bait a hook.