I've Changed My Mind About Trump

[MajGenl.Meade]

Allow me to clarify. I have no doubt that Trump appealed to racist, misogynist, bigoted, etc. notions in too many people (openly, consciously, deeply hidden, atavistic, whatever). For them and for many others, "liberal" means a tendency to be all or any of:

pro-abortion
anti-Christian
atheistic
pro-homosexuality
foul-mouthed
degenerate
anti-law'norder
anti-capitalist
anti-white
immoral

Now, I am neither so prejudiced nor so stupid as to think/believe that anyone on this board is all of those things. But there are at least four "Bingos!" there. I also am under no illusion that "rightist" people don't share some of those (and others stated and implied above).

No-one included in any of those bingos is forcing me to participate in them. But, as is common in disagreement, one side must and does tell those of contrary views (it works both ways) that it is "wrong" to hold those views.

It begins to look as if almost 50% of voters in the USA are telling the liberal thinkers (as defined above) that they are sick and tired of liberal thinkers (as defined above) arrogantly dispensing social, moral, political diktats which all others must agree to/accept or risk being publicly shamed with a big red letter branded on the forehead. Metaphorically speaking, of course.

Conservatives are far from being the only grouping in the USA that assumes their own absolute correctness and that no one else has the right to oppose, correct and change society.

Don't be so surprised that your "group-think" isn't my "group-think" and that, from time to time, the one will be in and the other out. Newton's third law.

[TPFKA@W]

TPFKA@W wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 05, 2020 12:00 pm
Yeah, that left wing hubris that got Hillabeast elected. Oh wait that didn't happen. You'd think it would have sent a message to the mothership, but it did not.

Four years ago I had asked you very politely to explain to me exactly what you thought was so horrible about Hillary Clinton, and you just waved me off.

It does not really matter why I dislike her, it will change nothing. But if you insist, it is her overwhelming tendency to condescendingly smirk and how she looks down her nose at the little people all the while using other little people to accomplish her power seeking goals. She exudes no warmth, no charm and scores a big fat zero in likability. I strongly suspect that she and Billy boy are both psychopaths, and probably narcissists. If I could push a button and have her cease to exist with no legal consequences, I would do so.

Feel better?

[ex-khobar Andy]

Allow me to clarify. I have no doubt that Trump appealed to racist, misogynist, bigoted, etc. notions in too many people (openly, consciously, deeply hidden, atavistic, whatever). For them and for many others, "liberal" means a tendency to be all or any of:

pro-abortion
anti-Christian
atheistic
pro-homosexuality
foul-mouthed
degenerate
anti-law'norder
anti-capitalist
anti-white
immoral

I do get that you are saying that you don't believe this. But taking those in order:

pro-abortion. I don't know anyone who is pro-abortion. I know plenty who believe that abortion, like any medical procedure, is a solution for those who find they need it, and we are not inclined to deny it to anyone who needs it.

anti-Christian. I don't know anyone who is anti-Christian. I know plenty who are against fundamentalists, of whatever religious ilk, who believe that their values are so superior to those of everyone else that they must require us to adopt those values. E.g., contraception, obeisance to Jesus, Mohammed, Abraham or whoever.

atheistic. Guilty as charged. If I am tolerant of others' religions - as long as they don't impose them on me - then they should be tolerant of my beliefs.

pro-homosexuality. I suppose I am pro-homosexuality in the same way that I am pro red hair. It's a fact of life (God made homosexuals and pheomelanin) and I accept it. I can do nothing about it; I don't want to do anything about it; and it adds to the rich tapestry of our lives.

foul-mouthed. Guilty as charged and I share that trait (of which I am not proud) with Trump.

degenerate. Well there's a loaded word. But I've never, for example, paid (or paid off) a prostitute; so I don't think that degeneracy, however defined, belongs to us liberals. Exhibit B: Jerry Falwell Jr.

anti-law'norder. I pay my taxes to maintain some level of law norder around here. More than some. Nuff said.

anti-capitalist. Well yes in many ways; but more accurately I recognize its limitations.

anti-white. See homosexuality above.

immoral. See degenerate above. On the broader issue of morality - i.e., non-sexual - I resent enormously the attitude that morality flows only from religion.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Thanks Andy. Correct in so many ways.

But this is the point (isn't it?): those "who believe that their values are so superior to those of everyone else that they must require us to adopt those values"

That is the accusation made by many against "liberals" (as defined above or below, depending on which way you order the board).

In what way is that accusation any different to yours? Or mine? We all believe that we are right and that everyone else should agree - if not aloud, then by quiet acceptance. Don't we?

For example: "liberals" say women should have the right to murder babies. "We" say they should not.

I'm not speaking here of which is correct or why. But what makes one argument "more valid" than the other argument? [My wife and have been through the abortion decision ourselves and as a result there is one less of "us" in the world, so bear that in mind]

[BoSoxGal]

For example: "liberals" say women should have the right to murder babies. "We" say they should not.

Fuck this fucking bullshit statement- all the more horrific coming from someone who availed himself of abortion when he needed it.

[MajGenl.Meade]

For example: "liberals" say women should have the right to murder babies. "We" say they should not.

(liberal potty mouthing obliterated). . . all the more horrific coming from someone who availed himself of abortion when he needed it.

I mistakenly thought you capable of comprehending that the inverted commas indicated a statement put forward by people who believe that way. But I should be grateful for the perfect example of liberal anti-intellectual smearing and bullying at which you are so skilled.

[BoSoxGal]

Describing the legal termination of a pregnancy in those terms is unacceptable in any context.

[Big RR]

I have to agree; it's like saying the anti-abortion people are in favor of allowing children to murder their mothers and preventing any semblance of self defense. Idiotic? Sure. But no more so than claiming abortion is the right to murder babies.

[TPFKA@W]

As she continues to both not comprehend and prove Meades point quite simultaneously.

I say that all the while maintaining that it is always a woman’s choice what she does with her body whether it is abortion or prostitution. If men are stupid enough to pay for sex, or pathetic enough to have to, women should be allowed to profit if they wish.

People should never be subjected to shame or denied basic human rights for who they love.

One should not be labeled stupid or deplorable if their beliefs differ from mine.

[Econoline]

[Crackpot]

A little too Accurate

[Guinevere]

I don't think either of you are particularly the people Meade is talking about. (:cough: think rubato :cough:)

There is a messaging issue with mainstream Democrats have with talking at People instead of to (or as) the people. Republicans have done a pretty good job at setting a more familiar tone so have Bernie and AOC (that's why Republicans are so scared of them)

If you can't be relatable people are not going to like you if they don't like you they are less likely to trust you if they don't trust you they are not going to vote for you.

It might not be strictly logical but humans aren't a logical species.

Ha. You used to think I was as bad as he is And make no mistake, that charge has been leveled at me, too.

As to being relatable, I agree that’s important. It’s another form of the “who would I want to have a beer with” question that differentiated GWB and Al Gore. I know HRC didn’t have it (although I also believe some of that conclusion was people relying on memes and stereotypes). I cannot believe DJT has it, but his supporters totally believe he is like them.

I’m interested to hear you say that AOC and Bernie have it. I’ll have to do some re-reviewing there.

[Crackpot]

Ha. You used to think I was as bad as he is

Never. I may have made the argument on a particular point, but, you aren't completely lacking Charisma.

Really the key is to align the people with you as the drivers of the policy (we need to push for this change) not subjects of said policy (we need to change) or worse victims of it.(you need to change)

Companion-Boss/Manager-Dictator.

[Econoline]

This post (from Wonketteer Robyn Pennacchia) seems relevant:

Bias doesn't always just mean unfairly favoring one side over the other or giving preferential treatment or even just assuming we are right and everyone else is wrong. It can also mean assuming people think the same way we do, on a very basic level. Liars always assume other people are lying. Cheaters tend to be more jealous. People who are not devious don't always realize when the people around them are up to some shit. As much as humans love to tout their own individual snowflake-like uniqueness, we actually have a hard time wrapping our heads around people not thinking the same way we do. After all, our primary sources of "what people are like" are our own minds.

As such, Trumpian conservatives have some truly messed up ideas about us and what we want and what would bring us joy. So ever since it became clear that Trump is going to lose this thing, and now that he has, for definite, lost this thing, many of them have begun preparing themselves for the gulags and reeducation camps that we will inevitably send them to, because sure, that's definitely our thing.

Like this guy, Chad Whoever, who asked his followers which they were looking forward to more? The bread lines or the gulags? And this other lady, Jill, who responded "I'm so excited to pay for everyone else's college tuition!"

Because, obviously, we have to educate people before we throw them in the gulags. We're not savages. We will wait for you to get your MFA, but then it is off to American Siberia — or as it was once called, North Dakota.

Also — I don't know if anyone else recalls this past summer, but it's hardly as if anyone had to wait for Joe Biden to be president to stand in a bread line.

Also too — it will never stop being weird that the big conservative nightmare is, like, giving bread to people who do not have bread.

(Continues here.)

[Joe Guy]