|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 19, 2016 18:41:34 GMT -5
Donald Trump is not my president and he never will be. If you are U.S. citizen, as of today he is your president. Meh. When people say "he's not my president," as I imagine people have said after every election ever, it's a more emotional yet not otherwise different way of saying "I didn't vote for the guy." They're not saying Trump is not the president, and they're not renouncing their citizenship. Just saying I get it. *shrug* |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2016 19:14:02 GMT -5
...."I didn't vote for the guy."... Yeah, I have a feeling I'll be saying that one a lot over the next four years. But, it's done, and I can't do a damn thing about it. I'm crossing my fingers it turns out better than I fear. |
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 19, 2016 19:19:37 GMT -5
I think Robo has a larger point, even though he is calling the opinion piece narcissitic and fangirlish, that is helpful here. It goes back to Michelle Obama. She's our First Lady, and I think she did a grave disservice to half of the country by wallowing with them right now. She's the wife of our current POTUS, and if she agrees there's no hope, plenty of people will feel validated. But the thing is...THERE IS HOPE. Hope is a choice. Hope comes from action not wallowing. Hope is something she could have inspired in that interview. The actions that could bring hope during this time for her side of the political spectrum is something she could have elucidated. Her comments could have brought light, not dark. For God's sake, I heard an interview on NPR the other day with a man in Aleppo, talking to the interviewer while we could hear the bombs hit near his building. And he was asked that very question - are you out of hope? And HE said there is always hope. So no, Michelle, I'm sorry but you blew it. And this opinion piece also blew it. And I do agree it's not only worthless, but it's damaging. And that's why it's a good idea to call them on it (Michelle and this opinion writer). When people have the visibility that Michelle and an opinion writer on an international news organization have, they not only have an opportunity, they have a responsibility. Too bad they squandered it. I didn't see rob making this point at all, but since you've made it, I can agree that Michele Obama could have not said what she did. However, I wouldn't categorize it as "bringing darkness" or "blowing it," no. I didn't actually listen to the interview, but I think I can safely assume that this wasn't the only thing she said. She's not a doomsayer. The OP article's author ends up saying that there *is* hope (from a liberal's perspective) in the power of those with a platform, like the First Lady. Surely the author would not come to that conclusion if Ms. Obama had brought nothing but darkness. |
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Dec 19, 2016 19:25:23 GMT -5
What would be great is if the Democrats rediscovered the reasons why we're supposed to have a limited government and checks and balances, and the GOP agreed and they did something that would be binding for future administrations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 19, 2016 19:48:48 GMT -5
...."I didn't vote for the guy."... Yeah, I have a feeling I'll be saying that one a lot over the next four years. But, it's done, and I can't do a damn thing about it. I'm crossing my fingers it turns out better than I fear. We can be like Don and wear t-shirts. |
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 19, 2016 20:34:53 GMT -5
Yeah, I have a feeling I'll be saying that one a lot over the next four years. But, it's done, and I can't do a damn thing about it. I'm crossing my fingers it turns out better than I fear. We can be like Don and wear t-shirts. I'm gonna replace this one with one that says "He's not my president." I wonder; do people refer to the president of the corporation they work for as "my president?" Why this assumed personal relationship with someone who you don't have any personal relationship with whatsoever? Whoever it may be, they are simply the president of a massive government machine that assumes authority over me because of where I happen to live. He or she is not "my" anything. I don't even recall hearing devout catholics I've known refer to "my pope." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2016 20:46:49 GMT -5
I'm not sure we do assume a special personal relationship with the president. The "my president" seems to me to be a mere piece of rhetoric, not a reflection of the way we usually talk about our president.
I don't say "my president" because he's my country's president, not just mine. I'd say "our President" or "the President."
I'd say "my boss" but I'd say "our CEO" or "our company president". When I was a practicing Catholic way back when, I might have said "our Pope." Now I'd say "the Pope."
|
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 19, 2016 20:48:41 GMT -5
It's a decent point. "My" is personal and implies a direct relationship.
I've never thought of Obama (or any other president) as "my" president, though I have referred to him as "our" president. As I probably will with Trump. Gods preserve me.
ETA Cass beat me to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Dec 19, 2016 21:00:23 GMT -5
I don't consider it a personal relationship. But, as former military and someone who works in civil service now, there is more than symbolic meaning in acknowledging the authority of the POTUS. I may not like who's in charge, but I am not going to pretend he isn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 19, 2016 21:15:34 GMT -5
When someone said something like "our President said x or did y," there are those who would retort "he's not MY President." That's what happened under Bush, at any rate.
In my opinion, that's a rather hapless retort.
That said, the independent statement of "so and so is my President" is, I would agree, unusual rhetoric, while saying "so and so is not my President," is a fair political statement, I think.
Though if someone from outside the US referred to "your President," I would think that would be perfectly correct. Responding to that with the above retort would again be rather weak.
Meh, context.
Trump is going to be President. If someone asks me "who is your President," I'll say Trump, soon enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2016 21:16:12 GMT -5
I'm not former military or in civil service, but I agree. How I feel about saying "our president" is going to vary on who's holding the office. But he will be president of my country. Denying he was lawfully elected and in charge of the country is denying our system of government, not just Trump the man.
If we don't like the way the electoral college is working, we can work towards changing it going forward. But we cannot deny its validity retroactively. (And we should remember that the way the electoral/popular vote plays out might be reversed next time around.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Dec 19, 2016 21:25:03 GMT -5
I'm still saying Morgan Freeman is my president.
You can't go wrong with Morgan Freeman as your president.
|
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 20, 2016 5:46:59 GMT -5
I'm not sure we do assume a special personal relationship with the president. The "my president" seems to me to be a mere piece of rhetoric, not a reflection of the way we usually talk about our president. I don't say "my president" because he's my country's president, not just mine. I'd say "our President" or "the President." I'd say "my boss" but I'd say "our CEO" or "our company president". When I was a practicing Catholic way back when, I might have said "our Pope." Now I'd say "the Pope." I see it as a linguistic hangover from the days when people were property and ruled by the "divine right" of kings. "My King, My Lord, My Master." It was chattel all the way down. A possessive term such as "My" made perfect sense in those days. As you pointed out, these days "my" (generic overseer term) is generally reserved for those directly above us in the chain of command, except in this weird case of political "representatives." "My President" is an appropriate term of address only if one considers themselves part of the holdings of USA, inc. I see it as an unintentional abdication of self-ownership. There is no possessive relationship either way between a government and its citizens, IF the citizens are truly free. The government is supposedly there as an arbitrator among those with different values, not the director of individuals' actions. OTOH, if one's life is micro-managed to the n th degree, I suppose it's quite appropriate to refer to "my government" or "my president," just as one refers to "my boss," because there's an intensely personal relationship there, whether you've entered into it willingly or not. Anyway, neither Obama nor Trump are "my" anything to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 20, 2016 8:09:18 GMT -5
I find that very silly, Don. I think your tunnel vision is blocking your view.
The problem with "my king," "my lord," or "my master" isn't the my -- it's king, lord, or master.
If someone wants to say "my president," it's likely because they feel affection and/or respect, not subservience or abdication of self-ownership. For Christ's sake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Dec 20, 2016 8:13:36 GMT -5
I dunno...If I ever heard someone say 'my president stands at attention whenever the national anthem plays', I'd be sure to move a few steps away.
|
|
