I would also recommend being careful to temper your words to Trumpnicks, especially with regards to racism and political correctness. The KKK, neo-Nazis and alt-right are a lost cause, but the average Joe who supports Trump and is also annoyed with things they maybe don’t get, like Black Lives Matter, isn’t going to be swayed by us yelling “racism” at the drop of a hat. In one-on-one conversations find a way to illustrate the problem in a way they can relate to, like : “your friend Kofi, did you know store security follows him every time he goes in Macy’s? He’s been dealing with that his whole life. I know you agree that’s not cool, so what should be done about it?”
Don’t be “the enemy”, be the friend who respectfully challenges their views.
Your passive aggression leads to road rage in others. Nobody wants you to be meek, but please don’t obstruct the flow of traffic. It’s unnecessarily aggressive of you to disregard the law while operating heavy equipment. Also, you may be incorrect in your assertion that everyone will burn less fuel that way. Some cars are more efficient at 65 than 55, say.
Sanctimony feels good, but it’s really awful behavior you’re describing there. Left lane pass, right lane drive. It’s not complicated. Some people suck at it naturally, oh well. The amount of work and pride you, if being honest, take in sucking at it intentionally is troubling to me as your brother, and I hope you reevaluate your priorities.
I think you were reading a lot into that comment. Their point seems to have been that if the DNC wasn’t such a poorly-managed mess of compromises, they could have prevented a Trump presidency without much difficulty. BUT it was more important for them to be the Clinton fan club than promote a successful campaign. You seem to take the consensus that this was a choice between two unpopular candidates as a suggestion of equivalence, but they were disliked for distinct reasons.
I think that much of the criticism of Clinton I encountered was hyperbole, and that she would be a much better choice than Trump. But that’s not to say that she was a smart choice. If the stakes are this high, and the population hates your candidate - even if much of the reasoning is bogus - you listen to your constituents and put forth a candidate who addresses their current concerns. She is not by any stretch a sulphorus demon from hell, but it is not misogyny to point out that there were better options who might also not have cost the left this election.
I agree 100%. Which I why I have a letter polished and ready to go, telling my newly elected Dem Congresswoman that I expect her to drop everything in favor of opposing Trump, that the only criterion I will use in deciding whether to vote for her again in 2018 is whether she refused to play nice with the Republicans.
Here’s hoping that while we recharge and draw a few deep breaths, the current lame duck administration is shoring up what they can, and tamper-proofing whatever is within their powers to save, because to quote David Frum at The Atlantic…
The only way to ensure that things turn out all right is to act and work harder than ever in your life until this danger has passed
The lovely American confidence that “everything will be all right” has itself now become a serious danger to everything being all right.
Trump is consolidating state power to enable systematic looting & disable oversight
… I’d like to take a moment and point out that The Atlantic has a fine history of dissent:
though at this point, I’m thinking that I should probably just go ahead become a member of the ACLU and of this news platform, where Glenn Greenwald works now:
You made a lot of good points, but seriously, what about the DNC? Is corruption not an issue when it’s your team? What about when it is a significant factor in your teams loss?
Addressing those questions need not exclude the issues that you mentioned.
There’s a reasonable argument that can be made for Bernie being likely to beat Trump by a significant margin
You do not – or should not – need to pre-emptively apologize for your comment, despite the vitriol on display above. Anyone who dishonestly tries to paint you as a trolley for what you wrote… is driving trollies.
In the comment above, nojoboja linked to a comment I made 2 days before the election. In it, I was critical of a prominent image in one of Clinton’s promotional videos. The cover image on the promo was of her, in a very recognizable multi-thousand dollar designer jacket. She’d taken flack over it a few weeks earlier so it was a recognizable symbol by the time the video came out. The decision to use that image in the cover still was not made by accident, and it was exemplary of every inadequacy in her campaign, and in her. It was a knowing, cute little spit in the eyes of everyone who found her over-class trappings to be repellent. (Basically, hippie-punching. Immediately before the election.)
Hillary Clinton lost because of her obvious disdain for most of the people she expected to lead, and all of the voters who had “no where else to go”. Many (perhaps most) of us had to vote for her almost reluctantly, because her essential contempt for us was as evident as it was rank.
We are stuck with Trump in great part because Clinton and her allies were so suffused with hubris they could not be bothered to entice Americans to vote for her. Many of the votes she did receive came from people who could barely stand her, but who were desperate to keep Trump out of office. Given the naked ugliness of Trump’s campaign her loss is an epic fail. She and her people deserve a great deal of blame for it and commenters who browbeat those who discuss this honestly are, at this point, both unethical and pitiful.
At least one petition is circulating requesting an audit of the Presidential election ballots.
I don’t know how useful an online petition is other than collecting email addresses for trading, but one on thepetitionsite.com targets the Secretaries of State for Florida, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan, calling for an audit in the states where paper ballots are used.
I have been wondering how such a large percentage of Latin@s voted for him. There aren’t that many Cubans in the States, who are the most likely subgroup within that classification.
And until now, elections in the US has always been about empirical evidence instead of persuasion. Whatever happened to us? Hopefully your insightful comment will encourage some meaningful dialog around this issue.
Sorry - I did not make it clear that I would be driving the speed limit through all of this. I drive on a lot of 2-lane roads where I am intimidated to drive 10-20 mph over the speed limit by large vehicles. That ended Wednesday.
[quote=“MikeKStar, post:20, topic:89244, full:true”]I recall an editorial segment some months ago on either Morning Edition or ATC that talked about how NPR was deliberately moving away from the “both sides are equal” false equivalency journalism and will start calling bullshit when they see it.
Can’t find that segment anywhere but I know for a fact I heard it.
[/quote]
You shouldn’t have to go faster, you should pull over. In California, you legally have to pull over if you have 5 or more vehicles behind you, and there is no legal way for them to pass. It verries state to state, of course. I typically will pull off if there is anyone behind me going faster, though I confess that doesn’t happen much.
