The Trump Card...

[ATeam]

Unless they proclaim it to be ethical journalism, then it becomes a disservice.

I almost never read Slate. That's not a matter of principle. It's simply because I do not find the publication interesting. If you say they proclaim their pieces to be ethical journalism, I have no choice but to either take your word for it or to research that question myself. Not interested in doing that so I'll default to your view.

I'll add that in a world where there are more media outlets than ever and more accessibility to them than ever, the energy people put into criticizing one journalist or publication over another confuses me. If I become interested in a controversial topic, I'll read about it in a wide variety of publications to gain a broad perspective. I don't understand why people get so wound up about this publication or that.

 

[ATeam]

Then how do you explain the vast political ideological differences between densely populated areas and everywhere else? And it's not just in this country, either. The differences are all over the world.

It would probably take a course or two in sociology to answer that question. The very first thing that comes to mind is elbow room. When trucking, Diane and I observed that the people in the country were nicer than people in cities. We attributed that to the stress that comes from living so close together with so many others. For the rest of the story, read a sociology book and let me know what you figure out.

It is worth noting that in rural settings, political views vary greatly. While a merchant in small-town Texas may have things in common with a merchant in small-town Minnesota, the two will likely have a good number of differences that set them apart.

If a Progressive Democrat goes and lives on a farm in Iowa for five years, will they return a staunch Republican? Probably not. They will, however, likely return with a better understanding of, and maybe even some surprising agreement with, the people of the farming community....

It's funny how that works, isn't it? When people of different views get to know each other, things become less tense. I wonder how many die-hard Trump supporters have visited a mosque or broken bread with an American Muslim family?

I seriously doubt that I'd come back as a Hindu, because I already know so much about Hinduism, but I may very well come back as an avid practitioner of yoga.

Next time you're in our area, drop by the gym. We do yoga twice a week and I'll treat you to a free class. Namaste.

 

[Turtle]

I almost never read Slate. That's not a matter of principle. It's simply because I do not find the publication interesting. If you say they proclaim their pieces to be ethical journalism, I have no choice but to either take your word for it or to research that question myself. Not interested in doing that so I'll default to your view.

The Wikipedia entry on Slate will tell you pretty much what you need to know. I don't read it daily, by any stretch, but I do read it often enough. There is some good journalism there, done by good journalists with integrity. John Dickerson, for example, is the current host of Face the Nation on CBS, and while he's a liberal Democrat, he still by and large practices the Ethics of Journalism. His bias sometimes shows through, and that's fine, but it's never in an agendized manner, which would be a problem (although during the presidential election he didn't try much to suppress his bias against Trump when he was on many of the CBS shows that I saw him on). But I read this or that story on Slate just to see what point of view they have on a story. I read many straight-up liberal agenda publications for the same reason.

I'll add that in a world where there are more media outlets than ever and more accessibility to them than ever, the energy people put into criticizing one journalist or publication over another confuses me. If I become interested in a controversial topic, I'll read about it in a wide variety of publications to gain a broad perspective. I don't understand why people get so wound up about this publication or that.

I read a wide variety even on the least controversial stories, certainly to gain a broad perspective on the controversial stories, but even on mundane hard news stories you can pick up facts here and there that were omitted from this or that reporting.

But the reason so many people get wound up about this or that media outlet is when they present heavily massaged spin, that is spun expressly for the purpose of misleading the reader or viewer in favor of an agenda, as unbiased factual reporting. It's particularly infuriating when it's done by the mainstream media, which by definition is the large mass media that influence a large number of people, and both reflect and shape prevailing currents of thought. When you start dishonestly and manipulatively shaping prevailing currents of thought, it's a serious problem. While Fox News isn't exactly mainstream media by definition, they do influence a lot of people, so when they claim to be fair and balanced but are neither, people get wound up, especially because so many of their viewers actually believe their whole fair and balanced dog and pony show. When CNN claims to be neither left nor right, while at the same time presenting a clearly biased viewpoint, they begin to look a little like Baghdad Bob on every news story. When CNN does story after story about fake news, and how bad it is in general, and how bad it was for Clinton, and the present themselves as being above that and looking down in judgement on those who perpetuate it, I can't help but to believe that everyone who works there could call their journalistic alma maters and get their money back. And when the New York Times, liberal to be sure, but still the standard bearer for journalistic ethics and professionalism, publicly and loudly flushes those ethics down the toilet of political bias, and even encouraged other journalists to do the same, people are gonna get wound up over it.

 

[Turtle]

Then how do you explain the vast political ideological differences between densely populated areas and everywhere else? And it's not just in this country, either. The differences are all over the world.

It would probably take a course or two in sociology to answer that question. The very first thing that comes to mind is elbow room. When trucking, Diane and I observed that the people in the country were nicer than people in cities. We attributed that to the stress that comes from living so close together with so many others. For the rest of the story, read a sociology book and let me know what you figure out.

I've read many sociology books. Social science and the study of human nature has been an interest of mine for as long as I can remember.

It is worth noting that in rural settings, political views vary greatly. While a merchant in small-town Texas may have things in common with a merchant in small-town Minnesota, the two will likely have a good number of differences that set them apart.

Political views vary greatly in rural areas, but not really all that much. You have far right and far left even in Midtown Manhattan. I was born in a very rural areas, grew up in the suburbs, and lived in a densely populated area of both New Jersey and Pittsburgh. I'm back home in the country now, a heavily conservative region, but my stepdad, who was born and raised (OK, reared) here, is to the left of Bernie Sanders. One look at the blue/red county map of the US will tell you while the political views may vary in rural areas, they are dominated by conservative views.

Part of the reason for that is an answer to the question of why is there a difference between rural and urban political views. Cities are more complex and thus require more top-down control. As a result, city-dwellers are more tolerant/trusting of governance control, as well as people who believe in strong governance tend to migrate to to live in cities. Those in rural areas enjoy less control and more personal freedom, and they like it that way. Also, cites naturally have more diversity, requiring residents to be more tolerant of others and will more easily dismiss the in-group/out-group clan mentalities.

And politically, large and small constituencies have multiple interests, and when enough constituents share an interest, they organize to promote the narrow special interest. As the size of the constituency grows, these narrow special interests have to compete with each other, therefore it becomes harder for one particular special interest to dominate all the others. In densely populated constituencies, rather than a particular special interest dominating, they tend to take on all of the interests at once. Small towns are far less diverse than urban areas, and are consequently dominated by a few narrow interests. This is true for both social and economic issues. There are some exception cases, but mostly the dominant interest will tend to be a conservative one. For example, when the dominant special interest is something like a liberal-leaning university, the small town will be dominated by a narrow liberal viewpoint, but this is certainly the minority of small towns (and not even the case in my small college town with an insanely liberal, trigger-warning-happy, safe-space-squattin,' millennial-filled university).

When the dominant special interest is a socially-conservative church group, or a group of church groups, the small town will be dominated by a narrow socially-conservative viewpoint. In urban areas, however, there is a mix of many more special interests with no particular dominant viewpoint, and so what you get is a political mix that looks quite 'if it feels good do it' liberal to all conservatives, but which also looks quite conservative compared to the most special interest liberal views.

And that's how you get a rural and urban population that's utterly out of touch with each other.

 

[ATeam]

And that's how you get a rural and urban population that's utterly out of touch with each other.

You offer an interesting analysis but I do not agree that the U.S. rural and urban populations are utterly out of touch with each other. Americans were very much in touch as they debated and voted on the merits of their respective candidates. While the Minnesota and Texas small-town merchants and the Manhattan liberals and conservatives may vote differently, all of them communicate reasonably well and all of them consider themselves to be citizens of the same country. A red/blue map shows where the majority of reds and blues carried their areas but it does not show that people of various persuasions live, play, work and vote within in a given area that all of them call home.

Also note that a significant block of people who were eligible to vote did not vote at all. In 2016, that group made up about 45% of the voting-age population. Those people may not vote but they do count when it comes to participating in their communities. They chug smoothly along while the activists are at each others' throats.

 

[ATeam]

But the reason so many people get wound up about this or that media outlet is when they present heavily massaged spin, that is spun expressly for the purpose of misleading the reader or viewer in favor of an agenda, as unbiased factual reporting

You're an expediter and likely have far more time for this luxury of political participation and analysis than I do. You probably spend far more time reading the news than me.

Thinking about this a bit more, it occurs to me that people get wound up about a given media outlet because they personally identify with a candidate, party or point of view; and they then take umbrage when an outlet reports information in a way they deem inaccurate or unfair to their favored item. Be it a political candidate or sports team, the dynamic is the same.

Few people get out of bed in the morning predisposed to critique the quality of journalism they encounter that day. Many people are willing to rise excitedly to their team's defense if they feel the team is unfairly treated or disrespectfully put down by a particular media outlet. That outlet only becomes a problem when the information it communicates ruffles the reader/listener/viewer's feathers.

Few and far between are the people who ask "how much professional and ethical integrity does this publication have" if you hand them a copy of the Star Tribune. Great is the number of people who will complain about the fairness or ethics of that paper if they read something in it that they disagree with.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

even a "Fox News commentator " Journalism is dead....no one wants the truth...Only their own perceived truth...
each network and newspaper has taken sides....

Truth? You can't handle the truth.....

 

[Turtle]

You're an expediter and likely have far more time for this luxury of political participation and analysis than I do. You probably spend far more time reading the news than me.

Long before I became an expediter I took my first journalism classes in high school, and in college between two masters degrees in music I managed to squeeze in many classes in journalism, as well as advertising and marketing classes. While the journalism and advertising courses also furthered the music theory degree (which is about far more than the notes of the music), they are also both good studies in human nature and how easy it is to manipulate the human mind. It is more than a luxury with me, it is an interest that I have continued to this day. It allows me to recognize when someone (advertisers, the press, and others) is trying to manipulate me, and it allows me to view differering opinions with a clearer, more open mind.

Few and far between are the people who ask "how much professional and ethical integrity does this publication have" if you hand them a copy of the Star Tribune. Great is the number of people who will complain about the fairness or ethics of that paper if they read something in it that they disagree with.

Not nearly enough people question the integrity of the news they receive, that is true. Most prefer to have their news wafted over them in a soothing, confirmational bias kind of way. And the Internet makes is even easier to keep on smacking that orgasmic button rather than the food button they really need to be pressing. News and opinion have become so intermingled, especially on television news, that they have become one in the same for many people. It's gotten to the point for many that if a media outlet doesn't deliver your particular flavor of news, they are biased in favor of the opposition, even if that media outlet only delivers the Five Ws with no commentary whatsoever. It certainly doesn't help that for the last 20-30 years educational institutions have been less focused on a foundation of critical thinking and have instead been more focused on the facade of social justice.

 

[ATeam]

It certainly doesn't help that for the last 20-30 years educational institutions have been less focused on a foundation of critical thinking and have instead been more focused on the facade of social justice.

It's not even about social justice any more. It's about teaching students to pass a test so the teachers can get credit for that. We have kids come in to join the gym who literally do not know how to write. When we give them the enrollment form and a pen, they tell us they cannot complete that task. They and their parents and their teachers explain that cursive is no longer taught in schools. It was dropped to shift the emphasis onto passing the test.

These are high school kids so most people in the work force still know how to write. But as these kids grow, Diane and I will not be able to hire them because we need our employees to know how to write. Or, we'll have to revamp our procedures and become device-dependent to accommodate people who cannot write. Students in third world countries are taught how to write but not students in Florida any more. I guess we'll have to start advertising for immigrants when we hire people. Instead of exporting a gym job, we'll have to import workers. A kid from Mexico who speaks two languages and knows how to write is far more attractive than an honor student and U.S. citizen from the high school down the street who cannot write at all.

Did Trump say anything about make kids write again? Does make America great again include teaching kids how to write their name? And even if this is not taught in school any more, where the hell are the parents? I don't have kids but if I did you could be sure they would know how to read, write and do arithmetic.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

It certainly doesn't help that for the last 20-30 years educational institutions have been less focused on a foundation of critical thinking and have instead been more focused on the facade of social justice.

It's not even about social justice any more. It's about teaching students to pass a test so the teachers can get credit for that. We have kids come in to join the gym who literally do not know how to write. When we give them the enrollment form and a pen, they tell us they cannot complete that task. They and their parents and their teachers explain that cursive is no longer taught in schools. It was dropped to shift the emphasis onto passing the test.

These are high school kids so most people in the work force still know how to write. But as these kids grow, Diane and I will not be able to hire them because we need our employees to know how to write. Or, we'll have to revamp our procedures and become device-dependent to accommodate people who cannot write. Students in third world countries are taught how to write but not students in Florida any more. I guess we'll have to start advertising for immigrants when we hire people. Instead of exporting a gym job, we'll have to import workers. A kid from Mexico who speaks two languages and knows how to write is far more attractive than an honor student and U.S. citizen from the high school down the street who cannot write at all.

Did Trump say anything about make kids write again? Does make America great again include teaching kids how to write their name? And even if this is not taught in school any more, where the hell are the parents? I don't have kids but if I did you could be sure they would know how to read, write and do arithmetic.

would be nice if the kids today could make change for a $20.00....the incompetence is running wild...

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Trump may try to bring jobs back to America....but we need competent employees to be able to understand simple instructions without Tweeting or FB or worse Googling it...If I were a plant Manager I might as well train others in a foreign country and pay them peanuts then use Americans...

 

[Turtle]

Cursive proficiency is not assessed or even addressed at all in the standardized tests of Common Core, therefore the ability to write in cursive is deemed non-essential to graduate and thus isn't even taught in more and more school districts. Cursive writing was invented for a specific purpose (to make writing quicker and less messy with ink-dipped quill pens), and really, the death knell of cursive probably began in the last 1800s when the ball point pen was invented. The ink would dry very quickly and thus would not smudge and thus no longer required the careful penmanship one would use with the older design of pen. Modern technologies have had a much greater impact, though.

But because careful penmanship is no longer required, and thus is not learned, we are now seeing a generation of people under 30 who more or less write like second graders. The penmanship is atrocious. And while I don't really have a problem with the disappearance of cursive writing in and of itself, I am a little concerned about the loss of other things connected with handwriting and good penmanship. Not merely the loss of the development of the motor skills that kids develop by actually holding a pencil and actually being able to write. But being able to write well is a great learning tool, in that if you have to form the letters with your hands, there's a kind of connection with using your hands to form those letters. It cements it in your mind a lot better, you are more reflective about what you write.

There are already television shows about the adventures of hiring and/or working with Millennials. Most are sitcoms, and are supposed to be funny, and many of them are, but the humor belies a tragedy underneath it all. They can't read and write, or do math, and don't understand the concept of being proficient in anything. That's what happens when you spend your formative years learning about how glorious it is that Timmy Has To Mommies, and in playing musical chairs with the same number of people as chairs.

 

[ATeam]

Be careful about generalizing. We get good applicants from a given age group as well as some who cannot write. All mellenials are not hopeless. Some are very bright, highly skilled, hard working and reliable. We are thrilled to have them on board.

 

[Turtle]

Be careful about generalizing.

Generalizations are just that. They are not intended, nor should they be construed to cover every possible variant. I generally (see what I did there) try to take the pain to point that out in most of my writings when talking in generalities, so as to head off the inevitable accusations of painting everyone with the same broad brush, and to prevent people from waxing poetic about the various and sundry exceptions to my generalized characterizations, as if I'm ignorant or dismissive of the existence of such exceptions.

For example, one can put great faith in when I say that liberals are bedwetters that I do not mean each and every liberal literally wets the bed on a regular basis when things don't go their way.

 

[davekc]

Be careful about generalizing.

Generalizations are just that.

For example, one can put great faith in when I say that liberals are bedwetters that I do not mean each and every liberal literally wets the bed on a regular basis when things don't go their way.

Are you sure?

 

[Ragman]

Be careful about generalizing.

Generalizations are just that.

For example, one can put great faith in when I say that liberals are bedwetters that I do not mean each and every liberal literally wets the bed on a regular basis when things don't go their way.

Are you sure?

Touble maker......

 

[ATeam]

Above, I predicted that the Republican Representatives and Senators who have the power to impeach Trump will move to do so when Trump's support base weakens. I believe the base will weaken as Trump fails to keep, or the Republicans prevent him from keeping, many of the campaign promises Trump made. Or it will weaken in response to an impeachable offense(s).

To track this prediction, it is necessary to document and track the keeping or breaking of the promises in question, which is the purpose of this post. An easy, interactive tool for this is The Washington Post Trump Promise Tracker. While the source is no favorite of Trump supporters, the tool itself is useful and it can be easily determined if that paper did a fair job of listing Trump's promises (check them against the other lists and words from Trump himself).

From Trump Himself: Contract With the American Voter

From A Trump-Friendly Source; Breitbart News: 28 Things Donald Trump Promises to do as President

1. Propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress
2. Institute a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health)
3. Require for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated.
4. Institute a five year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service
5. Create a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government.
6. Institute a complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections.
7. Announce intention to renegotiate NAFTA or withdraw from the deal under Article 2205.
8. Announce withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
9. Direct Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator.
10. Direct the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly impact American workers and direct them to use every tool under American and international law to end those abuses immediately.
11. Lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.
12. Lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward.
13. Cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure.
14. Cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama.
15. Begin the process of selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia from one of the 20 judges on my list, who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.
16. Cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities.
17. Begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won’t take them back.
18. Suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting.
19. Work with Congress on a Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act.An economic plan designed to grow the economy 4% per year and create at least 25 million new jobs through massive tax reduction and simplification, in combination with trade reform, regulatory relief, and lifting the restrictions on American energy. The largest tax reductions are for the middle class. A middle-class family with 2 children will get a 35% tax cut. The current number of brackets will be reduced from 7 to 3, and tax forms will likewise be greatly simplified. The business rate will be lowered from 35 to 15 percent, and the trillions of dollars of American corporate money overseas can now be brought back at a 10 percent rate.
20. Work with Congress on a End The Offshoring Act Establishes tariffs to discourage companies from laying off their workers in order to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the U.S. tax-free.
21. Work with Congress on a American Energy & Infrastructure Act Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral.
22. Work with Congress on a School Choice And Education Opportunity Act Redirects education dollars to gives parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable.
23. Work with Congress on a Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications.
24. Work with Congress on a Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act.Allows Americans to deduct childcare and elder care from their taxes, incentivizes employers to provide on-side childcare services, and creates tax-free Dependent Care Savings Accounts for both young and elderly dependents, with matching contributions for low-income families.
25. Work with Congress on an End Illegal Immigration Act Fully-funds the construction of a wall on our southern border with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall; establishes a 2-year mandatory minimum federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S. after a previous deportation, and a 5-year mandatory minimum for illegally re-entering for those with felony convictions, multiple misdemeanor convictions or two or more prior deportations; also reforms visa rules to enhance penalties for overstaying and to ensure open jobs are offered to American workers first.
26. Work with Congress on a Restoring Community Safety Act.Reduces surging crime, drugs and violence by creating a Task Force On Violent Crime and increasing funding for programs that train and assist local police; increases resources for federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to dismantle criminal gangs and put violent offenders behind bars.
27. Work with Congress on a Restoring National Security Act.Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values
28. Work with Congress on a Clean up Corruption in Washington Act.Enacts new ethics reforms to Drain the Swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics.

 

[ATeam]

Not included in the Trump promises listed above is "Lock her up." Trump promised to put Hillary in jail. He did it in public in a debate. He did it to her face. Elsewhere, Trump promised to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary. After he won the election, Trump informed his supporters that he will not do these things.

Is it fair to say this is a broken promise?

The negative response in Trump's base is a preview of more to come as more promises are broken, I believe.

Trump made other promises that are not on the list above. One of them is the temporary ban on Muslim immigration. To see how he does on that one and most others we have to wait until he begins his term.

 

[Turtle]

Propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress

As an example, even if he proposes the amendment, if Congress doesn't ratify it, The Washington Post will rate that as a broken promise.

Obama promised to close Guantonimo, but because Congress put up barriers to prevent it, The Washington Post actually deemed it a promise kept, but unwanted by Congress.

 

[x06col]

I have lived in a small rural town, in a large city, in the suburbs and on the road, all for years at a time. My views and biases did not change with my address.

Then how do you explain the vast political ideological differences between densely populated areas and everywhere else? And it's not just in this country, either. The differences are all over the world.

If we made it financially worth your while to live voluntarily in an apartment near a yoga school in India for five years, would you come back to us a Hindu?

If a Progressive Democrat goes and lives on a farm in Iowa for five years, will they return a staunch Republican? Probably not. They will, however, likely return with a better understanding of, and maybe even some surprising agreement with, the people of the farming community. (Dances with Wolves and Avatar taught us that ). I seriously doubt that I'd come back as a Hindu, because I already know so much about Hinduism, but I may very well come back as an avid practitioner of yoga.

Been my experience that WHEN a Progressive Democrat goes and lives on a farm in Iowa for five years, they, in that time, would have already attempted four times to require the neighboring Hog farmer to make his Hog House quit smelling like hog crap. So, no, they will not return a staunch Republican. In fact in my view they won't even return much wiser.

I have lived in a small rural town, in a large city, in the suburbs and on the road, all for years at a time. My views and biases did not change with my address.

Then how do you explain the vast political ideological differences between densely populated areas and everywhere else? And it's not just in this country, either. The differences are all over the world.

If we made it financially worth your while to live voluntarily in an apartment near a yoga school in India for five years, would you come back to us a Hindu?

If a Progressive Democrat goes and lives on a farm in Iowa for five years, will they return a staunch Republican? Probably not. They will, however, likely return with a better understanding of, and maybe even some surprising agreement with, the people of the farming community. (Dances with Wolves and Avatar taught us that ). I seriously doubt that I'd come back as a Hindu, because I already know so much about Hinduism, but I may very well come back as an avid practitioner of yoga.