Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The smug style in American liberalism

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 435 posts

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#241

Post by emless »

goostavos wrote: post #219
emless wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the risk of sounding "smug", I think most of this thread offers a poor analysis of the election. The reason Trump won is, presumably, to a large extent that he managed to make his message more relevant. If this election would have been about schools, even in the same context, he most likely wouldn't have won and the deplorables comment wouldn't have mattered or even happened in the first place. We've seen this i…

It doesn't sound smug, it just sounds massively over simplified and assumed. The reasons for Trump's win probably varies wildly from region to region and person to person. Anecdotally, I know several who voted only because he was _not_ Hilary, not due to any message resonance. Hell, I mean, personally, despite being politically closest to Hilary on paper, I had no intention of voting for her, and none of those reason…

A large part of Trumps message was that Hillary was unsuitable as president. If Trump hadn't manage to get that message through and elevated that issue in favor of other issues much fewer people would have voted for him.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#242

Post by rorykoehler »

silverbax88 wrote: post #208
rorykoehler wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obama is a huge part of why this happened. He promised change and delivered empire.

Wait, what? He ran on fixing the economy (done), ending the war in Iraq (done), restoring our relationship with the rest of the world (done), universal health care (done) and improving the acceptance of minority groups (somewhat done - at least the LGBT community). Illegal immigration is down, unemployment is down, crime is down. There are definitely things Obama hasn't done, but he absolutely delivered change, and h…

Ending the war? He has escalated on all fronts and opened new ones too. Obama talks a good game but under it all is more surveillance, more economic inequality and more violence.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#243

Post by aninhumer »

foldr wrote: post #216
Nursie wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A last minute, failed attempt to do something a few months before a referendum that they comfortably and smugly assumed they would win easily. No plan was made because the people in a position to make one didn't want to and assumed victory. All this after AFAICT two decades of ignoring or belittling people for their deeply held views. That doesn't really cut it and so we get the result we got. Personally I neither th…

>No plan was made because the people in a position to make one didn't want to and assumed victory. No plan was made by long-term Brexit supporters either. Where is Nigel Farage's plan? What useful suggestions has Boris Johnson made? >And even if I did I would try to recognise that I share a country with such folk and have a duty to take their views into account. We did take their views into account, as I said. The Co…

>The strategy you're proposing (engagement) was tried and has failed.

What was tried wasn't engagement, it was an attempt to suppress the issue by holding what they expected to be a doomed referendum, so they could use the result as an excuse to ignore the issue.

True engagement would mean acknowledging people's concerns, and explaining their true causes and how you're going to address them.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#244

Post by drzaiusapelord »

pron wrote: post #236
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> who repeatedly got the short end of the stick by the neoliberal policy of both parties. I agree with this assessment of voter outrage due to economic issues in the rust belt and elsewhere, but now what? Walmart isn't buying smartphones made domestically that cost 8x what the ones in China cost because Walmart can't sell them. I can see the complaint, but its a bit like voting against hurricanes and tornadoes. They'…

That Trump has misled them is obvious, but not because of any policy he may have suggested, but because he is too preoccupied with tweets, self-portraits, marking stuff with his name, gilded chairs and boobs to effectively enact any policy; it is reported that he is unable to read even short texts or engage in a conversation that isn't about him for more than ten minutes, for god's sake (although I am not yet sure if…

Americans can certainly reshape their society to bring back factory work, but there are practical concerns here. Who are your buyers, what are you making, who are your competitors, etc. Its not all fantasy make-believe on the economic level. There are real economic laws that you can't break via legislation.

You guys want to compete with the Vietnamese? Fine, but be prepared to have the lifestyle $150 a month in wages brings. I suspect Trump voters aren't going to find that acceptable.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#245

Post by talmand »

aaronchall wrote: post #202
bambax wrote: post #151

Wow. This article was published on April 21st, before the end of the primaries. > Trump capturing the nomination will not dispel the smug style; if anything, it will redouble it. Faced with the prospect of an election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the smug will reach a fever pitch: six straight months of a sure thing, an opportunity to mock and scoff and ask, How could anybody vote for this guy? until a m…

It's not the first time he's been wrong. Krugman has lived his life in a liberal urban academic bubble and has no idea what the rest of the USA is like. We would do well to remember that when we have the misfortune to come across his writings in the future.

>> It's not the first time he's been wrong.

It's because Krugman changes his mind based on who is currently President and/or controlling Congress. A policy under a Democrat President is good and the exact same policy under a Republican President is bad. Krugman is a hack who received his Nobel for being anti-Bush. There are far better voices for the Left.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#246

Post by talmand »

iainmerrick wrote: post #218
hash-set wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just curious how old you are because I lived through the Bill Clinton years and it was appalling how bad the Clintons were. Their legacy from Arkansas all the way up the Pay to Play Clinton Foundation has been completely consistent--to bend and break the law everywhere possible if it is to their benefit to do so and then engage in cover ups, blackmail, and possibly murder to get away with it. They are a modern da…

Then the leaks started dropping and we got a small window in a large world of corruption. Did none of this occur to you? It seemed to me more like a very large window onto what turned out to be a pretty small world of corruption. I don't have an axe to grind but I've never seen a straight answer as to what her "crimes" supposedly are.

Evidence of corruption is not necessarily evidence of a crime.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#247

Post by talmand »

Asdfbla wrote: post #140

Pretty hard to not look down on those people when you know that the facts are on your side, since for certain things there are established facts. I wouldn't be ready to be patient with someone who thinks the moon is made out of cheese or something. But I suppose the article is still right and competent politicians should have the empathy to relate even to those people. I couldn't do it.

>> Pretty hard to not look down on those people

Hence, the problem.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#248

Post by talmand »

iainmerrick wrote: post #233
xupybd wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is healthcare so expensive in the states? People seem to focus on private Heath insurance vs Obama care. But neither should be so expensive. Why are other countries able to provide way cheaper care?

It seems to me that the system is just very inefficient. There's a huge amount of bureaucracy, and not a lot of serious competition between healthcare and insurance providers. It's hard to switch providers and the pricing structures are very confusing. Similar to broadband and mobile phone services, the free market hasn't been able to drive prices down as effectively as it theoretically should. I think it's because t…

It's a feedback loop that started because of government intervention in the free market and it continues simply because of government intervention in the free market. There are many examples of this, such as your broadband and mobile phone markets, and university tuition loans.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#249

Post by aninhumer »

foldr wrote: post #239
aninhumer wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People voted in the way that best expressed their beliefs given the choice as presented. If they'd voted remain, the government wouldn't have said "Oh I guess that was a poorly defined referendum, let's work out a proper plan and have another." they'd have used it as an excuse to ignore the issue.

>People voted in the way that best expressed their beliefs given the choice as presented. That is true of any election, no? >If they'd voted remain, the government wouldn't have said "Oh I guess that was a poorly defined referendum, let's work out a proper plan and have another." they'd have used it as an excuse to ignore the issue. Quite possibly, but I don't see how that is relevant. We seem to be in agreement?

Hmm, I thought the "silly question" was the referendum, but maybe you meant that's the silly answer?

I thought you were blaming the public, but if you're primarily blaming the politicians then I agree.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#250

Post by talmand »

k__ wrote: post #150
hueving wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They effectively lost it with the implementation of Obamacare. The premiums and deductibles are so high that the plans only really protect against catastrophic loss for an obscene monthly cost.

> the plans only really protect against catastrophic loss Isn't that the idea of insurance?

That's not health insurance in the US. Here it's more like a payment plan on future service. I can't wait until the car insurance industry gets on board and starts covering preventative care such as oil changes, air pressure checks, and windshield wiper blade replacements.
Post reply on HN