Dear Transporter,
Intervention time.
I could have picked any post of yours; it's purely random that I picked this one.
But here's what needs to be said: you need an editor. You write with quantity and yes, sometimes even with quality (i.e., events or articles chosen). But (yes, there's a "but"), your writing borders on incoherent. Not crazy incoherent, but writing that suffers from a lack of internal coherence/congruence. In other words, how you link your argument together really needs work. And the emotional tone..., well, it's screechy and over-the-top. Maybe this would work in HS where one gets points for honesty and verve. Maybe even at an undergraduate level where professors account for adolescents finding themselves. But at the graduate level (the level at which you seem to want your posts received), no.
Further, an editor for proof-reading's sake. "ngorati types"? I assume you mean, "ignorant types." Or, perhaps, "ignoranti" (as a play on persone ignoranti)? But stylistically it can't be both; either "ignorant types" or ignoranti. But also, what are you trying to say? Strictly ad hominem? If so, purely HS. If something else, explain and support.
Let me point out two approaches that I think work very well (picked not because they're the only two; rather, because they reflect opposite approaches that do their posters well). First, I've said in earlier posts that I enjoy vraiblond's posts. Don't always agree with her take on things or her stridency in getting her pique across, but her posts are almost always internally very well-linked/well-presented. For the opposite reason, I like GURP's posts: he posts his articles (which reflect his views) and adds no (or little) commentary.
So choose one: either post and skip the commentary or post with commentary that is better-written/better-constructed.
In the interest of full disclosure, I lean right. But a professional life lived abroad on 5 of the 7 continents (alas, no Antarctica or Australia) has taught me to be appreciative of various cultural and/or political opinions/perspectives. So I try to appreciate what you bring to the forum. But the problem I have with the posts you and your left-leaning colleagues make here on SoMD.com is that your posts come across more as Molotov cocktails or flaming buckets of говно than as thoughtful commentary. If you're posting simply to get a rise out of fellow forum members that's being trollish (though some do seem to find great humor in your silliness). I guess if "troll" is what you're going for, then you've been pretty successful. But one wonders if it is healthy over the long-term. Then again, maybe you just need an outlet to rant. Whether the former or latter, maybe therapy? More expensive - to be sure - than posting your problems away, but certainly a better and healthier, long-term alternative.
Look, I get it: in your mind, Trump is incompetent. Stipulated. Get past it. Duly-elected. Probably will be duly re-elected in 2020. You may have to get past that as well. But in the interim, you have the opportunity to try to persuade others to help you get out of this current (again, for you and yours) nightmare. So, for instance, offer positive reasons to consider alternate candidates. Post items that make me want to consider Candidate X. But, please, don't fall back on the "Consider Candidate X because (s)he is not 'Incompetent Trump'!" That's perhaps a reason, but good posters post more (meaning, "better")!
Or further, maybe you don't like the current system. Well, politic for change. But do it in a well-reasoned, well-presented manner. Don't keep bringing up the same old, tired tropes. For instance, if you're going to parade out that tired "But HRC won the popular vote" angle, don't. That's not currently the rules of the game. No one cares if your team leads the league at the end of the season in total runs scored; it's the total number of wins. So you might want the rules changed so "total runs" does equal a championship. If you might want that and, say, get rid of the Electoral College make a cogent, coherent, well-reasoned argument (in this particular case, you're going to have to really bring it because the Electoral College is one of the most (subtly) brilliant accomplishments/legacies of the Founding Fathers).
Anyway, and so forth. Anything less than something better and people will continue to take you as seriously as they do now. Which is to say, not at all. Honestly, no one should (want to) be the once-and-future деревенский дурачок.
--- End of line (MCP)
