My office has two clear factions. One is those who hate Trump and consider him a great embarrassment and will openly insult him in public at work. The other is people who hate Trump but don't think people should talk politics at work because it's distracting. There has been some conflict between these two groups.
I don't know any knowledge workers, and that includes people who are not degree educated but work in a field that requires professional knowledge, that will admit to supporting Trump. The only people I know that support Trump have racist political views who were spewing hate and conspiracy nonsense years before Trump was voted in.
There was a sizeable group of people who were so disillusioned with politics that they voted Trump solely because he was an outsider. Those people all seem to have realized that was a great mistake.
There's a guy in my office who brought it up in a pro trump manner but when asked about what trump has actually done thats good all he could come up with was "other stuff" and then refused to elaborate on what stuff that was before he got all pissed off a stormed out.
There's a guy in my office who brought it up in a pro trump manner but when asked about what trump has actually done thats good all he could come up with was "other stuff" and then refused to elaborate on what stuff that was before he got all pissed off a stormed out.
Wow, still peddling that lie are you? I thought that died years ago.
For anyone not familiar deaf people sometimes wave their hands instead of clapping, because obviously they can't hear the applause. Some venue asked hearing people to do it for the benefit of the deaf people in attendance and right wing social media lost it's mind, triggered by outrage merchants making videos and blog posts about it.
Most of them moved on after a day or two but apparently not ruddk.
I remember it from Occupy Wall Street, people would "jazz hands" to show approval of speakers who were un aided by a sound system, so as to not interrupting or overwhelm them.
Actually he has done quite a bit, he has gotten nationâ(TM)s top talk together (Israel and Saudi, N/S Korea), rolled back regulations, and made it so that the DEA is not sending out live letters for importing meds. That last one was packaged with the ability to treat your condition as you and your physician see fit even if it is not even a phase 1 trial.
One may not like the language or manner he achieved it, but he has done more, for minorities and alternative lifestyles than any recent president.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA oh you are serious? In that case HAHAfuckingHA. More for minorities and alternative lifestyles? Is that why you've got race riots going and muslim bans and a massive boner for building a huge wall to keep the browns out? Hows that wall coming by the way? And the regulations he's rolled back are the ones offering protections to those groups and the environment in general putting everyone at risk, but they will be dead by the time those consequences really hit so who cares, right?
This post is exactly what I expect from someone who is ready to vote for a person who has been in government for 40 years, has a track record of abusing minorities and has no real agenda except to bash the person currently in charge. The "race riots" are not started by conservatives, they are being funded and coordinated by outside influences. As far as a wall to "keep browns out", if you see it that way, I can't help you. The wall is going up to combat criminals who would come to our country illegally. Kee
And this is what I expect from someone who is happy to vote for failed businessman come d list celebrity wannabe dictator. The race riots were started by people fed up of being shit on by those with power and those with power responding by shitting on them harder. What has trump done to appease that? Nothing, He's happy to make it worse by adding to the shit from an even greater height though. Its easy to just say outside influences and then leave it at that isn't it? How could you see it any other way when
Let me guess, it's all secret money coming from George Soros! Man, that guy must have deep pockets. He's probably at home making the protest signs himself.
To those who claim the race riots etc are the result of the president, notice how employment has gone up for those typically considered disenfranchised.
Notice how as a % of support the current president has a much higher number. And all of this for a guy that reminds people of my generation of Clint Eastwoodâ(TM)s companion orangutan Clyde.
I imagine someone in a cold crumbling office with broken windows and a leaky roof, sitting on a crate in front of an ancient windows XP desktop posting pro-trump comments. He got laid off from his last job and had to do something, ANYTHING, in order to pay some of his rent arrears. He is too desperate to care that he is writing lies that nobody would ever believe and too scared of his shouting boss to slow down in his posting or even to go to the toilet.
It would take desperation for anyone to suggest that r
I wish I had a favorable mod point I could give you, even though you forgot to mention Covid-19, Trump's greatest failure (so far) or Trump's debts (that motivate his desperation).
And if you don't like it, don't be a whiny bitch. Work to get those things codified into the constitution, so that they are federal issues.
It is a federal issue. No new laws were passed federally. States were trying to cross the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment with the way their laws were written. State laws were struck down as unconstitutional.
Conservatives had their plan backfire when the supreme court said the states could decide and all the states decided it was fine for two adults to marry.
North Korea doesn't seem to have moved much at all, if anything it's gone backwards. Cooperation in the border region has deteriorated, and with Japan on the issue of historic kidnappings too.
Kim played Trump like a fiddle. Went from being a little tin-pot dictator to a player on the world stage, a nuclear power that commands respect and an audience with the most powerful nations on Earth.
What has he done for "alternative lifestyles"? Even just calling them that is an insult, being gay or trans is intrinsic and not a lifestyle choice. Well on day one he got rid of the LGBT section of the White House website and hasn't replaced it, then tried to ban trans people from the military. Oh and he wanted to get rid of Obamacare which many trans people rely on. Anything else he has done "for" them?
Yes yes Kim and his THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS MOUNTED ON INTERCONTINENTAL MISSILES were a big fucking joke until the Orange Man deigned to attempt diplomacy; only THEN did Kim become relevant. Lefists and their magical thinking never cease to astound me.
One may not like the language or manner he achieved it, but he has done more, for minorities and alternative lifestyles than any recent president.
LOL. This is where issues are overshadowed by politics. Some of the things you list are interesting, controversial, and worthy of discussion. But then there's always something like "and he's the greatest man to ever live" thrown in at the end just to troll people.
the DEA is not sending out live letters for importing meds
This one is new to me - can you expand on it? What are "live letters?" I think I know a family who went to Canada to buy EpiPens, and I wondered if that was illegal. Was the DEA trying to stop medical tourism?
So the national talks are important to you but you don't feel they're offset by the loss of hegemony with the whole business with the Kurds and bombing our own weapons caches? That's what upset most of the NatSec folks. Between them and the Biodefense/NIAID/BARDA folks and I agree with grandparent that among knowledge workers it is... lefties that hate Trump and righties that hate Trump. From social media, he still seems to have some of the HVAC guys.
Good things may have happened while Trump has been President, but I would not suggest that he is automatically personally responsible for those good things. Political leaders are subject to fortunes beyond their control. Cynically, a great leader is someone who takes credit for successes that came about anyway, and a poor leader is one that is unlucky to preside over an unavoidable crisis.
[...]That last one was packaged with the ability to treat your condition as you and your physician see fit even if it is not even a phase 1 trial.
Paying for medications that haven't passed a phase 1 trial sounds like a horrible thing. Wasting money on stuff some charlatan passes off as a miracle cure.
Reminds me of the "What's the worst that could happen?" nonsense about hydroxychloroqine during the early Covid days.
You want to know what's the worst that could happen? Take an individual that would have been interested in an experimental trial (trial drugs are paid for by the people that run the trial) and give them a phase 1 drug that isn't in the t
Are you sincerely stupid? (Evidence in the inability to Preview.) Or proudly ignorant? Or paid to fake it?
Actually, I only want to know who you hate most. You can refer to the list in my longer comment and just use the numbers.
And yes, I know I shouldn't feed a troll. The paid ones probably get bonus payments for the replies they receive. And even if nuked, the trolls just respawn fresh sock puppets.
And no, I don't believe there are any sane Trump supporters left at this point. The smart ones have already c
Honestly, most politicians across the world rarely do something good once you discount just lucky things that happened during their term they take credit for.
Either it just happened and would just have happened the same with a monkey with a top hat being president or if they happened to make / prevent some change, people don't agree if its good or bad.
Best example is your president pissing on China's leg. Was it overdue for a long time? Is he cluelessly destroying the US economy? It depends on what you belie
"Other stuff he did that's good" is a euphemism for "Bad stuff he did that I don't mind... But I'm too chickenshit to say openly cause you'll all accuse me of being a racist fascist mysoginist pig - and I'm not a pig!"
Deportation of illegal immigrants (not rewarding bad behavior). Rapid deportation of those caught crossing the border. For the record, open immigration was only allowed from our founding until the early 1900s, when we found a lot of problems created by it. During colonial times, you needed permission to immigrate.
Defused tensions with North Korea
Israel now has peace agreements with UAE and Bahrain
Deportation of illegal immigrants (not rewarding bad behavior). Rapid deportation of those caught crossing the border. For the record, open immigration was only allowed from our founding until the early 1900s, when we found a lot of problems created by it. During colonial times, you needed permission to immigrate.
The US is a signatory to a treaty (which carries the force of US law, superceding all but the Constitution) that makes it legal to cross the border anywhere to seek refuge so long as they're able to present themselves to border agents shortly after crossing. Putting in an artificial throttling at the official border crossing is trying to deny access to something that we said we would do - we're the ones violating things here.
Defused tensions with North Korea
Isn't North Korea in the process of testing new ICBMs right now?
The US is a signatory to a treaty (which carries the force of US law, superceding all but the Constitution) that makes it legal to cross the border anywhere to seek refuge so long as they're able to present themselves to border agents shortly after crossing.
You of course leave out the fact that refugee status requires fleeing a war or imminent death by political persecution. Neither are occurring in Mexico or Central America.
Isn't North Korea in the process of testing new ICBMs right now?
Are we imminently looking at a war with them? Did Kim not see what was done to Qaddafi despite changing his policies and feel the need to secure himself?
Trade war with China -> He doesn't understand how Tariffs work. This barely hurts China at all and it ends up falling to the American citizens. They just raise the prices.
Renegotiated NAFTA with wage minimums-> Here in Canada we noted that basically nothing was changed other than rebranding it.
Deportation of illegal immigrants (not rewarding bad behavior). Rapid deportation of those caught crossing the border. -> He's also jailed tonnes of asylum seekers... something that is legally allowed
I don't know where you live and work, but the vast majority of the people I work with are quiet Trump supporters. Of course, I live and work in a primarily Republican area so it's not surprising. I know Trump supporters who would fit in your classification, "mindless robot" types, but I also recognize that this is true on both sides of the aisle. There are those who have their preconceived notions and refuse to believe that *anybody* could be rational and think otherwise.
I've got to say that most of the Trump supporters I know are well aware of Trump's rough exterior and would love it if he tempered his explosive reactive public image (i.e. lay off the Twitter fight and calling folks names) but we understand the issue here is NOT personality, but policy. So where Trump doesn't represent the perfect persona, he supports the policy we believe is best for the country.
For instance, in 2016 I actually supported the runner up, Ted Cruz, voting for him in the primaries, sending him money and such right up to the point where Trump won the nomination. I then supported Trump for his position on appointing judges and the list of Supreme Court picks. I didn't expect his policy pronouncements to actually pan out, but I hoped that the promise over the judges was better for the country than the promises of Hillary on the same subject. I wasn't fond of his personal attack dog tactics and I'm still not a fan. However, I fully understand that the personality of the president matters very little compared to the policies they are enacting and support.
So, don't dismiss Trump supporters as idiots. There are many of us who are quietly sitting there, not engaging in political debate in the highly charged highly divisive environment. We instinctively understand that it's not worth it to argue the point when many on the other side are not interested in a policy debate but are caught up in the polarized partisanship and political rhetoric designed by both sides to gin up emotion in their supporters to help ensure they are motivated to get out and vote. Politicians have honed the tribalism tendency in us, divided the country into voting blocks, and turned them against each other to keep their supporters angry so they will vote. Sadly many don't see they are being manipulated, and most of those don't react well to being shown this truth.
>"I've got to say that most of the Trump supporters I know are well aware of Trump's rough exterior and would love it if he tempered his explosive reactive public image (i.e. lay off the Twitter fight and calling folks names) but we understand the issue here is NOT personality, but policy. So where Trump doesn't represent the perfect persona, he supports the policy we believe is best for the country. "
Very well said (plus the rest of what you said). I have tried to explain exactly this to many people.
They only see Trump's sloppy/rough/strange/bizarre communication (continuously fueled by and often distorted by the media)
You take the place in the country with the shallowest most superficial people in general, and then you start importing the shallowest and most superficial people from all over the country...
I voted for the idiot in chief in 2016. Now that I see he is really a hateful person, I voted via mail in ballot for Biden. First time in 40 years I ever voted other than republican.
If he had laid off twitter, stopped the corrosive dialogue, and just acted presidential he probably would have gotten my vote. He made it very obvious when the Wuhan Virus shit kicked off that he didn't care about America, he was solely focused on his re-election.
Biden: Meh? The lesser of the evils, he probably won't
I still think you're an idiot for liking his policies. They are anti american and anti progress. Most of the stuff 'his administration' has done right is a result of bipartisan agreement of the house and senate that he just rubber stamps and takes credit for. He always takes credit for things he think makes him look good and blames everyone else for things that don't, even if those things that don't *are* a direct result of his actions.
How about not starting your argument with an ad-hominem attack? Then maybe offer up what you have with "In my opinion" rather than "they are..." when you are clueless about how "they" think. This response is EXACTLY why Trump supports don't engage. It's sophomoric and offensive.
It's not ad-hominem. It's just an insult and not part of their argument.
That is the definition of abusive ad-hominem.
It's even on wikipedia. Well, at least until you remove it.
"Abusive ad hominem argument (or direct ad hominem) is associated with an attack to the character of the person carrying an argument. This kind of argument, besides usually being fallacious, is also counterproductive, as a proper dialogue is hard to achieve after such an attack.[21][22][23] " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Key issues in examining an argument to determine whether it is an ad hominem fallacy or not are whether the accusation against the person stands true or not, and whether the accusation is relevant to the argument
According to your source, it can't be relevant to the argument and still be a fallacy. Since being an idiot is actually highly correlated with liking abusive policies, it's not unrelated.
I then supported Trump for his position on appointing judges and the list of Supreme Court picks.
And for people who are directly affected by that it's going to be very hard to forgive you. Whatever your motivation for making that decision if Roe v Wade gets overturned people will have had their bodily autonomy taken away and their lives will be put at risk, not to mention the multiplication of the misery they would have experienced when getting a safe, legal abortion.
There is no way to resolve that beyond you electing to keep it to yourself. It's not some trivial point of law that can be discussed, it'
The problem with Roe is that it's beyond the federal government's purview.
It certainly is not.
Will there be states that outlaw abortion? Yup.
Allowing oppression is a bad idea. 67% of Americans think abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
Codify the right to an abortion above the 10th amendment to the constitution
The supremes ruled that the right to access to abortion was supported by the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. And the counterargument is spectacularly lame: The decision "should be left with the people and to the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs." Yeah, that's called a government, and it includes a supreme court. Sadly, the new one wi
Opinions differ on Roe. Is it really a question of privacy? Does that right exist in the constitution?
I think it is *really* hard to objectively argue that the reasons used to arrive at Roe where the right ones. I think that returning the decision to the states is actually a proper constitutional answer to a difficult question like Roe. Just look at how Roe has been responsible for decades of rancor and disharmony. The courts should be judging the law as intended when it was written and stay away from
Sure, the President was a rubber stamp. The reason there were so many seats to fill was Mitch. The person that gave Trump a list to pick from was Mitch.
Politicians have honed the tribalism tendency in us, divided the country into voting blocks, and turned them against each other to keep their supporters angry so they will vote. Sadly many don't see they are being manipulated, and most of those don't react well to being shown this truth.
If only people understood this. It does not matter if the politics is right or left, progressive or conservative. The propaganda machines are highly effective these days, and only sophisticated intellects might be able to resist being coerced to certain views. I do not expect everybody in the country to be politically sophisticated, but I guess there might be a potential arms race between clever propaganda and old fashioned common sense.
I've known some quiet conservatives like that. I find they usually stay quiet because if they ever get into a discussion about things they end up saying something regrettable and people stop liking them.
I know some smart (techies, scholars) and very clever trumpers. It's fascinating to dive in their psyche and values. It's like watching a John Wayne movie or Sean Connery James Bond. I wonder what they see in my psyche?....Julia Roberts?
Having seen where four years of Trump policy have led us is more than enough data points for even former Republicans like myself to question the intellect/motives of the people who support seeing more of the same.
I also don't think Trump supporters get to claim they are above the tribalism and divisiveness. Trump's campaigns and presidency are defined by him stoking both. To deny this is willful ignorance.
I never claimed there wasn't tribalism on both sides here. I'm just claiming that there are thinking people on all sides, who are just sitting there wondering why all the craziness is allowed to continue. I sit here aghast at the level of divisive rhetoric is recklessly getting tossed around. What are we? Grade school kids fighting on the playground? This is craziness.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a full on Trump supporter, he's done more than I imagined was possible, kept more of his promises than
Let's start with taking a baseline on what you believe he has accomplished that you support. That would be a sensible way to start an honest debate, no?
By the way, using pejorative el-Rushbo terms like "Democrat party" betray your appeal to civility and rationality. If stuff like that is going to characterize your side of this discussion, then I don't have time for this either.
However, I fully understand that the personality of the president matters very little compared to the policies they are enacting and support.
That is simply not true. The office of president plays the primary role in conducting foreign policy for the nation. His history of insulting allies with personal attacks, name calling, trying to overpower other world leaders with firm handshakes or creeping behind them, nationalist & racist attacks by calling other places shitholes, and repeated submissive b
I've got to say that most of the Trump supporters I know are well aware of Trump's rough exterior and would love it if he tempered his explosive reactive public image (i.e. lay off the Twitter fight and calling folks names) but we understand the issue here is NOT personality, but policy. So where Trump doesn't represent the perfect persona, he supports the policy we believe is best for the country.
I'm no great fan of Democrat policy proposals in this area, but which of his policies are so important to you that you're willing to overlook him doing everything he can to stop any international action to slow or mitigate climate change? The longer Trump is in charge of the world's most influential country, the bleaker the prospects for long term human survival. I'm honestly curious.
In my work I've only encountered a few pro-Trump people and they are the uncommon (in this area) ultra-evangelical who'd vote for the German dictator I won't name as long as he was pro-life.
... who'd vote for the German dictator I won't name as long as he was pro-life.
You'd be surprised that said dictator was less pro-life than the governments preceding him. There were a few quite legal ways to get abortions at this time, some of them even against the will of the woman. Not pro-life, but not necessarily pro-choice either.
I'm afraid the reasoning of the German government between 1935 and 1945 might also work quite well to sell abortion to the religious fundamentalists: Abortions are only illegal for the righteous ones because they need to go forth and multiply. However, t
The only people I know that support Trump have racist political views who were spewing hate and conspiracy nonsense years before Trump was voted in.
I'm sure there are a lot more people than just this who support Trump. But they've been driven underground because of the sanctimony. They support Trump for reasons other than being fascists and/or racists. I discussed this phenomenon in my post above.
Yes, he claimed to be an outsider. He also claimed to be a businessman. His Ma and Pa Potemkin companies went bankrupt 6 or 7 times. He constantly screwed small time contractors that did work for his companies out of their money. He was so bad only Deutsche Bank would deal with him and that's probably because the Russians had laundered enough money through that bank that they couldn't say no to funding one of Putin's Poodles.
In my estimation, Republicans bought into him on his businessman aura and never bot
I don't know any knowledge workers, and that includes people who are not degree educated but work in a field that requires professional knowledge, that will admit to supporting Trump. The only people I know that support Trump have racist political views who were spewing hate and conspiracy nonsense years before Trump was voted in.
You've just identified the problem. Not the problem you think you've identified, but the actual problem. Namely: you and yours' inability to accept that some people don't agree with you.
There was a sizeable group of people who were so disillusioned with politics that they voted Trump solely because he was an outsider. Those people all seem to have realized that was a great mistake.
If I could morally choose to vote for the lesser of two evils, I would vote for Trump. As it is, I will vote third party (Mickey Mouse is the most popular).
The reason why I see Trump as the lesser of two evils is because how insanely intense the Democrats are at demonizing Trump. It has been a full court press for four years. Absolutely every thing, big or small, is twisted beyond recognition in an attempt to get me and others to hate Trump. Essentially, all of the vitriol tells me that Trump is very much d
I wish I had an insightful mod point to tilt your comment that way. Still wondering why I stopped getting givable mod points years ago.
I had an interesting discussion with a former coworker recently. He was speculating about "secret Trump supporters" and he got me to start thinking about that ancient mystery of how anyone can support Trump. Now I have started working on the profile of the perfect Trump fan defined in terms of hatreds (ordered roughly from largest to smallest targets): (1) Women (b-word or c
the tech workers split along lines that seem to go with the type of projects they work on.
The ones working internet/social media/apps/cloud/phones etc projects seem to be mostly anti-Trump.
The ones working serious on-the-metal, screw-up-and-people-die projects seem to be mostly pro-Trump.
It may have something to do with the ways in which people connect cause-and-effect. People with pie-in-the-sky politics who believe in universal basic incomes, universal free healthcare, getting rid of the police and reduci
Two clear factions in my office (Score:5, Interesting)
My office has two clear factions. One is those who hate Trump and consider him a great embarrassment and will openly insult him in public at work. The other is people who hate Trump but don't think people should talk politics at work because it's distracting. There has been some conflict between these two groups.
I don't know any knowledge workers, and that includes people who are not degree educated but work in a field that requires professional knowledge, that will admit to supporting Trump. The only people I know that support Trump have racist political views who were spewing hate and conspiracy nonsense years before Trump was voted in.
There was a sizeable group of people who were so disillusioned with politics that they voted Trump solely because he was an outsider. Those people all seem to have realized that was a great mistake.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Two clear factions in my office (Score:4, Interesting)
"Dang" (Score:5, Funny)
There's a guy in my office who brought it up in a pro trump manner but when asked about what trump has actually done thats good all he could come up with was "other stuff" and then refused to elaborate on what stuff that was before he got all pissed off a stormed out.
Did the whole office clap?
Re:"Dang" (Score:5, Funny)
Of course not, that would have been "triggering" to some. I believe that "jazz hands" are the appropriate response.
Re: (Score:1)
Wow, still peddling that lie are you? I thought that died years ago.
For anyone not familiar deaf people sometimes wave their hands instead of clapping, because obviously they can't hear the applause. Some venue asked hearing people to do it for the benefit of the deaf people in attendance and right wing social media lost it's mind, triggered by outrage merchants making videos and blog posts about it.
Most of them moved on after a day or two but apparently not ruddk.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if it were untrue, it's still a funny idea.
Yes, just for deaf people [twitter.com] and it's only right wing social media [twitter.com] that bought into it. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember it from Occupy Wall Street, people would "jazz hands" to show approval of speakers who were un aided by a sound system, so as to not interrupting or overwhelm them.
Re: Two clear factions in my office (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually he has done quite a bit, he has gotten nationâ(TM)s top talk together (Israel and Saudi, N/S Korea), rolled back regulations, and made it so that the DEA is not sending out live letters for importing meds. That last one was packaged with the ability to treat your condition as you and your physician see fit even if it is not even a phase 1 trial.
One may not like the language or manner he achieved it, but he has done more, for minorities and alternative lifestyles than any recent president.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
This post is exactly what I expect from someone who is ready to vote for a person who has been in government for 40 years, has a track record of abusing minorities and has no real agenda except to bash the person currently in charge. The "race riots" are not started by conservatives, they are being funded and coordinated by outside influences. As far as a wall to "keep browns out", if you see it that way, I can't help you. The wall is going up to combat criminals who would come to our country illegally. Kee
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Two clear factions in my office (Score:2)
To those who claim the race riots etc are the result of the president, notice how employment has gone up for those typically considered disenfranchised.
Notice how as a % of support the current president has a much higher number. And all of this for a guy that reminds people of my generation of Clint Eastwoodâ(TM)s companion orangutan Clyde.
Re: (Score:2)
I can picture Trump drafting an executive order. Hire more of the blacks! I need those votes!
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine someone in a cold crumbling office with broken windows and a leaky roof, sitting on a crate in front of an ancient windows XP desktop posting pro-trump comments. He got laid off from his last job and had to do something, ANYTHING, in order to pay some of his rent arrears. He is too desperate to care that he is writing lies that nobody would ever believe and too scared of his shouting boss to slow down in his posting or even to go to the toilet.
It would take desperation for anyone to suggest that r
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had a favorable mod point I could give you, even though you forgot to mention Covid-19, Trump's greatest failure (so far) or Trump's debts (that motivate his desperation).
Alternative lifestyles? (Score:1)
His recent supreme court nominee would roll back gay marriage in a heartbeat. Probably make birth control illegal too being a staunch catholic.
Re: (Score:2)
And if you don't like it, don't be a whiny bitch. Work to get those things codified into the constitution, so that they are federal issues.
It is a federal issue. No new laws were passed federally. States were trying to cross the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment with the way their laws were written. State laws were struck down as unconstitutional.
Re: (Score:2)
Conservatives had their plan backfire when the supreme court said the states could decide and all the states decided it was fine for two adults to marry.
Re: Two clear factions in my office (Score:5, Informative)
North Korea doesn't seem to have moved much at all, if anything it's gone backwards. Cooperation in the border region has deteriorated, and with Japan on the issue of historic kidnappings too.
Kim played Trump like a fiddle. Went from being a little tin-pot dictator to a player on the world stage, a nuclear power that commands respect and an audience with the most powerful nations on Earth.
What has he done for "alternative lifestyles"? Even just calling them that is an insult, being gay or trans is intrinsic and not a lifestyle choice. Well on day one he got rid of the LGBT section of the White House website and hasn't replaced it, then tried to ban trans people from the military. Oh and he wanted to get rid of Obamacare which many trans people rely on. Anything else he has done "for" them?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes yes Kim and his THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS MOUNTED ON INTERCONTINENTAL MISSILES were a big fucking joke until the Orange Man deigned to attempt diplomacy; only THEN did Kim become relevant. Lefists and their magical thinking never cease to astound me.
Re: (Score:2)
One may not like the language or manner he achieved it, but he has done more, for minorities and alternative lifestyles than any recent president.
LOL. This is where issues are overshadowed by politics. Some of the things you list are interesting, controversial, and worthy of discussion. But then there's always something like "and he's the greatest man to ever live" thrown in at the end just to troll people.
the DEA is not sending out live letters for importing meds
This one is new to me - can you expand on it? What are "live letters?" I think I know a family who went to Canada to buy EpiPens, and I wondered if that was illegal. Was the DEA trying to stop medical tourism?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually he has done quite a bit ...
Good things may have happened while Trump has been President, but I would not suggest that he is automatically personally responsible for those good things. Political leaders are subject to fortunes beyond their control. Cynically, a great leader is someone who takes credit for successes that came about anyway, and a poor leader is one that is unlucky to preside over an unavoidable crisis.
Re: (Score:2)
[...]That last one was packaged with the ability to treat your condition as you and your physician see fit even if it is not even a phase 1 trial.
Paying for medications that haven't passed a phase 1 trial sounds like a horrible thing. Wasting money on stuff some charlatan passes off as a miracle cure.
Reminds me of the "What's the worst that could happen?" nonsense about hydroxychloroqine during the early Covid days.
You want to know what's the worst that could happen? Take an individual that would have been interested in an experimental trial (trial drugs are paid for by the people that run the trial) and give them a phase 1 drug that isn't in the t
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sincerely stupid? (Evidence in the inability to Preview.) Or proudly ignorant? Or paid to fake it?
Actually, I only want to know who you hate most. You can refer to the list in my longer comment and just use the numbers.
And yes, I know I shouldn't feed a troll. The paid ones probably get bonus payments for the replies they receive. And even if nuked, the trolls just respawn fresh sock puppets.
And no, I don't believe there are any sane Trump supporters left at this point. The smart ones have already c
Politicians doing good deeds? (Score:2)
Honestly, most politicians across the world rarely do something good once you discount just lucky things that happened during their term they take credit for.
Either it just happened and would just have happened the same with a monkey with a top hat being president
or if they happened to make / prevent some change, people don't agree if its good or bad.
Best example is your president pissing on China's leg. Was it overdue for a long time? Is he cluelessly destroying the US economy? It depends on what you belie
It's a euphemism... (Score:2)
"Other stuff he did that's good" is a euphemism for "Bad stuff he did that I don't mind... But I'm too chickenshit to say openly cause you'll all accuse me of being a racist fascist mysoginist pig - and I'm not a pig!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah that trade war was so helpful. When my company buys parts from Digikey we pay a tariff now. Thanks orange man.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure let me just spin up a chip fab overnight and be competitive with Asian labor prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Deportation of illegal immigrants (not rewarding bad behavior). Rapid deportation of those caught crossing the border. For the record, open immigration was only allowed from our founding until the early 1900s, when we found a lot of problems created by it. During colonial times, you needed permission to immigrate.
The US is a signatory to a treaty (which carries the force of US law, superceding all but the Constitution) that makes it legal to cross the border anywhere to seek refuge so long as they're able to present themselves to border agents shortly after crossing. Putting in an artificial throttling at the official border crossing is trying to deny access to something that we said we would do - we're the ones violating things here.
Defused tensions with North Korea
Isn't North Korea in the process of testing new ICBMs right now?
Re: (Score:1)
The US is a signatory to a treaty (which carries the force of US law, superceding all but the Constitution) that makes it legal to cross the border anywhere to seek refuge so long as they're able to present themselves to border agents shortly after crossing.
You of course leave out the fact that refugee status requires fleeing a war or imminent death by political persecution. Neither are occurring in Mexico or Central America.
Isn't North Korea in the process of testing new ICBMs right now?
Are we imminently looking at a war with them? Did Kim not see what was done to Qaddafi despite changing his policies and feel the need to secure himself?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Two clear factions in my office (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you are stereotyping a bit.
I don't know where you live and work, but the vast majority of the people I work with are quiet Trump supporters. Of course, I live and work in a primarily Republican area so it's not surprising. I know Trump supporters who would fit in your classification, "mindless robot" types, but I also recognize that this is true on both sides of the aisle. There are those who have their preconceived notions and refuse to believe that *anybody* could be rational and think otherwise.
I've got to say that most of the Trump supporters I know are well aware of Trump's rough exterior and would love it if he tempered his explosive reactive public image (i.e. lay off the Twitter fight and calling folks names) but we understand the issue here is NOT personality, but policy. So where Trump doesn't represent the perfect persona, he supports the policy we believe is best for the country.
For instance, in 2016 I actually supported the runner up, Ted Cruz, voting for him in the primaries, sending him money and such right up to the point where Trump won the nomination. I then supported Trump for his position on appointing judges and the list of Supreme Court picks. I didn't expect his policy pronouncements to actually pan out, but I hoped that the promise over the judges was better for the country than the promises of Hillary on the same subject. I wasn't fond of his personal attack dog tactics and I'm still not a fan. However, I fully understand that the personality of the president matters very little compared to the policies they are enacting and support.
So, don't dismiss Trump supporters as idiots. There are many of us who are quietly sitting there, not engaging in political debate in the highly charged highly divisive environment. We instinctively understand that it's not worth it to argue the point when many on the other side are not interested in a policy debate but are caught up in the polarized partisanship and political rhetoric designed by both sides to gin up emotion in their supporters to help ensure they are motivated to get out and vote. Politicians have honed the tribalism tendency in us, divided the country into voting blocks, and turned them against each other to keep their supporters angry so they will vote. Sadly many don't see they are being manipulated, and most of those don't react well to being shown this truth.
Re: (Score:2)
>"I've got to say that most of the Trump supporters I know are well aware of Trump's rough exterior and would love it if he tempered his explosive reactive public image (i.e. lay off the Twitter fight and calling folks names) but we understand the issue here is NOT personality, but policy. So where Trump doesn't represent the perfect persona, he supports the policy we believe is best for the country. "
Very well said (plus the rest of what you said). I have tried to explain exactly this to many people.
Re: (Score:2)
They only see Trump's sloppy/rough/strange/bizarre communication (continuously fueled by and often distorted by the media)
You take the place in the country with the shallowest most superficial people in general, and then you start importing the shallowest and most superficial people from all over the country...
Thats California.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Two clear factions in my office (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
How about not starting your argument with an ad-hominem attack? Then maybe offer up what you have with "In my opinion" rather than "they are..." when you are clueless about how "they" think. This response is EXACTLY why Trump supports don't engage. It's sophomoric and offensive.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's not ad-hominem. It's just an insult and not part of their argument.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not ad-hominem. It's just an insult and not part of their argument.
That is the definition of abusive ad-hominem.
It's even on wikipedia. Well, at least until you remove it.
"Abusive ad hominem argument (or direct ad hominem) is associated with an attack to the character of the person carrying an argument. This kind of argument, besides usually being fallacious, is also counterproductive, as a proper dialogue is hard to achieve after such an attack.[21][22][23] "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Though it is also in the dictionary.
https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
Re: (Score:2)
From Wikipedia:
Key issues in examining an argument to determine whether it is an ad hominem fallacy or not are whether the accusation against the person stands true or not, and whether the accusation is relevant to the argument
According to your source, it can't be relevant to the argument and still be a fallacy. Since being an idiot is actually highly correlated with liking abusive policies, it's not unrelated.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know which makes you the biggest mug, sending money to Cruz or admitting it.
Re: (Score:1)
I then supported Trump for his position on appointing judges and the list of Supreme Court picks.
And for people who are directly affected by that it's going to be very hard to forgive you. Whatever your motivation for making that decision if Roe v Wade gets overturned people will have had their bodily autonomy taken away and their lives will be put at risk, not to mention the multiplication of the misery they would have experienced when getting a safe, legal abortion.
There is no way to resolve that beyond you electing to keep it to yourself. It's not some trivial point of law that can be discussed, it'
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
The problem with Roe is that it's beyond the federal government's purview.
It certainly is not.
Will there be states that outlaw abortion? Yup.
Allowing oppression is a bad idea. 67% of Americans think abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
Codify the right to an abortion above the 10th amendment to the constitution
The supremes ruled that the right to access to abortion was supported by the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. And the counterargument is spectacularly lame: The decision "should be left with the people and to the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs." Yeah, that's called a government, and it includes a supreme court. Sadly, the new one wi
Re: (Score:2)
Opinions differ on Roe. Is it really a question of privacy? Does that right exist in the constitution?
I think it is *really* hard to objectively argue that the reasons used to arrive at Roe where the right ones. I think that returning the decision to the states is actually a proper constitutional answer to a difficult question like Roe. Just look at how Roe has been responsible for decades of rancor and disharmony. The courts should be judging the law as intended when it was written and stay away from
Re: (Score:3)
That's a bit misleading. [npr.org]
And I'm sure others would say allowing murder is a bad idea.
All I know is that if you refuse to admit that both sides have solid ethical arguments, then you haven't put much effort into understanding them.
Re: (Score:2)
The anti-abortion crew doesn't have a logical argument at all, unless you believe in magic sky friends, which is illogical.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you haven't bothered to crack open an intro to ethics textbook doesn't mean that the arguments don't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you haven't bothered to crack open an intro to ethics textbook doesn't mean that the arguments don't exist.
The non-Jebus arguments are based on ignoring science. That makes them invalid.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to believe that, I can't stop you, and if you ever feel like learning something, you can pick up a book.
Either way, it's not my problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know every time you repeat that lie it makes you look bad, not me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It takes two branches to get a federal judge. The President must nominate, the Senate must consent, both are responsible.
So you are half right. McConnel is only half responsible here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians have honed the tribalism tendency in us, divided the country into voting blocks, and turned them against each other to keep their supporters angry so they will vote. Sadly many don't see they are being manipulated, and most of those don't react well to being shown this truth.
If only people understood this. It does not matter if the politics is right or left, progressive or conservative. The propaganda machines are highly effective these days, and only sophisticated intellects might be able to resist being coerced to certain views. I do not expect everybody in the country to be politically sophisticated, but I guess there might be a potential arms race between clever propaganda and old fashioned common sense.
Re: (Score:2)
I've known some quiet conservatives like that. I find they usually stay quiet because if they ever get into a discussion about things they end up saying something regrettable and people stop liking them.
Re: (Score:2)
I know some smart (techies, scholars) and very clever trumpers.
It's fascinating to dive in their psyche and values.
It's like watching a John Wayne movie or Sean Connery James Bond.
I wonder what they see in my psyche?....Julia Roberts?
Re: (Score:2)
Having seen where four years of Trump policy have led us is more than enough data points for even former Republicans like myself to question the intellect/motives of the people who support seeing more of the same.
I also don't think Trump supporters get to claim they are above the tribalism and divisiveness. Trump's campaigns and presidency are defined by him stoking both. To deny this is willful ignorance.
Re: (Score:2)
Read much?
I never claimed there wasn't tribalism on both sides here. I'm just claiming that there are thinking people on all sides, who are just sitting there wondering why all the craziness is allowed to continue. I sit here aghast at the level of divisive rhetoric is recklessly getting tossed around. What are we? Grade school kids fighting on the playground? This is craziness.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a full on Trump supporter, he's done more than I imagined was possible, kept more of his promises than
Re: (Score:2)
Let's start with taking a baseline on what you believe he has accomplished that you support. That would be a sensible way to start an honest debate, no?
By the way, using pejorative el-Rushbo terms like "Democrat party" betray your appeal to civility and rationality. If stuff like that is going to characterize your side of this discussion, then I don't have time for this either.
Re: (Score:2)
That is simply not true. The office of president plays the primary role in conducting foreign policy for the nation. His history of insulting allies with personal attacks, name calling, trying to overpower other world leaders with firm handshakes or creeping behind them, nationalist & racist attacks by calling other places shitholes, and repeated submissive b
Re: (Score:1)
I've got to say that most of the Trump supporters I know are well aware of Trump's rough exterior and would love it if he tempered his explosive reactive public image (i.e. lay off the Twitter fight and calling folks names) but we understand the issue here is NOT personality, but policy. So where Trump doesn't represent the perfect persona, he supports the policy we believe is best for the country.
I'm no great fan of Democrat policy proposals in this area, but which of his policies are so important to you that you're willing to overlook him doing everything he can to stop any international action to slow or mitigate climate change? The longer Trump is in charge of the world's most influential country, the bleaker the prospects for long term human survival. I'm honestly curious.
Re: (Score:2)
In my work I've only encountered a few pro-Trump people and they are the uncommon (in this area) ultra-evangelical who'd vote for the German dictator I won't name as long as he was pro-life.
Germany 1935-1945 and pro life (Score:2)
... who'd vote for the German dictator I won't name as long as he was pro-life.
You'd be surprised that said dictator was less pro-life than the governments preceding him. There were a few quite legal ways to get abortions at this time, some of them even against the will of the woman. Not pro-life, but not necessarily pro-choice either.
I'm afraid the reasoning of the German government between 1935 and 1945 might also work quite well to sell abortion to the religious fundamentalists: Abortions are only illegal for the righteous ones because they need to go forth and multiply. However, t
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be surprised that said dictator was less pro-life than the governments preceding him
I have over 6 million reasons why that would not be a surprise.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure there are a lot more people than just this who support Trump. But they've been driven underground because of the sanctimony. They support Trump for reasons other than being fascists and/or racists. I discussed this phenomenon in my post above.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, he claimed to be an outsider. He also claimed to be a businessman. His Ma and Pa Potemkin companies went bankrupt 6 or 7 times. He constantly screwed small time contractors that did work for his companies out of their money. He was so bad only Deutsche Bank would deal with him and that's probably because the Russians had laundered enough money through that bank that they couldn't say no to funding one of Putin's Poodles.
In my estimation, Republicans bought into him on his businessman aura and never bot
Re: Two clear factions in my office (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know any knowledge workers, and that includes people who are not degree educated but work in a field that requires professional knowledge, that will admit to supporting Trump. The only people I know that support Trump have racist political views who were spewing hate and conspiracy nonsense years before Trump was voted in.
You've just identified the problem. Not the problem you think you've identified, but the actual problem. Namely: you and yours' inability to accept that some people don't agree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a sizeable group of people who were so disillusioned with politics that they voted Trump solely because he was an outsider. Those people all seem to have realized that was a great mistake.
If I could morally choose to vote for the lesser of two evils, I would vote for Trump. As it is, I will vote third party (Mickey Mouse is the most popular).
The reason why I see Trump as the lesser of two evils is because how insanely intense the Democrats are at demonizing Trump. It has been a full court press for four years. Absolutely every thing, big or small, is twisted beyond recognition in an attempt to get me and others to hate Trump. Essentially, all of the vitriol tells me that Trump is very much d
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had an insightful mod point to tilt your comment that way. Still wondering why I stopped getting givable mod points years ago.
I had an interesting discussion with a former coworker recently. He was speculating about "secret Trump supporters" and he got me to start thinking about that ancient mystery of how anyone can support Trump. Now I have started working on the profile of the perfect Trump fan defined in terms of hatreds (ordered roughly from largest to smallest targets): (1) Women (b-word or c
That's funny, in my experience (Score:2)
the tech workers split along lines that seem to go with the type of projects they work on.
The ones working internet/social media/apps/cloud/phones etc projects seem to be mostly anti-Trump.
The ones working serious on-the-metal, screw-up-and-people-die projects seem to be mostly pro-Trump.
It may have something to do with the ways in which people connect cause-and-effect. People with pie-in-the-sky politics who believe in universal basic incomes, universal free healthcare, getting rid of the police and reduci
Re: Two clear factions in my office (Score:2)
Your coworkers are weak minded brainwashed political fodder