• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

President Trump: Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emily's Cat said:
What does that have to do with the point I was making?
Click to expand...

Emily's Cat said:
I am a right-leaning moderate. When generalized insults and derision are made castigating all people on the right (regardless of their actual opinions) as being bigots, I tend to feel obligated to point out that this sort of exaggerated derision is counter-productive.
Click to expand...
phiwum said:
Let me agree with Emily's Cat here.
Click to expand...

You can talk about counter-productive derision and 'can't we all get along' all you want. But no matter what the productivity of the discussion, you still haven't addressed the Trumpephant in the room.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I'll take that as a dodge. Duly noted.

You are, however, more than welcome to post your versions of what people were thinking when they elected Trump.
Click to expand...

I've done so several times, as have many others. Way back at the beginning of this thread, as well as in the "Why Liberal Suck at Understanding Conservatives and Why it Matters" thread. It counts for naught. It just gets ignored, and the rhetoric that all of the people who voted for Trump were ignorant bigots just keeps being repeated.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
You can talk about counter-productive derision and 'can't we all get along' all you want. But no matter what the productivity of the discussion, you still haven't addressed the Trumpephant in the room.
Click to expand...

WTF do you want? What do you think people should address? Both phiwum and I have said (on more than one occassion) that Trump is a buffoon, and that his election to the presidency is a travesty. Neither of us supported the fool. But I didn't support Hillary either - I still think she would have been a terribly president.

I have, however, called you and others on your methodology and your reactionary behavior. Castigating anyone who did support Trump as being deplorable bigots etc. is exactly WHY the democrats lost this election. I've tried to point this out many times. So have several others. But that doesn't seem to be what you want to hear. It seems that your hurt feelings are assuaged by lashing out at everyone else and calling them names. As if that sort of peer-pressure bullying has ever accomplished anything good. As if somehow a fear of being called a name would force someone to adopt your viewpoint.

That's not a discussion. It's social coercion.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
To be fair, Hillary should have been an experienced enough politician to realize the sentence could be taken out of context.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I don't know what she was thinking. From what little I've read, it seems a big part of the problem was that she surrounded herself with a few close advisors. That's always a problem for a politician. It's way too easy to stop questioning your assumptions, opening up yourself for a nasty surprise on election day.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I've read the whole thing. I can in fer what her intent was, but she still in the end said that half of Trump's supporters are deplorables. She was referencing the Reuters/Ipsos survey. I find it particularly offensive because she used it as a rallying cry for the Democratic platform while conveniently failing to mention that one-third of her supporters are in that same basket.
Click to expand...

It was definitely not her finest hour.
 
Hlafordlaes said:
In other news, according to these folks, the time to nuclear holocaust is now down to 2 1/2 minutes.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I first became familiar with the that clock when I was in high school in the '70s. Nuclear war, at least the full scale, civilization destroying variety, just doesn't seem as close now as it was then, and back then the magazine cover I think said five minutes to midnight. Maybe four. Sure, the election of Trump, the Chinese moves in the South China Sea. Putin. Those things all make the world more dangerous, but I don't think back to full scale cold war days.

Of course, we didn't have North Korea building missiles back then. It seems like the chance of a single city-destroying nuke have gone up since the days of disco and Jimmy Carter.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I've done so several times, as have many others. Way back at the beginning of this thread, as well as in the "Why Liberal Suck at Understanding Conservatives and Why it Matters" thread. It counts for naught. It just gets ignored, and the rhetoric that all of the people who voted for Trump were ignorant bigots just keeps being repeated.
Click to expand...
You don't think the title of that thread might turn people off from bothering? I had no interest in it. Sorry but I don't suck at understanding conservatives, thank you.

How about cutting and pasting your answers, save us a dozen go rounds to get to the answers?

Do you imagine your thread title was a tad hypocritical considering your assertions only the left are rude?
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
WTF do you want? What do you think people should address? Both phiwum and I have said (on more than one occassion) that Trump is a buffoon, and that his election to the presidency is a travesty. Neither of us supported the fool. But I didn't support Hillary either - I still think she would have been a terribly president.

I have, however, called you and others on your methodology and your reactionary behavior. Castigating anyone who did support Trump as being deplorable bigots etc. is exactly WHY the democrats lost this election. I've tried to point this out many times. So have several others. But that doesn't seem to be what you want to hear. It seems that your hurt feelings are assuaged by lashing out at everyone else and calling them names. As if that sort of peer-pressure bullying has ever accomplished anything good. As if somehow a fear of being called a name would force someone to adopt your viewpoint.

That's not a discussion. It's social coercion.
Click to expand...

Ummm, I said there was an elephant in the room. :boggled: It should be self explanatory. You can choose to address it or not.

But, seriously, "WTF do you want?" Explain why a sane person who wasn't duped voted for Trump and do they still think they were not duped now seeing him in action?
 
Emily's Cat said:
I have, however, called you and others on your methodology and your reactionary behavior. Castigating anyone who did support Trump as being deplorable bigots etc. is exactly WHY the democrats lost this election.
Click to expand...

I think this is exactly true.
 
Meadmaker said:
I think this is exactly true.
Click to expand...

How would that even work? If people were called deplorable bigots for supporting Trump then they were already supporting Trump when they were called that. Are you both suggesting that Trump supporters would have changed their minds if and only if nobody had called them any bad names? "Oh, I identified as a Trump supporter and was going to vote for Trump but then someone called me a name so I'm changing my mind and doing exactly what I said I would and vote for Trump!"
 
Meadmaker said:
I think this is exactly true.
Click to expand...

No, that's not why we lost the election. We lost the election because Clinton did not have an effective response to the propaganda machine that has been active against her since the 80s. And she especially failed in responding to Comey's last minute letter. She should have called 'outrage' and condemned the attempt to smear her with Weiner's name. She chose not to, in hindsight, it was a bad decision.

Don't forget, Clinton won the popular vote by a very large margin. It wasn't some piddly few thousand votes. In the three states that gave Trump the EC win, his vote was less than 100,000 more than Clinton's.

From Wiki:
There have been five United States presidential elections in which the winner lost the popular vote since the 1824 election, which was the first U.S. presidential election where the popular vote was recorded.[1]
Click to expand...
It's hard to compare past popular vote wins/EC vote losses given the voting populations varied widely.

Gore received 543,895 more votes than Bush. Clinton won 2,864,974 more votes than Trump. That is a very wide margin. So all the discounting of Clinton's election outcome need to keep in mind, she carried significantly more people than Trump did.
 
TragicMonkey said:
How would that even work? If people were called deplorable bigots for supporting Trump then they were already supporting Trump when they were called that. Are you both suggesting that Trump supporters would have changed their minds if and only if nobody had called them any bad names? "Oh, I identified as a Trump supporter and was going to vote for Trump but then someone called me a name so I'm changing my mind and doing exactly what I said I would and vote for Trump!"
Click to expand...
QFT
 
CNN is reminding us about The Bay of Pigs mistake early in JFK's Presidency and The Cuban Missile Crisis 11 months later.

Do you think the Congress would get rid of Trump like a hot potato if the US faced a real crisis? Or do you think the denial that Trump is incompetent (at least as a diplomat if not as everything POTUS) would stop them from taking quick action?

Would they put massive pressure on him the STFU or start an Amendment 25 procedure?
 
I'm imagining sometime in the future, a foreigner looking at our history and asking an American, "That was one of your Presidents???"

American replies, "It is an incident not discussed with outsiders."
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
No, that's not why we lost the election. We lost the election because Clinton did not have an effective response to the propaganda machine that has been active against her since the 80s.
Click to expand...

It's possible that there are multiple factors. So the "deplorable bigot" name calling might not be WHY we lost the election, in the sense of the one reason, but I think the "deplorable bigot" name calling was enough to sway 1% of the electorate from Democrat to Republican, or if you prefer, from Hillary to Donald. I would go so far as to say that of the things that the Democrats and/or Hillary had control over, and that they could have modified without severely compromising their values, that was it.
 
TragicMonkey said:
How would that even work? If people were called deplorable bigots for supporting Trump then they were already supporting Trump when they were called that. Are you both suggesting that Trump supporters would have changed their minds if and only if nobody had called them any bad names? "Oh, I identified as a Trump supporter and was going to vote for Trump but then someone called me a name so I'm changing my mind and doing exactly what I said I would and vote for Trump!"
Click to expand...

What I meant, and what I suspect Emily's Cat meant, too, is that prior to the election, an awful lot of very normal people were being called deplorable bigots, and as the election season rolled on, people who declared that they were leaning toward Trump were informed that they must be deplorable bigots, or they wouldn't be supporting Trump. Well, they didn't feel like deplorable bigots. They felt like normal people, and they decided they didn't like being called deplorable bigots, and would vote for the candidate who very clearly did not call them deplorable bigots.

A huge factor in deciding the election? Enough to sway 1% of people who live in Wisconsin.
 
alfaniner said:
I'm imagining sometime in the future, a foreigner looking at our history and asking an American, "That was one of your Presidents???"

American replies, "It is an incident not discussed with outsiders."
Click to expand...

Are you comparing Trump to a Star Trek continuity flaw? Because it's apt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom