I didn’t Hillary campaigned with Swastika flags?..Yikes.
I’m not so sure anymore. People really have no shame these days, Trump supporters in particular. I’m sure at least a few of them view the Hitler comparison as a good thing.
4 Likes
What does a negative mention of Second Life look like??
6 Likes
Yeah, that’s also pretty shameless. It’s an ugly, ugly election cycle.
2 Likes
Having visited your dogfight thingy, I have to congratulate you on a job well done.
1 Like
Yeah, he and his followers should be given the highest office in America…
I think not.
7 Likes
7 Likes
This smells like something the Patriotic Nigras might have done, yes. Or V5, for that matter.
1 Like
Just a metaphorical preview of FirstLife, if the the Trump campaign is permitted to steal the nation and the presidency.
1 Like
Dare I say it obviously required more intelligence than any Trump supporter has? It was most likely cooked up as a dis, and then shamelessly adopted, IMO.
1 Like
People have mistakenly thought lots of things were safe to assume regarding Trump…
9 Likes
I actually have some friends who are Trump supporters. They are not stupid people. It is easy to dehumanize people who have differing views. It even seems like many people today do not even recognize that it is even possible for others to simply have different opinions. It scares me how polarized everyone seems to be. They all seem to believe that the other side is pure evil.
Anyway, there are some people who support Trump because they are disgusted. They voted for Bush, and that turned out horribly, then they voted for Obama, and it just got worse. They cannot vote to have Washington carpet bombed, and they don´t actually want to hurt anyone, so they are voting for Trump.
I personally find both Trump and HRC reprehensible. I have no optimism at all for our future.
1 Like
That’s the mockup for the new flag should tRump be elected el presidente…
Well, at best, they must be yuuuuugely misinformed.
3 Likes
I am talking about a couple of people who I have known for a long time. That obviously cannot include the whole spectrum of Trump supporters. I was frankly surprised when they expressed support for him, so I asked why.
My biggest beef with most political views these days is how so many people seem to think “anyone who is informed about the facts would agree with my views in every way. Those who support other views must be stupid or pure evil”. I think it is hard to have reasoned discourse with that attitude.
1 Like
I wasn’t referencing the potential consequences of Trump’s policies or lack thereof. That sort of thing can always be up for debate. I was referencing the very tangible and well documented violent behavior of some of his supporters which he has done scarcely anything to denounce. (And let’s face it, he’s got quite a bit of white supremacist support too, which he also does little to denounce. Shit, I know a few Chinese people who’ve basically been introduced to the concept of anti-semitism thanks to reading news reports about Trump. Way to make America great again!)
Supporting Trump and not wanting anyone hurt do not go together unless:
- you are stupid
and/or
- you are woefully under or misinformed about his candidacy
and/or
- when you say anyone, you don’t actually mean “everyone”
4 Likes
I’m curious—what exactly do they think got “worse” under Obama than Bush? (The only thing I can think of is drone strikes, and that’s mostly just because Bush didn’t have all the drone tech available to Obama).
I also can’t fathom what qualities those people are looking FOR if they think Bush would be a better option than Gore, Obama would be better than McCain or Romney, and Trump would be a better option than Clinton or Sanders.
4 Likes
They think it got worse under Obama, even if it didn’t actually. I’d argue that the working class has been on a long slide downwards since the late 70s, actually. Reagan and everyone since has not helped.
I’d guess that the vast majority of Trump supporters don’t care about drone strikes or would support them, because they’d generally support the war on terror. For some unfathomable reason, since as far back as Kennedy, there was a right wing assumption that Democrats are soft on first communism now terrorism, despite ALL facts to the contrary. It was democrats who ramped up the war in Vietnam, and it was a democrat that intervened in Kosova and it’s a democrat now who is in some ways expanding the war on terror again. But democrats are also more likely to employ diplomatic programs as well, at least with much more fanfare and public discussion about such things. The massively popular jazz tours started under Eisenhower, but both Kennedy and Johnson kept them going, plus Peace Corps, and Fulbright programs, etc - all democratic initiatives that just are too much about trying to come to understandings as opposed to stamping out the commies with extreme prejudice… now it’s the employment of hip hop under Obama as a cultural exchange to the Islamic world.
I think it’s that they have a mistaken understanding of what democratic presidents have actually done, historically, that makes people think they are not strong on the military front.
Or maybe they are just racist and they don’t want to admit that to the world or maybe even themselves. They look at Obama and they don’t see their President, because he’s black. They see their own social position, the last thing many of them have, slipping away from them. It’s not logical or factually true, but it’s what they see, i think.
13 Likes
