Look, you guys are right about Blayne. I think that's sort of obvious. And I know that he doesn't tend to change much so I suppose it's easy to not care if you're communicating to him in a way that is even less likely to engender a change. But once the moderator steps in it just seems like a bad idea to keep baiting him. It's done. He took the bait, as everyone knew he would. I must be missing something... What purpose is served by continued mockery?
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think there's much of a purpose to continued mockery, but I don't think it's solely mockery. There is also criticism. It's warranted, especially considering that this is a cycle unchanged by time that occurs the same regardless of levels and types of — and I'm going to put this in giant quotes — "provocation."
i WILL be having it the next time I come by to see that we have decided to revisit this time-worn situation.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's unfortunate Sam. This was an interesting political discussion, and now its just another pointless argument about Blayne. And you are largely responsible for that.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: That's unfortunate Sam. This was an interesting political discussion, and now its just another pointless argument about Blayne. And you are largely responsible for that.
There's only one person here who is largely responsible for this derail. It is not me. It is not Rakeesh, who got into this way deeper than I was ever going to. Don't offer opportunities to confuse who's at fault for what behavior. You're also coming in at the tail end of this pointless argument, so why prolong it?
quote:Do you think the OWS movement is, on the whole, fairly centrist too? Or are they more extreme?
The OWS movement in and of itself has got to be closer to the edges than the center, especially when you count the people who are driving the movement most publicly. I would have never expected it to have worked in any real sense, that it would have fizzled out well before now. I'm continually saying that I'm amazed that this was what ended up working. Yet somehow this motley crew of various fringes and frustrated people all banding together for this message have really actually managed to resonate with the center, and found support with most americans. I guess it's just a combination of good timing, good exposure (cops being idiots was the gladwellian tipping point for the movement), and the right message towards elements of our society which most people agree are wrong and frustratingly unfair and which we all really want to change in spite of a sort of ingrained, exasperated hopelessness towards congress.
The way the OWS is out on the edges isn't very well plotted on a line, either. It's more like globs on the outward area of a circle in various places. They're not yet very well analyzed demographically. Hard to snapshot, I assume? They're also apparently drawing inwards because otherwise not extremely affiliated people are jumping on board in droves, not because of being anarchists or minarchists or Student Workers or Portlandese hipsterals or whatever, but because they're just a wide body of young people who struggle for employment due to forces well outside their control, feeling like victims to a system run amok for the benefit and enrichment of an already obscenely entitled oligarchic elite.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: FWIW, I think I'm pretty centrist, too, even by American standards.
^
It's actually worth a lot, to me. Very interesting!
Do you think the OWS movement is, on the whole, fairly centrist too? Or are they more extreme?
They are true conservatism because they want to see a return to the rule of law.
Posted via HTC EVO phone, your best first choice for an android phone.
IP: Logged |
posted
The groups that are driving OWS are, by and large, not centrist. But I think the most valuable voices in that group are the centrists. There's a reason the motto that's stuck is "we are the 99%," and not "we are the 15% who can take a few days off of work to shout in a park."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, hypothetically, if the OWS crowd was just the 15% that had the free time to shout in the park, do you think such a group would shy away from using "We are the 99%" as their slogan anyway?
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
That is as hypothetical as me asking "Well if the Republican parties really were just the 1% what would stop them from claiming to represent average middle american folk anyways"?
Its a loaded question completely divorced from reality.
IP: Logged |
quote:So, hypothetically, if the OWS crowd was just the 15% that had the free time to shout in the park, do you think such a group would shy away from using "We are the 99%" as their slogan anyway?
Oh, absolutely not. But the beauty of it is that they're not. That 15% may be heavily over-represented in the protests (and all long-running protests) by virtue of the fact that not everyone can spend multiple days protesting, in the same way that many of the people who were able to protest in Wisconsin were people with sick days saved up, but the Web shout-outs and other participatory activities have drawn a considerably larger and more diverse crowd. The 15% is doing its part by going somewhere to shout; the rest of us need to shout in the venues available to us.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, I was largely at fault. I should've stopped sooner, but didn't. Bad habit of mine, and I'm sorry I engaged in it this time.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne, I certainly have a different impression of OWS than Tom does, but I was asking the question honestly.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
That's sorta a part of the problem though, why ask that what if the movement wasn't of its principle membership? Sure it would be important to vet a movement such as this to make sure, it is a fair question. Do popular movements such as OWS and the Tea Party represent the people they claim to represent? What rules and principles do these movements follow and are they consistent with the desires and frustrations of the demographics they claim to represent?
Protest representation has always taken two forms, either it claims to speak for people, or it claims to represent the people. Various counter culture protests, say the G20 in Toronto, involve a lot of what some would characterize as the Activist demographic speaking their minds on issues they believe are important, to both act to pressure government and their elected representatives and to increase awareness so that otherwise un or misinformed people may know of the issues at stack.
The anti war protests are excellent examples of a more representative movement short and stillborn as they ended up, a large number of people in the hundreds of thousands from all walks of life. They for sure spoke for broad cross sections of the American electorate who had deep distaste for the war.
OWS is increasingly, day by day becomming representative protest.
But on the other hand, asking what if hypotheticals doesn't really advance the discourse.
IP: Logged |
I'll watch it when I get back to Nebraska (went home to Detroit for a visit, remembered how much I love trees and the smell of decomposing vegetation, heading back to the plains tomorrow), but the recaps seem to imply that the gloves really came off, and the frontrunners got hammered.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am royally frustrated that work prevents me from catching any of these debates. I'll have to read the synopses instead.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rick Perry dropped "brother," on Herman Cain 3 times in their first interaction tonight in the debate.
I don't even know what to make of that, I just found it interesting; especially after the "Niggerhead Ranch" fiasco. Is Perry trying to "black it up" calling Cain brother? If so, that's rather ham-handed.
But there is a cousining, patronizing aspect to it as well. It only helps highlight Cain's speech and manner, which is full of dropped 'g's, and provincial pronunciations: "Cakalate," for "calculate," "Valyuh added" and so on.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, it's pretty pathetic so far- I'm catching up on youtube. I rarely last the whole debate, they're just so ridiculous.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: But there is a cousining, patronizing aspect to it as well. It only helps highlight Cain's speech and manner, which is full of dropped 'g's, and provincial pronunciations: "Cakalate," for "calculate," "Valyuh added" and so on.
Out of curiosity, does this attribute of Cain's speech mean something significant to you, or is this just a sort of general observation?
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Orincoro meant "cozening" rather than "cousining." I think the suggestion is that Perry's faking it to try and point out that Cain both looks like and sounds like the stereotypical black person that the stereotypical Republican voter is going to have a pavlovian negative response to.
Dropped g's and "cakalate" might turn them off. But when he says stuff like "valyuh" I think he sounds down homey and rather folksy in a way Republicans tend to love. Is it possible that's just how Perry talks? Perhaps, but it's a prime target for suspicion.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's an observation primarily. I think the obvious issue that some of the Republican base is going to have with Cain should he be nominated (though I think there's little chance of that), is that he is black, and that he speaks with a regional (and distinctly ethnic) accent- and not a charming one for a lot of people.
Is his speech significant in and of itself? Yes. I would only vote for someone I felt could present himself as the educated person he/she is. I felt similarly about Bush, and even more so about Palin. Diction and elocution are comforting indications of competence- of the understanding that you are "playing the game," and that you have manners and are worldly. Those are all superficial signs to a degree- nevertheless they can be accurate. Cain is educated, but he falls in and out of regional accents in a way that is not flattering, in my opinion. Maybe he's trying to appeal to a certain base by doing that, or it's just his normal manner- but no, I don't find it appealing.
I think part of speaking in a more "political" accent or dialect is surrendering a bit of the cultural armor you possess. It comforts people and lets them know that you understand them- that you identify with a broader spectrum of cultures outside your own. Regional accents can make people sound more self-assured, but also militant, aggressive, or hard-headed. They have more of a defining characteristic, but also less ability to appeal to people who are foreign to that background.
For me personally, when I hear a strong regional accent from a politician, especially one that is in fact a smattering of regionalism over what was at one time probably a university cultivated neutrality, I don't find it endearing- probably because it tells me that this person is speaking *to* the people who identify with that accent, and *at* everyone else. That's why neutral accents exist- they don't embody a viewpoint.
I'm not a dialectical expert, but I am a keen observer of speaking patterns, and in Cain's case, my opinion is that his accent is a put on. Or more properly, I think it is the expression of something more complicated than a simple result of his linguistic roots. Which is fairly common, mind, and not at all *wrong,* in and of itself. But I'll tell you, and I think you *can* ascribe this reaction to latent racism on my part, which I will not deny, I don't identify with people who talk that way, I have trouble imagining a person who talks that way identifying with me. And that is a problem for a person who wants to be President.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I think Orincoro meant "cozening" rather than "cousining." I think the suggestion is that Perry's faking it to try and point out that Cain both looks like and sounds like the stereotypical black person that the stereotypical Republican voter is going to have a pavlovian negative response to.
Yeah that's what I meant. And honestly, even coming from a person with multiple black relatives whom he loves, I too have a pavlovian negative response to stereotypically black speech. I just do. A lifetime of movie and tv stereotyping and real life experience has made my superficial reaction to stereotypically black speech a negative one. I wish I could help it.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for your honesty! That's really interesting. The only part I specifically disagree with is that Cain is putting the accent on. My dad grew up in the south, and even going to a university, living overseas, and then living in California for 40+ years after that was not enough to remove all of his drawl. I don't get the impression Cain is putting the accent on at all, it's just there.
I think you have a legitimate point about people judging based on those accents (and again, thanks for your honesty re: your personal reaction) but I do think that this reaction is sort of sad. I find accents of all kinds, whether regional dialects or because of a different first language, to be rather endearing.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not a "put on" in the totally mercenary sense. Maybe more in the sense of a Kennedy or GW Bush. It's not a deliberate act, but a sort subconscious decision to go a certain route- like speaking in a formal or informal register in any given situation. I say this because if you listen to him, you can hear quite clearly that he is able to pronounce any given word in a neutral way quite naturally, but adds a regional pronunciation at points for a desired emphasis. That in itself can be a speech pattern a person develops naturally- my mother slides into a rusty midwestern twang at times, but only when the desired tone is "ah well..." So "put on" is a strong term, as is "affectation." This is just something more complicated than where Cain is from. As I said, regional accents constitute a piece of "cultural armor," a person can indicate through accent an attitude or an approach they can't express in words.
quote: I find accents of all kinds, whether regional dialects or because of a different first language, to be rather endearing.
I don't mind regional accents or foreign accents. I have an unusual accent myself, I am told, which is a function of having lived for some time in several different countries. And I'm also aware that my accent is different in different situations. Really, I think I just ascribe more meaning to an accent than you do. I've lived in different places in England, and in Spain, where accents *matter* in a way they don't in America- and I think that affected me deeply.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Really, Dan? How much experience do you have personally with accents or speech patterns that aren't very close to yours, but are still English?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Not a "put on" in the totally mercenary sense. Maybe more in the sense of a Kennedy or GW Bush. It's not a deliberate act, but a sort subconscious decision to go a certain route- like speaking in a formal or informal register in any given situation. I say this because if you listen to him, you can hear quite clearly that he is able to pronounce any given word in a neutral way quite naturally, but adds a regional pronunciation at points for a desired emphasis. That in itself can be a speech pattern a person develops naturally- my mother slides into a rusty midwestern twang at times, but only when the desired tone is "ah well..." So "put on" is a strong term, as is "affectation." This is just something more complicated than where Cain is from. As I said, regional accents constitute a piece of "cultural armor," a person can indicate through accent an attitude or an approach they can't express in words.
quote: I find accents of all kinds, whether regional dialects or because of a different first language, to be rather endearing.
I don't mind regional accents or foreign accents. I have an unusual accent myself, I am told, which is a function of having lived for some time in several different countries. And I'm also aware that my accent is different in different situations. Really, I think I just ascribe more meaning to an accent than you do. I've lived in different places in England, and in Spain, where accents *matter* in a way they don't in America- and I think that affected me deeply.
Now that you have clarified, I agree with you even more!
I grew up in California, and yet, probably due to my afore-mentioned father, I find myself falling into a drawl in certain circumstances. It's definitely not a conscious thing, but it happens. I agree that this is almost certainly true for Cain as well.
It's interesting to me because I actually think that Obama has used that sort of accent as an affectation in certain instances. This could be my own bias, and I'm absolutely willing to concede it could be unconscious for him too, but every now and then he gives a more "folksy" speech where he starts dropping Gs like crazy, and it just feels forced to me. (most recent example that springs to mind was in the speech where he tells the black caucus to stop "complainin', stop grumblin'..." etc. Oh here, I found a clip.)
What do you think: Is that my bias, or does it seem a little more forced here?
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Really, Dan? How much experience do you have personally with accents or speech patterns that aren't very close to yours, but are still English?
Is this a quiz? I'm detecting some surprising skepticism... what about me makes you assume that I am lying? Maybe I'm reading too much into your "tone," since this is text. If so I apologize.
To answer your question, well... my dad is southern, as I said, but I grew up in California, so his accent was very watered down by the time I came along. My grandparents, cousins, and aunt all had hardcore Memphis accents. My mom is from Pennsylvania, and again most of her accent was gone by the time I grew up but her sister has lived in Boston all this time, so she also has a pretty noticeable accent.
I spent several years living in rural Arizona on the border of the Navajo reservation, population was split pretty evenly between white, Mexican, and Navajo. A lot of the white people had a sort of southwestern redneck drawl, the recent Mexican immigrants had the accent you'd expect, and the Navajos had their own unique accent. I ran a few restaurants there, so I had a lot of employees from all three groups and, likewise, my customers ran the same gamut.
I also worked a fairly low-wage job in the East Bay area, and worked with a lot of people with, I don't know what they're called. Urban accents? Whatever the politically correct way to describe the accent that people associate with lower-class black people but is in reality pretty common amongs a subset of urban lower class people of any race. Whatever it's called. Most of the management staff had varying degrees of that accent. At that job I also worked with a lot of Filipinos, including one guy on my team who was without question the coolest guy there.
More recently I've been working in the software industry, and had a few interactions with both Indians and Eastern Europeans (Ukraine & Russia mostly). Not a lot though. (Yet!)
My first girlfriend was Australian. And my current partner's best friend in all the world is British. Also, though my partner grew up in Arizona, most of her family is from Wisconsin, and we visit them nearly every year.
Oh! And I used to game with a Nigerian, but I met him through a mutual friend and that friend and I had a falling out, so I haven't seen either of them in over a year.
Of all of those, I think that I probably have the lowest opinion of the more extreme Wisconsin accents. Even then it's mostly their slang that simultaneously amuses and infuriates me, not as much their pronunciation or elocution. But like I said, I'm actually rather fond of all of these accents. I feel like my own accent is terribly boring by comparison.
Edit: Oh my god I feel like such a jackass. My brother-in-law is Norwegian. I can't conceive of how I forgot to mention him, since I'm far closer to him than I am to my actual brother. I guess I've known him and his family since I was a kid (he married my sister, who is much older than I am) so I'm so used to it that their accents barely register for me anymore.
Seriously though I'm not sure how I feel about all that stuff up there. Again, Rakeesh, maybe I'm misreading you, but it feels a bit odd to be quizzed on my credentials re: accents. It feels like you're inviting me to do the sort of thing that everyone (rightfully) made fun of... malanthrop? was that his name?... for. He made racist comments and then said "it's cool, I know a Jamaican guy!"
If what I said about accents seems wrong to you, then let me know. But if that's the case, does my personal experience with accents make it less wrong?
Edit: I'm probably over-thinking this. I made a comment about my personal fondness for accents, it makes sense that you'd be curious what my actual sample size was. Sorry. I would remove this post entirely, but now I'm too proud of my Jamaican neighbors reference.
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: What do you think: Is that my bias, or does it seem a little more forced here?
Yeah, Obama dropping 'g's and "blacking it up" is about the most awkward display he ever makes. I can't tell whether it is because he despises the idea of having to embody that part of American cultural heritage, or because he is just not very good at doing it, but yes, it is forced.
Actually, I've sometimes entertained the notion that it is all a Xanatos Gambit, and that he is actually *good* at the "blacking it up" thing, and just pretends to be bad at it so as to endear himself to everyone by being so unnatural at being black.
Probably though this is all just subconscious mediation between imperatives that Obama must fulfill. Be relatable to whites. Be "black," be uncomfortable with being black so as to put whites at ease... rinse repeat.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Actually, I've sometimes entertained the notion that it is all a Xanatos Gambit, and that he is actually *good* at the "blacking it up" thing, and just pretends to be bad at it so as to endear himself to everyone by being so unnatural at being black.
That is hilaripressing.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Probably though this is all just subconscious mediation between imperatives that Obama must fulfill. Be relatable to whites. Be "black," be uncomfortable with being black so as to put whites at ease... rinse repeat.
To me, nothing is going to be as annoying as finding out what GWB sounded like in private versus his his public 'i'm the candidate you could have a beer with yeehaw' voice
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Changing accents is often not a conscious choice. Some peoples accents are simply a lot more labile than others. A few years ago a friend pointed out that I pick up a bit of an accent from everyone I speak to. It's totally a subconscious thing. I can't do it if I'm thinking about it. In contrast, I know a few people who've been in Trinidad for 30 years and haven't picked up even the slightest hint of a local accent.
[ October 19, 2011, 07:36 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: Changing accents is often not a conscious choice. Some peoples accents are simply a lot more labile than others. A few years ago a friend pointed out that I pick up a bit of an accent from everyone I speak to. It's totally a subconscious thing. I can't do it if I'm thinking about it. In contrast, I know a few people who've been in Trinidad for 30 years and haven't picked up even the slightest hint of a local accent.
Oh I definitely do this, though I am quite conscious it's going on when I speak. This isn't to say I make it happen, but I just go with it.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Sorry, you were reading something that wasn't there, but I definitely get why you thought (for a moment) why it was there. Should've phrased differently.
Anyway, the reason I asked was part curiosity to see what kind of experience informed your statement (I didn't doubt that you meant it, but I did wonder how widely drawn it was from varying accents), and part was because it's the sort of thing that's often said but much less often actually true, in life in general. People 'love immigrants' or 'don't mind religion, they're spiritual' or 'have a black friend' or 'I'm a moderate, except I almost always in all cases vote the party line'. Stuff like that.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Changing accents is often not a conscious choice. Some peoples accents are simply a lot more labile than others. A few years ago a friend pointed out that I pick up a bit of an accent from everyone I speak to. It's totally a subconscious thing. I can't do it if I'm thinking about it. In contrast, I know a few people who've been in Trinidad for 30 years and haven't picked up even the slightest hint of a local accent.
I notice that I do this as well, though on a much narrower scale. I can hear myself doing it sometimes, if I pay attention, depending on my company.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
My personal belief is that folksy, or regional shades of folksy, in someone who will be as polished and communications-aware as a Presidential candidate will never be anything less than at least partially a put-on. There are people who tell `em-well paid people-what color ties make them most likeable to the public on what day of the week for a given event and season of the year. There are certainly also people who tell them things like 'it's better to sound like...'
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: ... It feels like you're inviting me to do the sort of thing that everyone (rightfully) made fun of... malanthrop? was that his name?... for. He made racist comments and then said "it's cool, I know a Jamaican guy!" ...
To me, it's fine, especially when you and Orincoro mentioned that these is your personal feelings about these accents.
The "deal" with malanthrop was not so much that had feelings about stereotypical minorities, but that he used this simultaneously as proof that he was not racist and as evidence that he and the minority in question understood each other and agreed with each other's positions.
(The "deal" with me anyways)
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Changing accents is often not a conscious choice. Some peoples accents are simply a lot more labile than others. A few years ago a friend pointed out that I pick up a bit of an accent from everyone I speak to. It's totally a subconscious thing. I can't do it if I'm thinking about it. In contrast, I know a few people who've been in Trinidad for 30 years and haven't picked up even the slightest hint of a local accent.
I notice that I do this as well, though on a much narrower scale. I can hear myself doing it sometimes, if I pay attention, depending on my company.
The worst example of this, for me, is that I have a particular sort of horrible cackling laugh that I seem to only do when I'm in the company of certain really really nerdy somewhat socially awkward friends. Which I guess is better than the alternative, if the alternative were to laugh like that all the time. But... dang. Whenever I hear myself doing it I'm just baffled.
PS: Rakeesh, thanks for confirming that I misread what you meant. I definitely understand why you were curious. I try not to make assertions like that unless they seem genuinely accurate.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I have an allergy to "folksy" in presidents.
I agree. In one of the tributes to Steve Jobs it said "B students surround themselves with C students to make themselves look smart, A students surround themselves with A+ students." I want a president whose smarter than I am, but it seems that many Americans prefer a President who make them feel smart.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think there is truth to that, Rabbit, but in fairness I also think that some A or A+ students go out of their way to make people around them feel stupid. And that tendency, in my opinion, is far worse than folksiness.
It's also worth mentioning, again, that folksiness doesn't automatically equate to being a B or C student. I've had great, high level philosophy or armchair science conversations with people who sounded lahk purty big rednecks, if y'all know whut Ah mean. I recently took a class from a man with a very distinct low-class Londoner accent, an' I fink 'e did a bang-up job. And one of my old bosses, a highly effective manager in the financial industry, just loved to axe me questions.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think there is truth to that, Rabbit, but in fairness I also think that some A or A+ students go out of their way to make people around them feel stupid. And that tendency, in my opinion, is far worse than folksiness.
Well, sure. However, you'll rarely find a Presidential candidate who likes (and acts on) a desire to make people feel stupid in his day-to-day. Politician, y'know? Not very long-term-success-strategy.
What you will find, though, is a politician who wants (and crafts a public image) to be considered 'just folks'. Which is not at all strange when you consider how someone who gets elected is elected (politics, getting people to like you) but when you consider 'doing the job', it's just an awful metric.
The President as someone you could have a beer with and enjoy spending time with is one thing. I can sign on with that. The President as like the people you bowl/videogame/watch football/jog/etc with, on the other hand. I can't think of a single person I know that I would say of them, "This is a person I would trust in terms of conscience and capability with the Presidency." Can you?
Part of the strangeness of attacking 'Ivy League (liberals)'. Parents generally would very much love if their children went to an Ivy League school, or one on the same academic level with them. Then all of a sudden one guy hints that because this other guy performed brilliantly in school, he thinks you're stupid while he is 'just folks'...
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dan, I'll be the first to agree with you that it isn't fair to judge a person's intelligence by their accent. For example, I had a brilliant math professor who spoke with a heavy Texan drawl. Though I did laugh at the way he said "La Hoppy-talls" rule, I never doubted his mathematical prowess.
But I think that sounding folksy is not simply having an accent or speaking a non standard dialect. Sarah Palin doesn't have a distinctive rural accent and yet sounds folksy. Jimmy Carter doesn't sound folksy to me even though he has a thicker southern drawl than Bush.
And while I'm sure there are people who go out of their way to make people feel stupid, its not a trait I've noticed in politicians.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: But I think that sounding folksy is not simply having an accent or speaking a non standard dialect. Sarah Palin doesn't have a distinctive rural accent and yet sounds folksy. Jimmy Carter doesn't sound folksy to me even though he has a thicker southern drawl than Bush.
I definitely hear a distinct accent in Palin's speech. Reminds me of Minnesota, but then, I've never been to Alaska so *shrug*.
But your point is a good one, there is a different between the two. Edited for a typo
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
