- Messages
- 3,081
Donald Trump has successfully undermined faith and confidence in our national institutions, which provided cover for millions of Americans to expose their worst instincts.How is this race so close??!!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Donald Trump has successfully undermined faith and confidence in our national institutions, which provided cover for millions of Americans to expose their worst instincts.How is this race so close??!!
Let me add to this point. The reason for Trump's emergence was the collapse of the traditional GOP bullshit. Liberals always knew that the old GOP mantras about trickle down and pugilist foreign policy and deregulation were failed ideas and would lead to disaster eventually. And the disaster happened in 2008. And then the racists and the like realized that the traditional GOP folks actually didn't have their best interests in mind. But instead of joining with Dems, they went all-fucking-in with Trump.There are no Democratic positions/policies that drive people to Trump.
To be sure, they did so, in part, in reaction to the modern Democratic Party, but it was wholly a choice the voters of the Republican Party made and was in no way, shape, or form forced upon them by anything Democrats did.
When indeed?
Right. In my mind, somewhere between 2008 and the end of Obama's second term, the Democratic Party, whether the label is fair or not, became associated with many "new" things that they probably hadn't been associated with previously: wokeness, cancel culture, drag queen story hour, men in women's bathrooms, etc. And you had some old things that become more visible: softness on crime and the border. I say "whether the label is fair or not" because social media has created an environment where broad-brush generalizations are the norm. If one politician in Minnesota openly advocates for completely getting rid of police, then "Democrats" in general want to get rid of police.Nothing specific, except that we know parties change in both big and small ways over time.
Simply think "the Democratic party since 2008".
One thing that happened in that time period certainly did.Right. In my mind, somewhere between 2008 and the end of Obama's second term, the Democratic Party, whether the label is fair or not, became associated with many "new" things that they probably hadn't been associated with previously: wokeness, cancel culture, drag queen story hour, men in women's bathrooms, etc. And you had some old things that become more visible: softness on crime and the border. I say "whether the label is fair or not" because social media has created an environment where broad-brush generalizations are the norm. If one politician in Minnesota openly advocates for completely getting rid of police, then "Democrats" in general want to get rid of police.
Do you believe that those things have anything to do with the rise of Trump?
Since those things post-dated Trump, I'd say no.wokeness, cancel culture, drag queen story hour, men in women's bathrooms, etc.
Do you believe that those things have anything to do with the rise of Trump?
I agree. The Democratic party also started doling out accusations of racism like it was candy on Halloween.
Trans/Drag queen may have been post 2012, but Wokeness, which was directly associated with, among other things, cancel culture and constant accusations of racism, happened during Obama's second term.Since those things post-dated Trump, I'd say no.
So, you agree that the right turned to a revanchist troglodyte like Trump largely because it was so vexed by having a black man in the Oval Office for eight years, but you're also critical of Democrats for calling that racist? Interesting.I agree. The Democratic party also started doling out accusations of racism like it was candy on Halloween.
I wholly disagree with this. I think it's very important we not make cartoon characters out of a group of people, that's an early step in dehumanizing them.Now they can't admit that they fucked up, because it was the ultimate stupidity. Sure George W Bush didn't actually give a shit about the soldiers he sent to die in Iraq, but he at least pretended. Somehow these morons thought Donald Trump cared about them. When it was clear that he didn't, they couldn't bring themselves to admit that the liberals were right. They couldn't bring themselves to admit that they were the stupidest gaggle of voters in the entire history of the United States. So now they draw superhero memes and pretend that God sent Trump for mysterious reasons, because they can't defend the actual man.
I'm not saying that at all. Obviously there are racists in the country, but not 72 million... or however many votes Trump got last election. I also don't think, at all, that everyone that voted from Trump in 2016 was racist.So, you agree that the right turned to a revanchist troglodyte like Trump largely because it was so vexed by having a black man in the Oval Office for eight years, but you're also critical of Democrats for calling that racist? Interesting.
OK, you are correct about the wokeness timeline. My mistake. See how easy it is?Wokeness,happened during Obama's second term.
I do think those things have something to do with the rise of Trump.Right. In my mind, somewhere between 2008 and the end of Obama's second term, the Democratic Party, whether the label is fair or not, became associated with many "new" things that they probably hadn't been associated with previously: wokeness, cancel culture, drag queen story hour, men in women's bathrooms, etc. And you had some old things that become more visible: softness on crime and the border. I say "whether the label is fair or not" because social media has created an environment where broad-brush generalizations are the norm. If one politician in Minnesota openly advocates for completely getting rid of police, then "Democrats" in general want to get rid of police.
Do you believe that those things have anything to do with the rise of Trump?
When I said the Trans/Drag stuff may have started after 2012, I was basically admitting I was wrong. I have no problem admitting I'm wrong when there is reason to. The abnormal/normal/typical/atypical situation is a difference of opinion, not a matter of someone being wrong, even though you tried to portray it that way.OK, you are correct about the wokeness timeline. My mistake. See how easy it is?
1. Fair about not making cartoon characters out of an entire group of people. It is, of course, difficult to talk about politics without using generalities, and then the generalities can raise these sorts of issues.I wholly disagree with this. I think it's very important we not make cartoon characters out of a group of people, that's an early step in dehumanizing them.
I would say they think that Trump cares about them more than Dems care about them. Trump has clearly heard them and what they are seeking from the government. And he promises them those things. You and I know he's full of shit with the vast majority of those promises, but in their mind it's better than nothing. He also followed through on some of those promises...such as appointing SCOTUS justices to overturn RvW, taking drastic steps at the border, trying to keep the folks they want to be second-class citizens as second-class citizens, and enacting tariffs to protect American manufacturing. While not nearly enough to make a difference in their day-to-day lives, it is more than they feel the Dems offer them.
The other thing that Trump does better than Dems or other Pubs is making MAGA folks feel special. He continually points to them as "Real Americans" and holds them up as the "best" or "true" part of America. Now, these folks aren't so stupid that they don't realize that things aren't going their way. They know that many of their communities aren't doing well and that a lot of rural red areas aren't thriving. But Trump not only tells them it's not their fault, but that they shouldn't have to do anything to address these issues. He tells them that America owes them and that the country should be the one to fix the issues facing their areas. You and I know that there is almost no chance of this happening on a grand scale, but they respond to it by preferring Trump's promises to other potential solutions.
1. It wasn't just me. Basically nobody agreed with you. So you had to invent a political angle to explain why everyone else was wrong.The abnormal/normal/typical/atypical situation is a difference of opinion, not a matter of someone being wrong, even though you tried to portray it that way.
“…but not 72 million” racists in the country. I disagree. With over 300 million people in the US, I’d venture to say there damn well are 72 million of them who are “racist” enough not to care for a black man in the White House.I'm not saying that at all. Obviously there are racists in the country, but not 72 million... or however many votes Trump got last election. I also don't think, at all, that everyone that voted from Trump in 2016 was racist.