4 ms·
It's odd to me that someone who's worried about intellectual debate becoming rare would vote for Trump. Trump avoids substantive debates and relies on catch phr
by ritchiea 10y ago
It's odd to me that someone who's worried about intellectual debate becoming rare would vote for Trump. Trump avoids substantive debates and relies on catch phrases. It seems to me that the lack of intellectual debate is tied to polarization of political parties rather than anything done by the Obama administration.
And there is real evidence that the republican party is driving the lack of real debate. The republican party refused to allow hearings for a Supreme Court nominee for a legitimately elected sitting President. That's obstructionism driven to ignoring the constitutional duties granted to the President to achieve political ends.
- therealdrag0 10y agoMaybe it fits more if you think of it as a vote "against the left" instead of a vote for Trump. As for your "real evidence", I don't think that enters into most republicans considerations.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago>Maybe it fits more if you think of it as a vote "against the left" instead of a vote for Trump. With the problem that if by "the Left" you mean Hillary Clinton, then... * The "Left" are more of the country, by 3 million votes. * The "Left" aren't even all that left-wing. Hillary said $12/hour was a high-enough minimum wage. Nancy Pelosi said, "We're capitalists." Obama dropped the Employee Free Choice Act in 2008. So in this context, a "vote against the Left" comes across as a vote to suppress the already-suppressed political majority.