That prospect.org article is interesting but remember everyone, it's only racist if there's clearly stated intent. Accidentally targeting African Americans is just a happy coincidence.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
Bill Weld (Libertarian VP nominee) has come out and said very forcefully that whatever people do they must not vote for Trump.
Quote:
Weld then turns to making the case against Trump — a case he says is addressed “to all those in the electorate who remain torn between two so-called major party candidates whom they cannot enthusiastically support.”
Trump is temperamentally unfit, Weld argues. “After careful observation and reflection, I have come to believe that Donald Trump, if elected President of the United States, would not be able to stand up to this pressure and this criticism without becoming unhinged and unable to perform competently the duties of his office,” he writes.
“A serious candidate for the Presidency of the United States must be stable, and Donald Trump is not stable,” Weld continues, going on to compare Trump’s behavior to a child’s.
“When challenged, he often responds as a child might,” he continues. “He makes a sour face, he calls people by insulting names, he waves his arms, he impatiently interrupts. Most families would not allow their children to remain at the dinner table if they behaved as Mr. Trump does.”
Citing Trump’s fearmongering about immigrants, Muslims, and foreign trading partners, Weld notes that “from the beginning of his campaign, Mr. Trump has conjured up enemies.”
“The goal of the Trump campaign, from the outset, has been to stir up envy, resentment, and group hatred,” he writes. “This is the worst of American politics. I fear for our cohesion as a nation, and for our place in the world, if this man who is unwilling to say he will abide by the result of our national election becomes our President.”
I always wondered why Weld wasn't at the top of the ticket instead of Johnson.
I think he is the more sensible man. He basically gave Clinton a tacit endorsement to those who aren't voting anything other than Democrat or Republican. Essentially if you aren't going to vote for a third candidate then make sure it's cast for Clinton instead of Trump.
Goofball atheist Donald Trump never had a chance.
12:03 PM - 27 Oct 2016
__________________
The Quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all. Yet hope remains while the Company is true. Go Flames Go!
So something that's been on my mind the last couple days, while being down some certain rabbit holes of Trump supporters. It's no surprise that there's some crazy conspiracy theories, only the most loosely cogent of which ever filter up to being noticed by the mainstream. Everything is connected back to Hillary; small, unimportant comments are extrapolated to have sinister meaning. Everything fits, and if it doesn't fit it's discarded.
None of that is really surprising. It's actually all very cliche. But what is interesting to me is that there are also counter-conspiracies... the idea that all of these disparate pro-Trump elements are connected and working behind the scenes with more clarity and strategy than anyone could imagine, and are outmaneuvering their opponents. This week, the car crash that I haven't been able to look away from revolves around a new zealand hacker and software developer who seems to be posting some cryptic messages related to Hillary's deleted emails, as well as to Clinton's birthday. A rational interpretation would seem to be 'this guy is just trolling as advertising his new software.' A slightly irrational interpretation would be 'this guy has the missing Clinton emails, and is going to release them on her birthday.' At least with that you can look at the evidence and understand how someone would get there.
Here's where it becomes a counter-conspiracy: Clinton's birthday passes, and nothing comes of it other than the hacker tweeting at wikileaks and that the NSA has Clinton's emails in some secure location in Utah. Rather than the acceptance that they were trolled, some of the Trump supporters put together theories about how on Clinton's birthday he sent the emails to Wikileaks, and wikileaks is busy vetting them right now, but he also knew that Wikileaks evidence would be unusable in court so he tweeted the NSA thing as showing how congress could legally obtain the emails to prosecute Clinton; soon, this becomes the prevailing theory, and dissenters who believe it was all a troll-job get shouted down. Oh, and also Trump's statement about a 400 lb. hacker was a reference to this guy, because Trump knew about it all along, too. And a guy on 4Chan who seems to know his stuff says that November 1st now is when these are going to be released so that it's close enough to the election that the Democrats can't switch their candidate. Whew! (I can't say for certain that the people putting forth these theories are legitimate Trump supporters, or simply others looking to troll them; but my hunch is it's at least mostly the former, with some egging on from the latter.)
This is just the latest counter-conspiracy I've observed, but it's probably the best at summing up what I think it noteworthy about counter-conspiracies:
1. It's linked to an original conspiracy theory; it only makes sense if you believe that there's incredibly damaging, indictable content in those emails, and that the NSA has all emails ever sent.
2. It creates heroes, in the same way a conspiracy theory creates villains. The more elaborate the backstory for the heroes, the better (this hacker allegedly had his assets seized by the US government in an order signed by Clinton herself!) He's added to existing heroes like Assange. This is a very different type of hero than the usual conspiracy theory hero, who exists simply to expose the conspiracy; these are heroes who are behaving in a conspiratorial way to defeat the original conspiracy.
3. Rather than explaining past events, it primarily exists to predict future events. When those events do not come to pass, the goalposts shift to a future event, usually requiring an additional layer added to the theory.
I think this is a relatively new phenomenon; conspiracy theories have usually been a call to action: everyone is in on it or rubes who will never be convinced, so only those few people in the know can actually fight it. The idea of heroic forces behind the scenes negate the call to action. It's essentially conspiracy theories for the lazy: there's this secret evil plot to take over the world, but it's okay, because there's an even better secret good plot to defeat the evil plot.
I'm curious to see if this is simply a product of this election climate -- in particular a anti-hero-worship culture around Trump -- or if this is a phenomenon that will make its way into the mainstream conspiracy theory community.
Michelle Obama is campaigning with Hillary right now in North Carolina, and she's killing it as usual. She's probably the Clinton campaign's best weapon right now.
The Following User Says Thank You to direwolf For This Useful Post:
