Has anyone had fruitful conversations with parents/ and or relatives that are in the Trump camp. Specifiallu, the "I don't a lot of what he says, but he was a better alternative" camp.
Every conversation I have with my parents just ends with my head in my heads in utter confusion. I cannot figure out how they were able to forgive what they fully admit are deplorable morals for a leader who is "strong". It comes back to that over, and over over. They think this country is tired of weakness, and Trump will be "strong". That seems so emotional and lizard brain thinking for people that i know are usually thoughtful and considerate.
Anyone else having these talks. Man, why does Thanksgiving have to fall around a election time....
lots of articles/podcasts draw this comparison because circumstances and characters are so similar, very american-arrogant of us though to ignore evidence from elsewhere (we do the same thing on pretty much everything that works or doesn't work in other countries).
it didn't work out great for the italians (although on the bright side it also didn't lead to the destruction of italy), much more dangerous here.
I got one worse - my parents look me dead in the eye and say, "Explain to me exactly how he is racist or misogynistic?"
this is actually a really good point and one that hadn't really occurred to me before: there's a significant % of the population that has a very old-school idea of what "racism" (and the other *isms) is. we think it's obvious that if you say a mexican-american judge can't be expected to rule fairly that it's a racist statement, we think there's an enduring stain on the current american social fabric that is the legacy of slavery, we think that it's not okay to brag about the idea of sexual assault even if you never act on it (and we suspect he did anyway), we think that regardless of your own beliefs you shouldn't attempt to impose those on others to the extent it can be avoided (as long as your beliefs don't restrict the rights of anybody else). we think these things are all disqualifiers, and to a certain extent that no decent person could believe otherwise.
there's a significant % of the population that disagrees--that thinks racism is only about overt displays of white supremacy, (in spite of all evidence) that there is no appreciable legacy of slavery (and therefore that affirmative action itself is racism against them) and that people have the status they have because they as individuals deserve it, and that people talking is just people talking, taking a stand against people making racist or sexist jokes is just political correctness gone amok and a kind of violation of the spirit of freedom of speech. so while they might not be comfortable with the stuff he's said and done, to them it's not disqualifying. that doesn't mean they are all horrible people. some are. but my cousins for example aren't horrible people, they are just, imo, ignorant on the wrong side of history and progress. i say that here but i wouldn't say that to them, though, because it wouldn't help change their minds.
the sad thing is that not only do we disagree about the fundamental definitions of "racism", "sexism", "homophobia", etc, but that there's an echo chamber for both sides such that not only do we think the other side is "wrong", but we think they're cartoonishly wrong, obviously and stupidly wrong, often by finding the most clueless, thoughtless, and extreme supporter of the other side and presenting their views as typical.
moreover, they don't have the same impetus for introspection that we do right now--a stinging rebuke and the facts on the ground of a president trump who with an ascendant republican party has free rein to do more or less whatever he wants. on the contrary, unless they are paying close attention and realize that over half the people who voted do see things our way they are likely to see it as a vindication.
The real travesty here is that congress has a 10-25% approval rating yet 80-90% of them get re-elected.
If anything makes you shake your head at how stupid of a society is it should be this. really think about that. We re-elect 90% of the guys the entire country almost universally agrees suck at their jobs.
Did anyone watch the 60 minutes interview? The shit that really pissed me off is how they were so dismissive about peoples' fears. You have to "show" people they have nothing to fear not tell them that their fear is irrational.
I think you're exactly right, and it's the conclusion I have been coming to the last couple of days. To them, words hold very little threat. Something I can only guess in a generational thing, especially if you grew up white or a man.
What I can't understand is how they don't see that what someones says or promotes can have real life consequences. How do those dots not connect for them? Bigotry happens up in your brain, in your thoughts - action is just the effect. Words influence thought, thoughts influence action. It's so desperately simple.
Did anyone watch the 60 minutes interview? The shit that really pissed me off is how they were so dismissive about peoples' fears. You have to "show" people they have nothing to fear not tell them that their fear is irrational.
I just don't see what he has said that would give people fear. He is probably the most pro-gay candidate that the republicans have ever elected, yet there are gay people protesting his election.
Why would all these states just give away their influence so that New York, Florida, California and Texas will just suck up all the oxygen?
States rights in terms of Federal offices are a bullshit compromise. The president represents all people. The fact that the electoral college exists makes the votes of people in the most populated areas count less. That is inherently unfair. Democracy should represent the will of the people. EC is just gerrymandering on a macro scale. I mean shit look at the results of this election. For all the hand wringing, She got more votes than he did. 2 out of the last 5 elections, the presidency was "won" by someone who had less votes than their opponent. There is nothing just about that.
it would more than likely end in the same result, but be a different campaign. Like, trump never bothered to campaign in California or New York, just how Clinton never bothered to enter Texas more than a few times. If it was decided by the popular vote then they would hit all areas hard and more than likely end with the same result.
Did anyone watch the 60 minutes interview? The shit that really pissed me off is how they were so dismissive about peoples' fears. You have to "show" people they have nothing to fear not tell them that their fear is irrational.
I just don't see what he has said that would give people fear. He is probably the most pro-gay candidate that the republicans have ever elected, yet there are gay people protesting his election.
There are indications that Trump wants to have Mike Pence be very involved in policy etc. in the administration (probably because Trump would get way to bored actually governing full time) - and Pence is one of the most anti-LGBT politicians of national prominence.
I just don't see what he has said that would give people fear. He is probably the most pro-gay candidate that the republicans have ever elected, yet there are gay people protesting his election.
Setting aside that being the most pro-gay republican is useless given their track record against the community (it's basically just by virtue that he doesn't care), Mike Pence is a fucking monster and he's going to be making major decisions about actually governing the country while Trump figures out how to schedule another rally tour and waits to give the State of the Union speech. The fear is real and absolutely justified.
Did anyone watch the 60 minutes interview? The shit that really pissed me off is how they were so dismissive about peoples' fears. You have to "show" people they have nothing to fear not tell them that their fear is irrational.
I just don't see what he has said that would give people fear. He is probably the most pro-gay candidate that the republicans have ever elected, yet there are gay people protesting his election.
He has picked a Vice President who:
1. Signed a bill to jail same-sex couples for applying for a marriage license.
2. Wanted to divert funding from HIV prevention to conversion therapy (in which he expressed the belief that electrocuting you can turn you straight).
3. Opposed the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
If that's your idea of pro-gay then I'm terrified to think what your idea of anti-gay is. Sure, you can say that that's not Trump, that's Pence, but a true LGBT ally wouldn't be caught dead associating with Pence in a positive manner, let alone have him be one heartbeat/assassination attempt away from the Presidency.
The thought that a man I don't know and have never had any personal interaction with could think that I could be 'cured' of my gayness by running an electric current through my body makes me feel physically sick. And Trump has helped him in a dramatic rise to power.
Did anyone watch the 60 minutes interview? The shit that really pissed me off is how they were so dismissive about peoples' fears. You have to "show" people they have nothing to fear not tell them that their fear is irrational.
I just don't see what he has said that would give people fear. He is probably the most pro-gay candidate that the republicans have ever elected, yet there are gay people protesting his election.
Really? Have you not been paying attention at all?
In the run up to the election he has said that he was against gay marriage, civil unions, or civil benefits for gay couples.
Sure, you can claim that he is not that bad and was just saying that stuff to get the nomination. Which is about the only defense anyone can say to argue that he will not be that bad. The only way that anyone can argue that a Trump presidency won't be that bad for minorities and LGBT community is by saying that he only said those terrible things to win the election and didn't really mean them.
Did anyone watch the 60 minutes interview? The shit that really pissed me off is how they were so dismissive about peoples' fears. You have to "show" people they have nothing to fear not tell them that their fear is irrational.
The media are already tripping over themselves trying to normalize him. It's sickening. Not one actually tough question.
Yeah, the media is desperately trying to normalize him. Like, he is polite to Obama for 5 minutes and they all go "see, he is so presidential now." Just like they try to spin him nominating pretty much the GOP establishment to all the key positions to him being mature. As opposed to pointing out the obvious hypocrisy of running as an anti-establishment candidate and then just handing it over to the standard GOP opperators.
Im in an american governement class in college taught by a right leaning professor who just bashes Obama and Clinton daily. I leave the class shaking in anger. I dont care if someone has those beliefs but their shaping young adults minds and it sickens me that its so one sided. For example today we discussed how trump wants to now just focus deportation of illegals on just the criminals while my teacher says obama and liberals want them to stay. OBAMA HAS DEPORTED MORE ILLEGALS THAN EVERY PRESIDENT COMBINED WITH FOCUS ON CRIMINALS... rant over lol
1. Trump appoints Steve Bannon, white supremacist and alt right nutjob as his senior advisor
2. Trump officially announces his kids are going to run his companies, totally falsely calling it a blind trust
3. Trump also requests security clearance for his kids, which would make them privy to billions of dollars worth of inside information, obviously an extreme conflict of interest
4. Trump camp talked about LOOSENING campaign finance regulations, something he claimed to be against
5. Said that parts of his bullshit wall will actually be fencing
6. told his supporters to stop violence against minorities only when asked about it but still hasn't condemned the KKK rally planned in his honor
7. this man is probably our next secretary of state, meaning he is our main liason to foreign allies
But yes media, we should totally give him a chance to see if he "succeeds".
I thought he was the AG. Newt for Secretary of State?
Initially that was the talk but now I'm seeing Giuliani is the front runner. Other option for secretary of state is John Bolton, an uber-hawkish nutjob who couldn't even get confirmed as full time UN Ambassador under the Bush administration. There's a weird fluidity to all the guys Trump wants in his cabinet, position doesn't seem to matter. I'm sure they're all getting a role. It wouldn't shock me at this point to see Alex Jones as the head of the CIA
So Jeff Sessions, the guy who was considered too racist to become a judge by a senate controlled by the GOP in the 80s, is now going to be the attorney general. And Flynn, the guy who has admitted to being paid to be on public events alongside Putin, is going to be the national security advisor.
I hate to fire this thread back up but I found this definition on Mayo Clinic and was blown away by how accurate it is of a certain someone
"Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism."
I hate to fire this thread back up but I found this definition on Mayo Clinic and was blown away by how accurate it is of a certain someone
"Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism."
To be fair, that's a lot of politicians - our last Prime Minister Tony Abbott fits that description to a T.
Comments
1. Signed a bill to jail same-sex couples for applying for a marriage license.
2. Wanted to divert funding from HIV prevention to conversion therapy (in which he expressed the belief that electrocuting you can turn you straight).
3. Opposed the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
If that's your idea of pro-gay then I'm terrified to think what your idea of anti-gay is. Sure, you can say that that's not Trump, that's Pence, but a true LGBT ally wouldn't be caught dead associating with Pence in a positive manner, let alone have him be one heartbeat/assassination attempt away from the Presidency.
The thought that a man I don't know and have never had any personal interaction with could think that I could be 'cured' of my gayness by running an electric current through my body makes me feel physically sick. And Trump has helped him in a dramatic rise to power.
Really? Have you not been paying attention at all?
http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/rachelwitkin/donald_trump_10_comments_that_show_where_he_stands_on_gay_marriage
In the run up to the election he has said that he was against gay marriage, civil unions, or civil benefits for gay couples.
Sure, you can claim that he is not that bad and was just saying that stuff to get the nomination. Which is about the only defense anyone can say to argue that he will not be that bad. The only way that anyone can argue that a Trump presidency won't be that bad for minorities and LGBT community is by saying that he only said those terrible things to win the election and didn't really mean them.
"Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism."