Or populist anything for that matter.
populist: noun a person, especially a politician, who strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.
Is that mop-head freak in UK considered a populist?
Populists are ordinary people who deeply resent it when they aren't treated much different than other ordinary people.
Did Karen buy a priority-boarding pass when the option was offered? No she didn't. Will she complain to the manager that she isn't offered priority-boarding, anyway? Yes, yes she will. I WANT TO SEE YOUR MANAGER
How to manipulate as a populist politician: tell your constituents "I'm going to get you what you deserve!"
Don't be too specific about the whole "what you deserve" part.
Depends on the issues. The population of the USA wants to curb immigration and stop giving money to illegal immigrants. The elite politicians do not care. A populist president might follow the will of the people. Populism cuts both ways...for good and bad
Why did we get rid of our hereditary kings? Or at least land and serf-owning lords?
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
This whole government by national poll is just as ridiculous. The "ordinary" people will never accept the fact that there are some issues out there beyond their comprehension. They have a strong opinion on everything.
ple who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite group s.
The people who founded the U.S. were populist as far as they publicized the ir ideas to the public, but in reality almost of all them were monarchists and elitists. Many of them did not like the idea of parting with the King o f England, they would have been satisfied with overthrowing the rule of Par liament over America. After independence, there was a real movement to make George Washington king.
On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 12:53:00 PM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@columbus.rr.com wrote :
on and stop giving money to illegal immigrants. The elite politicians do no t care. A populist president might follow the will of the people. Populism cuts both ways...for good and bad
You have a point there. But we shouldn't have to give away the farm to get our way on the issue.
No ordinary American thinks of themselves as an "ordinary American", I've mostly known misunderstood/unrecognized geniuses and down-on-their-luck millionaires.
Politicians sometimes give money to white Americans who aren't financially much better off than illegal immigrants, either.
But no populist would want to belong to any club which would accept him as a member. And a large majority of 'em descend from pogue-Irish dirt farmers themselves.
So long as you can give 'em someone one rung down to kick they'll do what you say and give you their money, they'll be happy about it.
The "will of the people" with respect to a populist president tends to always be the same - "Put the hurt on the other people we don't like for us, and we'll dance for you and be your bitch"
Bitch, I don't dance
The word you're looking for is "liberalism"
People wanted to call George "Your Excellency" but he insisted on "Mister President."
The US constitution was a huge leap towards the rights of citizens. It went about as far as it could in those days, so it included the hooks for future self-modification.
Was Ben Franklin, or Thomas Jefferson, a monarchist or elitist? Many of the signers were merchants or farmers. I don't think any had British titles.
Too many lawyers!
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Hail King Trump, he'd look more the part in a cardboard crown from Burger King. Maybe after he finishes showing Iran who's "boss" he'll take on Ronald McDonald, just one more sad example of clown-on-clown crime.
people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite gr oups.
their ideas to the public, but in reality almost of all them were monarchis ts and elitists. Many of them did not like the idea of parting with the Kin g of England, they would have been satisfied with overthrowing the rule of Parliament over America. After independence, there was a real movement to m ake George Washington king.
Washington thought the document was a wackadoodle contrivance that "would n ever work."
They din't want the common man voting. State senators were to be appointed by the state legislators and not elected. This practice continued in some p laces until the 1920s.
Benjamin Franklin authored the petition.
America at the time was tiny nothing of a place. They offered to give Spain everything west of the Appalachians if they entered the war against Englan d. They did other outrageous stuff like petition some royal from Prussia to come here and be king.
The place was in complete disarray before, during and after their so-called revolution, which was nowhere near as popular as the laughable popular his tory makes it out to be.
There's a bunch of things you just don't know about.
I wasn't looking for any word, especially that one.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
y people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.
d their ideas to the public, but in reality almost of all them were monarch ists and elitists. Many of them did not like the idea of parting with the K ing of England, they would have been satisfied with overthrowing the rule o f Parliament over America. After independence, there was a real movement to make George Washington king.
never work."
And yet when he could've been king (as you noted), he declined.
d by the state legislators and not elected.
Which made sense -- the House of Representatives was to be the voice of the people. The Senate is supposed to represent the states, just as the European Parliament comprises representatives from each of the member nations.
That was changed by the 17th Amendment in 1913. That's when Woody Wilson, first progressive president, declared the Constitution and the rule of law annoying impediments to making all of us benighted ignoramuses his children, and he'd be all of our daddies.
Cheers, James Arthur
In short, to test the American idea that a virtuous, educated people could govern themselves, had the right, and should (a.k.a. the American Experiment).
Today we see the opposite argument continually made--that ordinary people aren't able and ought not be allowed to be masters of their own destinies, but instead must be herded and directed by centralized fat- heads (whose pay is never affected, who deem their own work as always 'essential,' who themselves pass the lockdowns with freezer chests full of premium ice-cream, and getting haircuts they've forbidden the hoi polloi).
Funny thing is, distributed government ('freedom') has done remarkably well.
Cheers, James
Citiziens, not humans.
As the slaves in the south were excluded , or are the Puerto Ricans, who still are excluded from many rights of a true US citizien.
-- Uwe Bonnes bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 1623569 ------- Fax. 06151 1623305 ---------
Slavery was standard in most of the world once. The USA inherited it from the Brits.
Puerto Ricans are US citizens and could vote for independance. We wouldn't send in an army if they did.
They voted against statehood. Maybe they don't want the right to pay income tax.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.