• 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.

Cont: President Trump: Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emily's Cat said:
<snip>

Me: Hey {liberals} - telling a bunch of people that you think they are horrible awful people, insisting that they're worthless trash, calling them names, ,mocking and deriding them continuously, and so on... that's not a winning strategy. That doesn't win people to your viewpoint. It's counter productive. Stop doing it, and you'll have a much better chance at making headway.

<snip>
Click to expand...


You keep saying this.

And yet, when it is pointed out that it has been exactly such a strategy which has been largely responsible for Republicans getting the power base they have today you just handwave that fact away.

Why are you so vituperatively caustic about the mostly imagined slights of a few Democrats and totally unaffected by the Republican Party all but making it an official part of their policy?

And why do you think that a practice so demonstrably established to be successful when employed extensively by Republicans is inevitably going to mean utter failure for Democrats.

It's almost like you don't want them to try a strategy that has been proven to win elections.
 
Emily's Cat said:
How so? In what way have they based their strategy on soliciting support of bigots? Please point me to specifics.


What do you continue "so many more"? On what are you basing this assessment? Please provide some specific evidence to support this, with an actual comparison between Republican Party and Democratic Party supporters.


In what way is the Republican strategy one of placating bigots? Please provide some specific evidence of this claim.


Again, please provide some evidence that supports your claim that the Republican Party actively and purposefully courts bigots.
Click to expand...


I'm not going to waste my time trying to get you to review all the events of a two year long election cycle which you have already made boasts about having pointedly ignored.

Your ignorance of the events isn't my fault. And I'm not going to take responsibility for trying to repair that deficiency. It's what you wanted. Rectify it on your own time.
 
quadraginta said:
You keep saying this.

And yet, when it is pointed out that it has been exactly such a strategy which has been largely responsible for Republicans getting the power base they have today you just handwave that fact away.

Why are you so vituperatively caustic about the mostly imagined slights of a few Democrats and totally unaffected by the Republican Party all but making it an official part of their policy?

And why do you think that a practice so demonstrably established to be successful when employed extensively by Republicans is inevitably going to mean utter failure for Democrats.

It's almost like you don't want them to try a strategy that has been proven to win elections.
Click to expand...

She has been clear she holds republicans to much lower standards than democrats. She has stated she expects them to be racist so their supporting a racist is not a big deal, but pointing this out is totally unacceptable for democrats, who need to be above such things.
 
Emily's Cat said:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Me: Hey {liberals} - telling a bunch of people that you think they are horrible awful people, insisting that they're worthless trash, calling them names, ,mocking and deriding them continuously, and so on... that's not a winning strategy. That doesn't win people to your viewpoint. It's counter productive. Stop doing it, and you'll have a much better chance at making headway.
Click to expand...



I don't think you're understanding the responses. Those who vote for Trump vote for easily identifiable lies and an obvious conman/shyster who was never, ever suitable to be president.

To convince those people, who are so lacking in critical thinking skills and so much victims of the DK effect that they voted for Donald Trump, to vote for anyone else would require the same amount of lies and insincere promises that Trump made during the election.

If one were to climb down into Trumps pit and do the 'say anything to get votes' thing, regardless of intent, then:

a - any integrity is lost and one risks losing votes already gained.

b Trump, or whomsoever, just has to lie harder and more and will still get those votes because he's a better liar, the people you're talking about literally cannot comprehend this as demonstrated by the votes they've cast.

c - even if it works you're left now with all the broken promises of Trump with his apparent immunity to any criticism for it.



When the people you're trying to convince are so lacking in logic and rational thinking, when they're deep in the pit of DK and don't even know enough to even start to pull themselves out, when they vote for Donald Trump, then you really do just have to forget about them and hope you can get elected without climbing into the pit.


the alternative is that Trump is actually the preferred choice of America and the US citizens here who can actually see what a disaster he is are actually a fairly tiny minority.



One does not fight lies with lies.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Me: Hey {liberals} - telling a bunch of people that you think they are horrible awful people, insisting that they're worthless trash, calling them names, ,mocking and deriding them continuously, and so on... that's not a winning strategy. That doesn't win people to your viewpoint. It's counter productive. Stop doing it, and you'll have a much better chance at making headway.

{liberals}: You're wrong. They really are worthless trash and deserve to be mocked.

Me: You're kinda missing the point here.

{liberals}: Nuh-uh, you're just supportive of worthless trash. Don't take it so personally - I mean, nobody could possibly be offended by being called worthless trash deserving of derision unless they're actually worthless trash, right?

Me: :confused: Seriously, you're not getting this? Let me try again...


Rinse and Repeat.
Click to expand...

Here's another one:

You: Hey {liberals} - telling a bunch of people that you think they are horrible awful people, insisting that they're worthless trash, calling them names, ,mocking and deriding them continuously, and so on... that's not a winning strategy. That doesn't win people to your viewpoint. It's counter productive. Stop doing it, and you'll have a much better chance at making headway.

Me: That's nice in theory, but how do you know that this had any impact on the election? Most people had made up their minds about which party to vote for years ahead of time. Decades, even.

You: Hey {liberals} - telling a bunch of people that you think they are horrible awful people, insisting that they're worthless trash, calling them names, ,mocking and deriding them continuously, and so on... that's not a winning strategy. That doesn't win people to your viewpoint. It's counter productive. Stop doing it, and you'll have a much better chance at making headway.

Me: Ugh...

Rinse and Repeat.
 
acbytesla said:
I REALLY REALLY REALLY don't get why anyone would trust this Lying Turd. Somebody please explain to me why they do?
Click to expand...


They may prioritize wrecking the proverbial china shop over honesty and good governance. If Trump can't implement their right-wing ideals, maybe they hope he'll at least destroy the left-wing ideals.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Me: Hey {liberals} - telling a bunch of people that you think they are horrible awful people, insisting that they're worthless trash, calling them names, ,mocking and deriding them continuously, and so on... that's not a winning strategy. That doesn't win people to your viewpoint. It's counter productive. Stop doing it, and you'll have a much better chance at making headway.
Click to expand...

You are asking liberals to remain silent in the face of worthless trash opinions in the name of trying to advance their agenda. That normalizes and insulated those worthless trash opinions. That sounds extremely unethical.
 
Greedo said:
Diagnosing aside, his amount of lying and just plain antisocial behavior, after and before becoming president is unbelievable, regardless of cause.
America scares the poop out of me.
Click to expand...

Me too.

Consider for a moment that here we are discussing the psychological issues of the President of the United States. We're NOT discussing whether he has such issues, but what their nature and extent are.

That's just incredible. I'm literally speechless (writeless?) as I sit here thinking what possible words could convey the enormity and gravity of the situation. This man could destroy mankind with our nuclear arsenal and he's (not to put too fine a point on it) nuts.

If I lived in another country I'd really be pissed at the USA. Hell, I live in the USA and I'm pissed.

I don't know where to go with this so I'll just hang up the phone and go have a cry.
 
SezMe said:
Me too.

Consider for a moment that here we are discussing the psychological issues of the President of the United States. We're NOT discussing whether he has such issues, but what their nature and extent are.

That's just incredible. I'm literally speechless (writeless?) as I sit here thinking what possible words could convey the enormity and gravity of the situation. This man could destroy mankind with our nuclear arsenal and he's (not to put too fine a point on it) nuts.

If I lived in another country I'd really be pissed at the USA. Hell, I live in the USA and I'm pissed.

I don't know where to go with this so I'll just hang up the phone and go have a cry.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of people from other countries who are pissed. In general, you can't say that to an American because the response is usually along the lines of "idgaf. what is a sweden?"
 
SezMe said:
Me too.

Consider for a moment that here we are discussing the psychological issues of the President of the United States. We're NOT discussing whether he has such issues, but what their nature and extent are.

That's just incredible. I'm literally speechless (writeless?) as I sit here thinking what possible words could convey the enormity and gravity of the situation. This man could destroy mankind with our nuclear arsenal and he's (not to put too fine a point on it) nuts.

If I lived in another country I'd really be pissed at the USA. Hell, I live in the USA and I'm pissed.

I don't know where to go with this so I'll just hang up the phone and go have a cry.
Click to expand...
Re. the highlighted part: I'm not sure he actually can. Sure, he is AUTHORIZED to do so, but it's not really that there's a button hardwired to nukes.

In practical terms, he has to call someone. This someone sits way up in the chain of command in the Pentagon. In fact, the way I understand the US military works, there are TWO someones that both must agree to continue. They act as a shield, and this is a function that the military and those two people take extremely serious. I'm not even sure that he's easily able to replace them. (Yes, technically he's the commander-and-chief, but he still has to direct his commands through the military high echelons. From what I see, the high military is quite far from blindly following Trump like Nunes.)
 
Stacko said:
The Trump administration removed the “civil rights” page from http://WhiteHouse.gov.

That's a disturbing dichotomy they want to push.
Click to expand...

Good. After the Muslim ban, and their harassment of Latino people, they don't deserve to work under the mantle of Civil Rights. No point pretending that they're anything but white nationalists. The people marching against them represent Civil Rights - and folks like John Lewis and Maxine Waters in congress.

And again, same for anyone who voted for this. Keep names like Martin Luther King out your mouths.
 
Last edited:
elgarak said:
Re. the highlighted part: I'm not sure he actually can. Sure, he is AUTHORIZED to do so, but it's not really that there's a button hardwired to nukes.

In practical terms, he has to call someone. This someone sits way up in the chain of command in the Pentagon. In fact, the way I understand the US military works, there are TWO someones that both must agree to continue. They act as a shield, and this is a function that the military and those two people take extremely serious. I'm not even sure that he's easily able to replace them. (Yes, technically he's the commander-and-chief, but he still has to direct his commands through the military high echelons. From what I see, the high military is quite far from blindly following Trump like Nunes.)
Click to expand...
He could. There was a series of 60 Minutes pieces about America's nuclear power structure, including an interview with one of the two men you mention. Brief summary: everything from the bad old days of the cold war is still in place and operational, and the president can still, unilaterally, call in a nuclear strike on a target of his choosing. The military commander interviewed said he might argue strongly against it, but at the end of the day he was a soldier and would be bound to follow the orders of his commander in chief.

On the flip side, I'm not all that worried about Trump nuking anything because the man turned out to be a coward. He doesn't even have the balls to face his own party, much less put lives on the line.
 
Last edited:
Beelzebuddy said:
He could. There was a series of 60 Minutes pieces about America's nuclear power structure, including an interview with one of the two men you mention. Brief summary: everything from the bad old days of the cold war is still in place and operational, and the president can still, unilaterally, call in a nuclear strike on a target of his choosing. The military commander interviewed said he might argue strongly against it, but at the end of the day he was a soldier and would be bound to follow the orders of his commander in chief.
Click to expand...

Is he under any obligation to follow illegal orders?
 
acbytesla said:
...My father use to beat the crap out of me if I lied to him...
Click to expand...
I'm sorry to hear that, that's child abuse.

Bob001 said:
Here's someone who contends that "blue lies" -- believing them and telling them -- is a kind of groupthink that establishes bonds among members. Link
Click to expand...

I agree with the premise in the article Bob linked, Trump essentially uses 'blue lies' to further his agenda and solidify his support base. Social scientists and psychologists have used experiments to show that many people are more likely to use 'win the argument' skills than 'critical thinking' skills. As was stated in the article Bob linked, it is believed that it is a form of social conditioning that has evolved in humans. That people in a group often choose to support that group even if it means believing in facts that aren't facts at all.

But it seems to be a dangerous trend in a democracy when it's taken to the extremes that Trump does. That's exactly what George Orwell was writing about in 1984, a book I doubt most of Trump's supporters have ever read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom