Looks like the votes have finally been counted in Michigan this gives Trump 306. Not a total wipe out but a very convincing win. Unless that has already been counted? Hard to find a consensus for some reason.
The rudest, most belligerent, divisive and disliked candidate in history won the election less than a week ago after threatening violence if he didn't win, and the analysis that "the left" isn't polite enough. Sheesh.
"You just don't understand his base...".
I don't. I never will. Far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants this guy to be the President is probably beyond saving with politeness, soothsaying, and understanding.
That attitude will ensure that liberals will keep losing.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Leaving aside your self-important elitism, my solution is to have conversations with these people without calling them names or deriding them, and explain why these issues are important and why they should see it your way. There are racists out there, there are genuinely terrible people who are beyond reaching, but there are a lot more people like my hypothetical electrician who are good, well-meaning and would probably agree with you on many things (or could at least be brought around to seeing and respecting your point) without you acting like they're a lower rung on the evolutionary ladder.
Your hypothetical would have been much more effective if it had been a plumber, say a plumber named Joe. Would have put a much different but recognizable face on your issue.
What is interesting is that Joe, that well meaning plumber, was so poorly informed that his ignorance made him a cause celebrity, then a keynote with the Tea Party set. Whatever happened to him? In the immortal words of Cyndi Lauper, "I see your true colors shining through..."
It is also interesting that you are telling people to have conversations without calling these people names or deriding them, but in the same post use the bolded language.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
So going by this map Michigan is not factored in the total, odd. Trump got 306. On another note this guy decided he would Tweet out how he's going to take out Trump with a sniper rifle. Why.
And I'm just saying that if you continue to try to shame people into accepting your politics and moral code in absolutist terms, they're going to continue to tell you to #### off, and vote for people like Trump (and Farage, and etc etc etc).
So in a world where you have Trump legitimizing the far-right, when an outlet like Breitbart who are incredibly hateful towards women, gays, blacks, Jews, etc, etc. now has a direct connection to the White House. When you have a world where Fox News is reinforcing the idea that there's a War On Christmas and a War On Men and a War On Christianity, when these things are patently, ridiculously untrue, how are people supposed to respond?
Just smile and nod and "boys will be boys" and move on?
Fox News, Sean Hannity, Alex Jones and the like are screaming into an echo chamber and riling up these people and legitimizing those base instincts, that any "outsider" is a threat. Hate crimes are increasing. Women's rights have been under attack more in the last 6 years than in decades.
Are we supposed to sit by and let those other forces influence them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
My issue with Islamism (not Islam, important distinction) is the group of people who are effectively the equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church, or worse - the ones who are actively committing, or supporting, murder, torture and in some cases rape of innocents with impunity. Being harsher on those people is warranted. Social conservatives are trying to pass laws to allow bakeries not to make wedding cakes for gay couples; Islamists want to cut those gay couples' heads off. If what passes for "social conservatism" in Pakistan managed to moderate itself to the point that it was the moral equivalent of the Christian right in America, I'd moderate my tone with them, just as soon as I finished doing cartwheels with glee.
It goes so much deeper than that. They want to make or keep it legal to fire someone if they're gay (that's legal in many states in the US), to keep it legal to refuse to rent an apartment to a gay couple, or to evict them based on that sexuality. It's discrimination in all its forms, it's why there are more homeless gay/trans youth than any other group in this country. Because we should be much better than those places where being gay is illegal and can get you killed--but we still have a long way to go. This society where we can't tell someone that "hey, discriminating against gay people is bigoted and wrong" legitimizes parents who kick their kids out when they come out of the closet.
Just like you're saying we can do better as the left, we can do better as a country, and just because we've gained some rights and made some progress doesn't mean we should just sit down and shut up and wait until this wave of regressionism is over because conservatives are going to dig in their heels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Leaving aside your self-important elitism, my solution is to have conversations with these people without calling them names or deriding them, and explain why these issues are important and why they should see it your way. There are racists out there, there are genuinely terrible people who are beyond reaching, but there are a lot more people like my hypothetical electrician who are good, well-meaning and would probably agree with you on many things (or could at least be brought around to seeing and respecting your point) without you acting like they're a lower rung on the evolutionary ladder.
I'm reminded of a quote from Martin Luther King Jr:
Quote:
"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
The people who you worry about aren't the KKK. Those are the people you see coming, they're the ones that aren't a surprise. They're the fringe that no one really accepts or legitimizes, for the most part. It's the people who know better but don't want to deal with the ugliness of it that cause the issues. Because then you're just letting it slide, because hey, we can't tell them they're wrong, they'll get defensive.
Well yeah they'll get defensive. But progress is not easily won. The voting rights act came with peaceful men like MLK but it also came with big, ugly, violent protests and conflicts. They were all part of the process.
These conservative types are not easily going to step aside and allow progress to happen, and after 20 years of Fox News telling them that they're right, that if we could just shut up the elites, we could get back to the way things used to be. So now you have this generation that longs for the days of the 1950s, who are told again and again by their leaders and their media that it's this liberal agenda that's holding them back--when it's not that at all. What's holding them back is their desperation for the past. Their refusal to live in a world that's passed them by, their need for everyone around to coddle their antiquated world view.
Yes, as progressives and educated people on the coasts, we need to see the issues with rural America, with job loss and lack of education and all of those problems, but by the same token, they need to look at the actual world that's now around them and stop wishing for a return to the Good Old Days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
the electrician is a good example.. not long ago a high school diploma was good enough for a good job in most of the country. These people paved the way for kids today to get a college education. Then somehow the 'educated' bar got raised to mean a college degree. Well imagine you're the mid40 year old with that high school education that used to be good enough, now this kids you helped into college are calling you stupid.
that would get anyone mad.
and yes, im still mad at comedians.
Or they could accept that they were more educated than their parents, and that their parents were more educated than their grandparents, realize that as time moves on, more information is available and thus the generations that come after them are going to inherently be smarter and perhaps they're worth listening to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos
The rudest, most belligerent, divisive and disliked candidate in history won the election less than a week ago after threatening violence if he didn't win, and the analysis that "the left" isn't polite enough. Sheesh.
"You just don't understand his base...".
I don't. I never will. Far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants this guy to be the President is probably beyond saving with politeness, soothsaying, and understanding.
One side is telling conservatives that they need to broaden their world view and be more accepting.
The other side is calling Mexicans rapists, saying that trans women are going to rape their daughters, that anyone from the Middle East is a terrorist who is going to kill their neighbors.
But sure, it's the left that's being insulting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999
The rudest, most belligerent, divisive and disliked candidate in history won the election less than a week ago against all predictions because his campaign flipped several long-time Democratic strongholds, often improving on Romney by 10 points or more, by using an economic strategy and the analysis is that he only won because of racists, xenophobes and misogynist?
He won because a whole lot of people decided that racism, xenophobia and misogyny weren't deal-breakers. Their personal concerns were more important than the safety and well-being of their fellow human beings.
Hasan Minhaj put it wonderfully on the Daily Show. It's not that these people all hate Muslims/LGBT people/women--it's just that they literally don't care about them.
Last edited by wittynickname; 11-14-2016 at 07:06 PM.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to wittynickname For This Useful Post:
You're asking the left to abandon tribalism because the left isn't being nice enough when they say "if tribalism stays, they need to be equal and there's no room for tribes that say otherwise." Working towards ending the need for tribes (even if it seems like a whole bunch of little ones pop up) is a much closer step than suggesting we do nothing if we can't abandon it outright.
How is acting in a tribal fashion working towards ending the need for tribes?
We can't change the unfortunate aspects of our nature, all we can do is try to overcome it.
Quote:
You're never going to get the change you're looking for, not in your life time. It seems counter-productive to rally against the change that heads that direction.
It's not heading in that direction, though. That's my point. It's backfiring. Look at what's happened in the past year.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
was always going to happen. Why else would have Rudy kissed his ass all the time? I agree it's scary, don't get me wrong. But I'm not surprised at all that Trump is going to reward him for his disgusting loyalty.
How is acting in a tribal fashion working towards ending the need for tribes?
We can't change the unfortunate aspects of our nature, all we can do is try to overcome it.
It's not heading in that direction, though. That's my point. It's backfiring. Look at what's happened in the past year.
Your time frame is inadequate - WAY too small I'm talking about years and years of progress that's been in the works since probably before you were born and your reaction is "yeah well it's not working, Trump!"
No Corsi, it is working. It has been working. A step backwards isn't indicative of the whole process crumbling. Name one period of progress in humanity had zero setbacks and no resistance. I'm honestly curious if you can find one because I'm not aware of any.
You haven't presented a remotely plausible solution. How is acting in a tribal fashion working? Because certain "tribes" are pushing towards equal stature. They congregate this way because they are more powerful together and united than they are alone. I could understand your concern if you thought they were looking to "one up" other tribes, but it's about being equal. As I said, acting tribal moves towards the end of tribalism by eliminating the NEED to act that way.
Do you really think the LGBTQ community are gunning to take over the power position and start eliminating the rights of straight people? Because I could see concern if it was over an endless cycle, but it's not.
EDIT: and New Era got it spot on. You can't keep condemning "the left" and their tactics of derision and shame and then go insulting people who do that. You're doing the EXACT same thing you're telling them not to do, while you tell them not to do it. You think it'll backfire for the left, so how does it serve you?
Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, James Baker, Warren Christopher. Madeline Albright, Colin Powell, Condeleeza Rice, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry... Rudy Giuliani?? Oy
__________________
Trust the snake.
The Following User Says Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
The far right won without any lick of understanding.
I think liberals will be fine. A little quick on the eulogy Cliff.
The far right cannot 'win'... they are what they are, and they are out there every time. Their votes don't change, and never change an election.
Just as the far left won't/can't win on its own. It (like the far right) is what it is.
Elections are won in the middle. What the left is missing here is that many people in the middle voted Trump because the elitist, bigoted (yes, leftist liberals like PsYcNeT, are just as bigoted, hateful and exclusionary as the people they are trying to condemn), have insulted non-cardholders for so long that those people have finally said #### you, I am sick of you putting me down just because I am not a PC, SJW, white-hating, elitist.
Until rational people realize that many of these people aren't KKK racists, simply people who are tired of not having a voice, nothing will be learned from this election.
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
So in a world where you have Trump legitimizing the far-right, when an outlet like Breitbart who are incredibly hateful towards women, gays, blacks, Jews, etc, etc. now has a direct connection to the White House. When you have a world where Fox News is reinforcing the idea that there's a War On Christmas and a War On Men and a War On Christianity, when these things are patently, ridiculously untrue, how are people supposed to respond?
I was really clear about this. It's frustrating to have to just keep repeating it. I think we live in a constant state of choice between conversation with people we disagree with, and violence. So, to answer your question, we respond to these people with facts, reason, evidence, and we don't respond in kind. Win the war of ideas.
Quote:
It goes so much deeper than that. They want to make or keep it legal to fire someone if they're gay (that's legal in many states in the US), to keep it legal to refuse to rent an apartment to a gay couple, or to evict them based on that sexuality. It's discrimination in all its forms, it's why there are more homeless gay/trans youth than any other group in this country. Because we should be much better than those places where being gay is illegal and can get you killed--but we still have a long way to go. This society where we can't tell someone that "hey, discriminating against gay people is bigoted and wrong" legitimizes parents who kick their kids out when they come out of the closet.
First, I'm well aware of that - I was using an example to make the point that whatever detrimental effects the policies proposed by the right are, and they are terrible, they are not suggesting that gay people should be killed for being gay. There are degrees of intolerance, and I was explaining to Pepsifree why I condemn ISIS and their ilk in stronger terms than I condemn the Christian Right Wing.
Second, no one, literally no one, is arguing for this. No one is proposing we create a society where you can't tell someone that "discriminating against gay people is bigoted and wrong". Quite the opposite. I'm advocating for the society where we explain why that is, to the extent it's even necessary anymore. The more apt point is to explain how these policies lead to terrible results. Some people may be convinced by evidence and rational argument, others may not be, but no one is convinced by saying "you support that? You're a homophobe, your horrible monster." No one responds to this.
Quote:
just because we've gained some rights and made some progress doesn't mean we should just sit down and shut up and wait until this wave of regressionism is over because conservatives are going to dig in their heels.
Yet again, no one is arguing for this.
Quote:
The people who you worry about aren't the KKK. Those are the people you see coming, they're the ones that aren't a surprise. They're the fringe that no one really accepts or legitimizes, for the most part. It's the people who know better but don't want to deal with the ugliness of it that cause the issues. Because then you're just letting it slide, because hey, we can't tell them they're wrong, they'll get defensive.
Yet again, no one is arguing for this.
The parade of straw men is getting a bit tiresome.
Quote:
These conservative types are not easily going to step aside and allow progress to happen, and after 20 years of Fox News telling them that they're right, that if we could just shut up the elites, we could get back to the way things used to be. So now you have this generation that longs for the days of the 1950s, who are told again and again by their leaders and their media that it's this liberal agenda that's holding them back--when it's not that at all. What's holding them back is their desperation for the past. Their refusal to live in a world that's passed them by, their need for everyone around to coddle their antiquated world view.
Yes, as progressives and educated people on the coasts, we need to see the issues with rural America, with job loss and lack of education and all of those problems, but by the same token, they need to look at the actual world that's now around them and stop wishing for a return to the Good Old Days.
This is a fantasy caricature of the Trump voter that doesn't really reflect reality, I don't think. Which I recognize is a bit of an irony since I just a page ago created a caricature of the well-meaning blue collar family man, but I think this is a pretty superficial analysis of the motivations of "rural America", whatever that means.
That being said, your comment about the "Fox News" version of reality is right, which is really the big Achilles heel in my prescription for addressing this cultural divide. People can choose their own facts, and because of more of those human failings we were discussing earlier, probably will. I don't really have a solution for this.
Quote:
Or they could accept that they were more educated than their parents, and that their parents were more educated than their grandparents, realize that as time moves on, more information is available and thus the generations that come after them are going to inherently be smarter and perhaps they're worth listening to.
Your position is that every generation is "smarter" than the one that came before it? That progress is a fait accompli? I would say there is no basis for saying so, and that's a remarkable statement to make.
Quote:
One side is telling conservatives that they need to broaden their world view and be more accepting. The other side is calling Mexicans rapists, saying that trans women are going to rape their daughters, that anyone from the Middle East is a terrorist who is going to kill their neighbors.
Again, a caricature. They're not telling conservatives that they need to broaden their world view and be more accepting. They're telling conservatives that their world view is, in its entirety, evil, and that they're terrible, immoral people for subscribing to it. Full stop.
Quote:
He won because a whole lot of people decided that racism, xenophobia and misogyny weren't deal-breakers. Their personal concerns were more important than the safety and well-being of their fellow human beings.
Just reflect on this statement. You really think that tens of millions of Americans went into the voting booth and thought this to themselves? You really think these people are, at their core, bad people?
This is why I'm cynical. That sort of cultural fracturing can't be repaired.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
No, the point is you can't tell Mike anything about himself. He knows and he won't be having no fancy book learning big city libtard looking down on him. Any attempt to educate him will be met with resistance unless you coddle him in your explanation which is hilarious in the irony regarding the derision for safe spaces and triggering from those in his camp.
Their solution from what I can tell is...leave it alone. It's fine for some people and it's crappy for others but that's just life. Buck up, stiff upper lip, and go to work.
I really like you as a poster, so it disappoints me to see you so blatantly hypocritical and oblivious to the issue that you think you're addressing.
No one is asking to be coddled. People like PsYcNeT constantly insult anyone that isn't as militantly left as him/her, and those people are fed up. They aren't racist, they aren't misogynistic, they are simply tired of being lectured about white privilege.
The militant left can be just as prejudist as the people they are trying to attack. And their victims are sick of it. That doesn't make them racist, it just makes them tired and frustrated.
I believe this election will, in the long run, be a major positive because it is bringing a lot of things to the surface that need to be brought to the surface (on all sides). It is only then that they can be dealt with.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Your time frame is inadequate - WAY too small I'm talking about years and years of progress that's been in the works since probably before you were born and your reaction is "yeah well it's not working, Trump!"
No Corsi, it is working. It has been working. A step backwards isn't indicative of the whole process crumbling. Name one period of progress in humanity had zero setbacks and no resistance. I'm honestly curious if you can find one because I'm not aware of any.
Well, now I'm confused about what we're talking about. Because I don't think the years of progress that have been in the works since before I were born were the product of the politics I'm suggesting are poisonous, which have only emerged in the last handful of years.
Quote:
You haven't presented a remotely plausible solution.
Sure I have. My solution is conversation and argument, the marketplace of ideas. I certainly admit it has flaws, doesn't solve all problems, works very slowly, and the potential achilles heel I mentioned. But it's better than the alternatives, which are going to just make things worse.
Quote:
How is acting in a tribal fashion working? Because certain "tribes" are pushing towards equal stature. They congregate this way because they are more powerful together and united than they are alone. I could understand your concern if you thought they were looking to "one up" other tribes, but it's about being equal. As I said, acting tribal moves towards the end of tribalism by eliminating the NEED to act that way.
What tribes are you talking about becoming equal? Are you talking about dividing people into groups according to their race or gender or sexual orientation, and calling those groups tribes? I'm not sure I'm understanding you.
Quote:
EDIT: and New Era got it spot on. You can't keep condemning "the left" and their tactics of derision and shame and then go insulting people who do that. You're doing the EXACT same thing you're telling them not to do, while you tell them not to do it. You think it'll backfire for the left, so how does it serve you?
I'm not insulting anyone for having a different perspective. Some people are willing to have an earnest conversation and work through difficult topics and ideas. Other just want to post snarky trolling crap. If someone wants to engage and talk about ideas, that's fine, but just posting smarmy sarcastic BS when people are trying to have a conversation is annoying.
EDIT: Or, what Enoch Root said.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
