Why is it my cognitive skills deteriorate after watching political debates?

Status
Not open for further replies.

dannyf

Joined Sep 13, 2015
2,197
A big part of the blame (though it is many-faceted) is simply due to the average person's disinterest in politics.
That would call for an expansion of the tax base so everyone has skin in the game.

Right now, we have a government of some people for other people. The anger your see is due to taxation without representation of the silent majority.
 

jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
11,087
Probably not: Lincoln would for sure be condemned as a racist today.

What he said about the slaves would offend many people today.
1) I said "style" not content. The "Lincoln-Douglas style" is a common term used by forensic societies.
2) What did Lincoln say about slaves that would be so offensive?

John
 

dannyf

Joined Sep 13, 2015
2,197
Really?

Just some minor stuff that Lincoln said:

'I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.'
 

jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
11,087
Here is a link to the content of that debate that dannyf avoided adding: http://www.stolaf.edu/people/fitz/COURSES/debates.htm

Lincoln was anti-slavery. He was also a politician running for the Senate from Illinois. History may be uncomfortable, but it is still history and cannot be erased. Had Lincoln not won that election, slavery in the US might well have persisted many years longer.

Regardless of the history, it is clear that my reference was to the format for the debate, not its content.

John
 

jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
11,087
Now, imagine what will happen if trump said something remotely like that, :)
Apparently, Trump isn't even allowed to speak at the University of Illinois in Chicago, so we will never know. What if Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders said the same thing?

John
 

ronv

Joined Nov 12, 2008
3,770
Apparently, Trump isn't even allowed to speak at the University of Illinois in Chicago, so we will never know. What if Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders said the same thing?

John
Don't misunderstand me. I think what happened was wrong, but not very unexpected. When you insult 35 to 40% of the people sooner or later they are going to do something. His response reminds me of the arsonist that was kind enough to call 911.
Did I hear he cancelled another in Cincinnati? Do I since a political ploy?
 

jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
11,087
I think what happened -- at a state university no less -- was wrong, period. There is no excuse.

Every legitimate candidate deserves the right to speak. Certainly, a very large number of people also are offended and insulted by what Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders say. Where were the police? What about the administration at UIC? Doesn't every major candidate deserve the same protection and right to present his/her views that Hillary Clinton gets?

While what happened might have been expected, it will probably work to Trump's advantage and support his bombastic claims. So yes, political ploy was probably involved in Trump's cancellation. But of course, the demonstration was not a spontaneous event, it was well a well-planned event.

John
 

dannyf

Joined Sep 13, 2015
2,197
Lincoln was anti-slavery. He was also a politician running for the Senate from Illinois.
Basically you are saying that Lincoln is a liar.

What happened on US campuses in general and our societies at large is the spread of totalitarian thinking: only the voices of the mob should be heard. It is the natural extension of political correctness - back then, dissenters are shut out; now, they are knocked out, burned down. In some cases, liberals are advocating locking up of people who refuse to align up to the progressive thinking of this moment.

That's why you don't see the mentioning of "democracy" in the constitution, because in the hands of the wrong people, democracy is indistinguishable from tyranny (of the majority).
 

ronv

Joined Nov 12, 2008
3,770
I think what happened -- at a state university no less -- was wrong, period. There is no excuse.

Every legitimate candidate deserves the right to speak. Certainly, a very large number of people also are offended and insulted by what Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders say. Where were the police? What about the administration at UIC? Doesn't every major candidate deserve the same protection and right to present his/her views that Hillary Clinton gets?

While what happened might have been expected, it will probably work to Trump's advantage and support his bombastic claims. So yes, political ploy was probably involved in Trump's cancellation. But of course, the demonstration was not a spontaneous event, it was well a well-planned event.

John
Yes, I agree.
I think the difference is the Dems only insult the top 1% instead of the bottom 35%.
Most of the 1 percenters don't have much experience in protests.:D
So what's the deal in Cinci??
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
I think the difference is the Dems only insult the top 1% instead of the bottom 35%.
Both Dem candidates fell over themselves the other day in a debate, proclaiming they will NOT enforce existing immigration law. I'm not surprised at their positions, but I was shocked they would publicly announce they do not intend to do law enforcement - the most important function assigned to the Executive by the constitution.

No one asked what other laws they will choose to ignore, or how they reconcile their position with taking the oath of office.

I think far more than 1% Americans are deeply insulted by such pandering.
 

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
10,045
n some cases, liberals are advocating locking up of people who refuse to align up to the progressive thinking of this moment.
What liberals/dems are saying this?

Don't Trump and his supporters bear any of the blame for what happened in Chicago? What happened there last night is a reaction to the guy sucker punching a protester and then saying, "next time we should kill them". Rubio said this morning that this is all Obama's fault, the divisiveness of his presidency. Does this mean the republicans have not been divisive toward him?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top