McGovern "Come Home America" vs Trump "Make America Great Again"

[August1991]

As a foreigner, I'm struggling to see the difference between McGovern and Trump.

What's the difference?

 

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, August1991 said:

As a foreigner, I'm struggling to see the difference between McGovern and Trump.

What's the difference?

 

I doubt more than half a dozen of us remember McGovern.

[August1991]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

I doubt more than half a dozen of us remember McGovern.

Sarcasm.

Irony.

=====

This forum is wonderful.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, August1991 said:

As a foreigner, I'm struggling to see the difference between McGovern and Trump.

What's the difference?

 

The whole idea of coming back to similar principles that made America great or just saying make America great has been used many many times. Kennedy ran literally on the slogan make America great

The only primary difference is that for whatever reason the left Really latched on to the shortened version of 'maga" And in their mind that phrase became a symbol of everything they hate about anyone who isn't left wing. It allowed them to consolidate phrases like alt right or far right or radical right etc etc into one catch-all phrase that basically referred to anyone right of Castro.

So it caught on in a more permanent sense as more than just a slogan and was severely demonized by the left. But the actual slogan has been reused and reused throughout political history. I am 100% certain that if I go looking I'll find a speech from a roman candidate stating he would help make Rome great again  

[August1991]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

....

Kennedy ran literally on the slogan make America great

...

Disagree. JFK ran on the slogan "New Frontier".

====

McGovern and Trump/Vance want America to come home.

Edited October 23, 2024 by August1991

[CdnFox]

34 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Disagree. JFK ran on the slogan "New Frontier".

====

McGovern and Trump/Vance want America to come home.

Not in 60' . Although i did look it up and it was actually "time for greatness", but same diff. 

[August1991]

The speech later became known as "The New Frontier." In his remarks, then Senator Kennedy famously states, "The New Frontier of which I speak is not a set of promises-- it is a set of challenges. It sums up not what I intend to offer the American people, but what I intend to ask of them."

https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/historic-speeches/acceptance-of-democratic-nomination-for-president

This link needs subtitles.

Edited October 23, 2024 by August1991

[CdnFox]

31 minutes ago, August1991 said:

The speech later became known as "The New Frontier."

We're talking about a slogan. Trump's is make America great again. His was time for greatness

Thanks for playing

[August1991]

15 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

We're talking about a slogan. Trump's is make America great again. His was time for greatness

Thanks for playing

You Americans defeated the Soviets; you won the Cold War.

America now has a different role to play in this world.

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, August1991 said:

You Americans defeated the Soviets; you won the Cold War.

America now has a different role to play in this world.

Been into the cough syrup supply again I see

[August1991]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Been into the cough syrup supply again I see

Eh?

Around the world, since 1990 or so, from Vietnam to China to Russia to, uh, Albania, countries have opened to foreigners.

More people live better.

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, August1991 said:

Disagree. JFK ran on the slogan "New Frontier".

====

McGovern and Trump/Vance want America to come home.

And that's bad somehow?

[Michael Hardner]

12 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

And that's bad somehow?

He didn't say that...

Furthermore.... if we're comparing 1972 to 52 years later....

Nixon knew China would be an economic and diplomatic boon to the USA.  Trump, less so.

[Nationalist]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

He didn't say that...

Furthermore.... if we're comparing 1972 to 52 years later....

Nixon knew China would be an economic and diplomatic boon to the USA.  Trump, less so.

Oh ya. China has been great for the economy. I mean, who really wants to have all those dirty factories anyway?

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Oh ya. China has been great for the economy. I mean, who really wants to have all those dirty factories anyway?

The West has made a lot of money through this engagement with China, including Canadians.  That's just a fact.  And that doesn't mean the relationship is "great" or "terrible" either.

As Facebook says: "it's complicated"

[Nationalist]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

The West has made a lot of money through this engagement with China, including Canadians.  That's just a fact.  And that doesn't mean the relationship is "great" or "terrible" either.

As Facebook says: "it's complicated"

Ya Mike...it's always "complicated" when one is arguing an obviously detrimental course of action.

 

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Ya Mike...it's always "complicated" when one is arguing an obviously detrimental course of action.

 

You like to make things simple, and that's ok.  But without China you wouldn't be able to afford an iPhone and Apple - at times the wealthiest American company - wouldn't exist.

Economics doesn't lie, but political economy does FIB from time to time ...

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

You like to make things simple, and that's ok.  But without China you wouldn't be able to afford an iPhone and Apple - at times the wealthiest American company - wouldn't exist.

Economics doesn't lie, but political economy does FIB from time to time ...

I have never owned an iPhone and never will. Nor do I ever spend my money in Wallymart. Outsourcing has driven IT to India and now everything needs to be done at least twice.

The whole exercise has enriched the Uber wealthy Libbies claim to hate, and left North America with greatly diminished ability to provide for themselves. 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

1. I have never owned an iPhone and never will. Nor do I ever spend my money in Wallymart. Outsourcing has driven IT to India and now everything needs to be done at least twice.

2. The whole exercise has enriched the Uber wealthy Libbies claim to hate, and left North America with greatly diminished ability to provide for themselves. 

1. Ok.  Not an answer though.  You are benefiting from international economic relationships whether you buy specific products or not.
2. Not just the uber-wealthy but a lot of middle to upper-middle have done well with this change.  Again, just look at the numbers.  Canada's exports to China would be a good starting point...

Anyway, I can see where this is going.  If I try to highlight any individual benefits to these relationships, you will come back to say that overall it's a bad idea.  Another interesting thing for you - in 1988 the only party that was isolationist, before all of these globalism took off, was the NDP.

Did you vote for them at that time ?

You're welcome.  

[WestCanMan]

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The only primary difference is that for whatever reason the left Really latched on to the shortened version of 'maga" And in their mind that phrase became a symbol of everything they hate about anyone who isn't left wing.

When Trump tried to slow the flow of covid into the US, the left hated him for it. 

The left hated that Trump eliminated islamic state faster than Obama thought possible.

The left complained when he killed Suleimani.

It didn't matter what Trump did: "OMG IT WAS THE WORST THING POSSIBLE"

If Trump cured cancer and made the cancer drugs free, leftists would accuse him of creating a racist population explosion.

 

I was 4 when McGovern said that, so I don't remember it. 

It seems like a reaction to the hippy/drugs/anti-war culture from the '60s, which had replaced clean cut patriotism from the '50s, but I  must be wrong though, I think they've always been the pro-hippy party. 

[Nationalist]

18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok.  Not an answer though.  You are benefiting from international economic relationships whether you buy specific products or not.
2. Not just the uber-wealthy but a lot of middle to upper-middle have done well with this change.  Again, just look at the numbers.  Canada's exports to China would be a good starting point...

Anyway, I can see where this is going.  If I try to highlight any individual benefits to these relationships, you will come back to say that overall it's a bad idea.  Another interesting thing for you - in 1988 the only party that was isolationist, before all of these globalism took off, was the NDP.

Did you vote for them at that time ?

You're welcome.  

1. Moving the goal post are we? Ok. I think I've expressed this to you before but, when shopping, the wife and I do our best to buy only local products. Made in Canada or the USA. That has become next to impossible, but we do our best.

2. You're right. We are not going to agree. I'm not adverse to global trade. That would be stupid. I am opposed to unfair trade and vehemently opposed to the whole idea of outsourcing. 

"5. One in 25 Canadian workers loses their job due to outsourcing.

(Source: Pearsoned & CBC)

Jobs lost to outsourcing statistics show us that one in 25 employees in Canada loses their jobs because of outsourcing. The jobs that are outsourced are mainly accountant positions that go to Indian workers. One of the biggest companies in Canada that outsource is CIBC. This Toronto-based bank pulled in $1.4 billion in profit due to outsourcing.

6. Between 2011 and 2018, the Canadian federal government outsourced over $11.9 billion to IT consultants.

(Source: Pipsc)

Outsourcing Canada shows that there were also management contractors as well as temporary help contractors.

Check this out:

Canada outsourcing IT services and consultants make up 71%, management consultants 24%, and temporary help services 5%. The yearly tag for personnel outsourcing has doubled from $1 billion in 2011 to $2.2 billion in 2018.

In fact, IT consultants account for seven out of ten dollars spent on personnel outsourcing" https://reviewlution.ca/resources/outsourcing-statistics/?origin=serp_auto

I was one of those 1 in 25. My position as IT Architect and Support was replaced by outsourcing. I lost all sense of security and was forced to incorporate as one of those consultants the article speaks of. Every few years I would be forced to go find a new contact. I had trouble getting personal financing at banks, even though while on contract, I made very good money. I'm my field, I've learned I have to sit on these outsourced resources in order to get things done...and done correctly.

This article hardly pays lipservice to the jobs lost...families utterly destroyed...entire industries disappeared from the Canadian job market. 

This needs to be reigned in. Manufacturing, IT, and numerous other industries need to be encouraged to feed Canadian workers, not everyone else's.

 

[Michael Hardner]

47 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

1. Moving the goal post are we? Ok. I think I've expressed this to you before but, when shopping, the wife and I do our best to buy only local products. Made in Canada or the USA. That has become next to impossible, but we do our best.

2. I was one of those 1 in 25. My position as IT Architect and Support was replaced by outsourcing. I lost all sense of security and was forced to incorporate as one of those consultants the article speaks of. Every few years I would be forced to go find a new contact. I had trouble getting personal financing at banks, even though while on contract, I made very good money. I'm my field, I've learned I have to sit on these outsourced resources in order to get things done...and done correctly.

 

1. What ?  What goal post ?  I pointed out that China enables the ability of large corporations to thrive and you replied with "I don't own an iPhone"...  My response is "ok but you're still benefiting from global trade"... Seems more like an ongoing conversation than a point-counter-point type argument.

2. I went through the same thing you did, likely worse than you because I was unable to find work in my field and had to retrain.  This was over 25 years ago now.  There was hardly any news coverage of said outsourcing... all of a sudden there were Chinese nationals on my team and work and next thing I knew I was gone.

It's sad but trade deals necessarily involve impacting individuals so if you support global trade at all, that's an aspect of it.  As I said above, the NDP are the only party who strongly push back against such things.

[Nationalist]

37 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. What ?  What goal post ?  I pointed out that China enables the ability of large corporations to thrive and you replied with "I don't own an iPhone"...  My response is "ok but you're still benefiting from global trade"... Seems more like an ongoing conversation than a point-counter-point type argument.

2. I went through the same thing you did, likely worse than you because I was unable to find work in my field and had to retrain.  This was over 25 years ago now.  There was hardly any news coverage of said outsourcing... all of a sudden there were Chinese nationals on my team and work and next thing I knew I was gone.

It's sad but trade deals necessarily involve impacting individuals so if you support global trade at all, that's an aspect of it.  As I said above, the NDP are the only party who strongly push back against such things.

You asked...

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

without China you wouldn't be able to afford an iPhone and Apple - at times the wealthiest American company - wouldn't exist.

I answered. Then you shifted to overall economic impact. Something I'm not convinced provides a real economic benefit. Putting Canadians to work provides real economic benefit. Relying on China for masks and so many other things, creates a long term risk and detracts from Canadian employment and independence. 

I do NOT and never will support global trade at the expense of Canadian stability.

Edited October 23, 2024 by Nationalist

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

When Trump tried to slow the flow of covid into the US, the left hated him for it. 

The left hated that Trump eliminated islamic state faster than Obama thought possible.

The left complained when he killed Suleimani.

It didn't matter what Trump did: "OMG IT WAS THE WORST THING POSSIBLE"

If Trump cured cancer and made the cancer drugs free, leftists would accuse him of creating a racist population explosion.

 

I was 4 when McGovern said that, so I don't remember it. 

It seems like a reaction to the hippy/drugs/anti-war culture from the '60s, which had replaced clean cut patriotism from the '50s, but I  must be wrong though, I think they've always been the pro-hippy party. 

Absolutely. The left believes that trump is wrong because trump is trump, not because trump is wrong.

They will behave exactly the same way with the next one too. They said Romney was going to put black people back in chains unironically.  With the next guy whoever it is I guarantee it'll be"Oh please give us trump back, this guy's way worse"  They'll claim he's not just trump 2.0 he's trump Pro now with Bluetooth.

 

 

america, and in fact all countries who are a democracy, does their best when the politicians are forced to confront the issues and not the personalities. Track record is fine if it's specifically applicable, but elections should be about the platform and the person's ability to deliver.

And these days that is not what happens, especially in the states. Elections like this one make for excellent theater but poor governance.

But until the people rise up against parties that behave that way, this will continue because while people claim they hate it it's extremely popular in as far as consumption.

Originally if you look at a bunch of the interviews in 2015 people brought trump in to upset the apple cart and to point out to the established parties that they are quite prepared to bring in a disruptive force if they're not given better choices.

Maybe after this election the democrats will see that Making it about the person is a dead end, and hopefully the republicans have learned that an outsider absolutely can walk in and steal the show if the supporters are not happy

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

1.  Then you shifted to overall economic impact.

2. Something I'm not convinced provides a real economic benefit.

3. Putting Canadians to work provides real economic benefit.

4. Relying on China for masks and so many other things, creates a long term risk and detracts from Canadian employment and independence. 

5. I do NOT and never will support global trade at the expense of Canadian stability.

1. Ah ok, my bad.  I WAS intending to address economic impact in my point.  Not clear, then.
2. Debatable but look at exports and the GDP.  And economic theory says trade, productivity is better than the opposite.  BUT philosophy and political economy may vary.
3. As a blanket statement, this is false.  We could provide full employment digging and filling in holes for example.  
4. Let's shift the example to microchips and now you are 100% correct.
5. Your stance is a moral one... Nothing wrong with that.