2020 US Election (Part One)

[Gorbles]

I recognise his assets, but people then object when I say "racists will vote for the racist dude".

 

[Zardnaar]

I recognise his assets, but people then object when I say "racists will vote for the racist dude".

A lot of people voting for Trump is to stick it to the libs.

The GoPs not insulting them. You are. Hey morons vote for us isn't a great campaign tactic.

There's a certain arrogance to it.

 

[Narz]

A lot of people voting for Trump is to stick it to the libs.

The GoPs not insulting them. You are. Hey morons vote for us isn't a great campaign tactic.

There's a certain arrogance to it.

Yeah alot of Repubs think of libs as the type of "woke" people who will judge anyone a worthless pos who ever said anything that could be viewed by anyone as slightly offensive or have a friend who did, even tho that's only like 5% of the left. So helping the most politically incorrect guy possible even has he mocks them too has a visceral good feeling to it. Reminds me of the appeal of eminem 20 years ago.

I also blame drama-merchants who deliberately paint opposition in the worst possible way to feed people's preconceived notions. Outrage sells in a world where people are emotionally numb but it doesn't lead to good decisions.

 

[Gorbles]

A lot of people voting for Trump is to stick it to the libs.

The GoPs not insulting them. You are. Hey morons vote for us isn't a great campaign tactic.

There's a certain arrogance to it.

I was talking about Trump, and how certain demographics will vote for him because of specific qualities. I didn't say all people who voted for him were racist, or whatever it is you're trying to say by claiming I'm insulting people.

Nice attempt, I guess.

EDIT

The more I think about it, voting solely to "own" a stereotype of people said voters don't actually know (or apparently care to reason with, beyond stereotypes) is incredibly depressingly petty, and it beggars my mind that this is framed as some kind of defense.

 

[Zardnaar]

I was talking about Trump, and how certain demographics will vote for him because of specific qualities. I didn't say all people who voted for him were racist, or whatever it is you're trying to say by claiming I'm insulting people.

Nice attempt, I guess.

You were directly implying everyone voting for Trump is a certain type of person.

Most people aren't fascists. Most people aren't woke. Most just go about their daily lives.

Trump's a useless turnip. But to defeat him you need to broaden your appeal.

Insulting people isn't the best way to do that.

Out of woke academic type circles and cities like San Francisco go spend some time with construction workers.

Or port workers.

Or tradesmen.

Or farmers etc.

Yes some will make off colour jokes etc but they're not exactly fascists or even rascists.

As I said earlier the far left is alienating everyone that's not a dyed in the wall SJW.

 

[Gorbles]

You were directly implying everyone voting for Trump is a certain type of person.

Nope. That's an assumption you made to prop up your argument.

Even when I clarified what I meant, you didn't change your tune. Because you want this to be the argument. You want to keep perpetuating your stereotype of what you consider the "far left" to be, but as soon as somebody makes a general statement about a voting demographic, you complain about "arrogance" and "insults". The hypocrisy astounds me.

My argument is simple: racists will vote for the racist behaviour that they see. If you disagree that the President exhibits racist behaviour, argue that. Don't make up some strawman about some implication I never made.

 

[Berzerker]

Yeah alot of Repubs think of libs as the type of "woke" people who will judge anyone a worthless pos who ever said anything that could be viewed by anyone as slightly offensive or have a friend who did, even tho that's only like 5% of the left. So helping the most politically incorrect guy possible even has he mocks them too has a visceral good feeling to it. Reminds me of the appeal of eminem 20 years ago.

I also blame drama-merchants who deliberately paint opposition in the worst possible way to feed people's preconceived notions. Outrage sells in a world where people are emotionally numb but it doesn't lead to good decisions.

Joy Reid of MSNBC got busted insulting gays a dozen or so years ago. She said her account must have been hacked. I cant say I've seen a Republican in black face yet, they've been mostly Democrats.

 

[Zardnaar]

Nope. That's an assumption you made to prop up your argument.

Even when I clarified what I meant, you didn't change your tune. Because you want this to be the argument. You want to keep perpetuating your stereotype of what you consider the "far left" to be, but as soon as somebody makes a general statement about a voting demographic, you complain about "arrogance" and "insults". The hypocrisy astounds me.

My argument is simple: racists will vote for the racist behaviour that they see. If you disagree that the President exhibits racist behaviour, argue that. Don't make up some strawman about some implication I never made.

That's not exactly a big reveal. The Dems best asset is Trump himself.

 

[Takhisis]

Hence why I said feral charisma.

People don't like Trump but they don't recognise his assets. It's just bad orange man will lose. Oops.

I recognise his assets, but people then object when I say "racists will vote for the racist dude".

I have to agree with Gorbles here.
You have a lot of racist, sexist and otherwise discriminatory people. Within their circles it is politically correct to claim that Mexicans are rapists, women are by definition inferior to men, Chinese are stealing our jobs, Europeans are stinting on us, Arabs are traitors who kill us when we invade their homeland so they deserve us invading their homeland, etc. Trump goes out and says all that and more.

Essentially the GOP's stated position as well as actual policy is ‘vote for us and we'll ruin your life but also the lives of people you don't like so you'll feel good’ while the DNC inarticulately tries to express ‘vote for us and we'll help people you don't like and also help you’, which is very much a return (or continuation?) of the post-civil war entrenchment of racial segregation in the U.S. of A. in the 1880s but with the party names switched around.

 

[stinkubus]

Winning matters, I agree, however, I believe that the counterpoint is that the approach that you're implying Democrats and/or Bernie should adopt trends toward what eventually became know as the "Southern Strategy". I guess the point is that if you focus so much on "winning" that you fundamentally change what your party is about in the process... what did you win?

I'm certainly much more in the "unite behind the nominee regardless" / "lesser of two evils" camp, but to me there have to be limits... so I try to be respectful of other people's limits too.

Nothing about Bernie's platform has changed as a result of his appearance on Joe Rogan's show.

What actually happened was that Bernie appeared on the show and convinced a well known transphobe to vote for the only candidate in the race who is willing to guarantee access to medical care for all trans people; it's included in Bernie's Medicare for All bill.

 

[Berzerker]

Within their circles it is politically correct to claim that Mexicans are rapists

Trump didn't call Mexicans rapists, he said some of the Mexicans entering the country illegally were rapists

 

[stinkubus]

He used no such qualifier. The "some, I assume, are good people" was clearly sarcasm in context.

 

[Berzerker]

go ahead

 

[stinkubus]

Updated my post to drive home the point that the obvious sarcasm was obvious.

 

[Berzerker]

The US has become a dumping ground for everybody else's problems. Thank you. It's true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

 

[stinkubus]

Plain text doesn't convey the change is his tone of voice when he utters the last sentence. It's a deliberate misunderstanding by taking him literally and not seriously.

 

[Berzerker]

I saw him give that speech, he didn't add the last sentence sarcastically. You went looking for the quote and found out he didn't accuse Mexicans of being rapists. So now you're claiming he was being sarcastic as if not only was every Mexican coming across the border a rapist, but all Mexicans are rapists.

 

[Narz]

Nothing about Bernie's platform has changed as a result of his appearance on Joe Rogan's show.

What actually happened was that Bernie appeared on the show and convinced a well known transphobe to vote for the only candidate in the race who is willing to guarantee access to medical care for all trans people; it's included in Bernie's Medicare for All bill.

I agree with all this except that Rogan isn't a transaphobe just for having the opinion that M2F transgender folks shouldn't be able to fight biological ladies in the ring.

 

[cardgame]

That opinion in and of itself isn't transphobic, because there are qualifiers you can add onto it. The joke, now I'm pretty sure this is Rogan but I can't be positive, that "That's just a dickless dude punching a woman in the face" is transphobic as you can get.

edit: 37% odds that is actually Chapelle but Rogan has said something very similar.

 

[stinkubus]

I saw him give that speech, he didn't add the last sentence sarcastically. You went looking for the quote and found out he didn't accuse Mexicans of being rapists. So now you're claiming he was being sarcastic as if not only was every Mexican coming across the border a rapist, but all Mexicans are rapists.

I didn't even need to go looking. I edited my post almost immediately. That the last comment in that sentence was not meant to be taken seriously was so obvious to me I assume it's obvious to others. It's one of my character failings.

I agree with all this except that Rogan isn't a transaphobe just for having the opinion that M2F transgender folks shouldn't be able to fight biological ladies in the ring.

I've definitely heard him make some other un-enlightened comments regarding trans people. It's moot to my point so it's not worth debating whether or not he is or isn't a transphobe. For the purposes of discussion I can just concede that point.