Unprecedented unbelievable anger?
I believe it’s neither.
I keep reading people saying that Muslims are rats. Everywhere they go, they destroy society. Then they say Trump 2016.
It’s hate. Plain ol’ hate. Wearing different clothes.
11 Likes
Ah, the Sharia BS… Here’s the thing to keep in mind when you hear of ‘conservative’ politicians being against stuff - it is because they are projecting and are in favor of such things, but it has to be the American Jesus version of said reprehensible thing.
But they have voters, and those voters are often ill informed enough to take the politicians at face value. To answer your question, yes.
6 Likes
Are you kidding, the reptilians are going to unmask themselves and say no even we are not that crazy if trump wins.
3 Likes
He is the embodiment of the ignorant nationalistic might-makes-right USian stereotype. His recent successes and his possible election sadly confirms the stereotype.
One can hope that the overindulgence ultimately leads to moderation (after a decent hang-over).
2 Likes
Hmmm. . . this is what I was considering for a while too, except a lot of what she says in the article implies he doesn’t care about winning at all, so why modify any of his views. According to her claim (which may not be accurate, of course) losing the election to Hillary or Bernie would be just fine with him, he will have increased his stature, promoted his brand, basically given his ego a giant uber-stroking, without any of the annoyance of figuring out how to cope with congress, re-negotiate treaties, or deal with the economic/engineering nightmare of building a huge border wall.
1 Like
My votes with the Reptilians. At least they think we taste good.
So they have a vested interest in at least some of our welfare.
Trump doesn’t need anyone for anything.
3 Likes
You can’t really judge a whole movement from one group of protesters.
And reasoning for being against abortion can be both.
But I am not going to derail the Drumpf drama with an abortion thread so I’ll just let you all keep on keeping on.
1 Like
Perhaps if I hadn’t read this comment on a little glowing screen in my hands, I could take your point more seriously. Perhaps you’d like to go back twenty years and complain about television, too.
*Hops off your lawn. *
8 Likes
Right she’s a hate mongering monster. You’d have to be to play those politics.
Because if you actually believe that shit you’re functionally useless except to vote… And maybe to get shot off your personal mobility scooter while patrolling the neighborhood with your Browning blah blah blah blah blah…
Whatever.
I think someone should tell them that obesity and guerilla warfare don’t mix. Just saying.
1 Like
Agreed. I say good for her, and I wish her luck weathering all the legal threats and character assassination that will follow.
Okay, she was slow to catch on to the obvious stuff that we all saw. She was deep inside the reality distortion zone, and was excited by what seemed a nice limited mission. Many never see past that. I appreciate her added perspective.
BTW: Does this indicate that Drumpf operated directly with a super-PAC?
Is that actionable?
Or does it fall under the three categories that don’t apply to him (rules, laws, & facts)?
The horses are loose! Quick! Shut the barn door!
2 Likes
What @kupfernigk said. And also – who really cares why they claim they’re saying what they say, when what matters more is the (anti-women) effects of what they say?
Seems to me that your attempts in this thread to carry water for the Republican Party aren’t getting anywhere. Aren’t those buckets getting heavy by now?
15 Likes
And holy shit… I see the light.
2016… Women save America from the redneck right.
I’m not trying to carry anything. I am encouraging better understanding between people. When the right portrays the left as whiny granola eating hippies or lazy slobs who just want to suck on the government’s teat their taxes are paying for, they are reducing a complicated group of people into a caricature which is easy to dismiss any empathy or understanding for.
4 Likes
Ugh, looking at that figures I can only think of Samantha Bee’s closing line on Kasich: “So, Republicans might want to take another look at Kasich, because while Trump and Cruz are promising to do terrible things, Kasich gets Terrible things done.”
(For clarity, I’m not saying “Those Republican women don’t know what’s good for them and why don’t they support who I say they should support”. I do think Kasich has an unearned reputation as a ''moderate" but I have to imagine a lot of women who support candidates who would attack women’s rights actually want a candidate who would attack women’s rights)
12 Likes
Okay, but that’s not I see you doing here. Seems to me that you’ve mostly been responding in this thread to criticism of Trump and of conservative ideas with replies that “not all Trump fans and conservatives believe all conservative ideas.”
I do agree that observations from the anti-Trump side of the fence often caricature Trump fans in unsympathetic (mostly classist) ways, but I don’t seem much of that happening here.
I think you’re trying to say “people are more complex than the caricatures that often get used to lazily describe them” to a bbs crowd that pretty much already knows that.
6 Likes
If you follow the thread of conversation specific to diverging from talking about Turmp to conservatives in general: someone made a comment about knowing a lesbian couple who were Trump supporters and others wondered how they and others could support parties thought to be detrimental to their well being.
I posted my experience of knowing gay and transgendered conservatives and offered some insight. They obviously don’t always agree with everything the Republican party does or the attitude some its members have about them. But they do agree with the ideals of conservative government (i.e. smaller federal powers, more state powers, etc). They support conservative politicians then because the big picture is the most important for the nation. They figure that they will be accepted by society and Republicans eventually as social norms change. They also act as a bridge of understanding exposing people to others who are like minded, yet different.
Someone else posted lots of laughter, saying that statement wasn’t going to work out so well, "Because conservative thought has obviously done that with regard to women as a whole. " I disagreed that conservatives were somehow anti-women or not accepting of women. Certainly the views of women have changed dramatically in the last 50 or 60 years and recent polls show young Republicans are more accepting of gays showing that yes, though slower, conservatives are moving with the rest of society to be more accepting over all.
That’s it in a nutshell.
The definition of a conservative is someone who thinks he has always believed, what he considered to be radical nonsense twenty five years ago.
The definition of a neoliberal is someone who has always believed what gives the best return on his investment. If it’s slavery, well, slavery is a kind of free market, right?
The definition of a fundamentalist is someone who believes what is written in a book regardless of external evidence. If the book contradicts itself, go with the option that gives the most power over women and minorities.
The Venn diagram consists of circles which overlap, but Trump seems to be in the pure neoliberal region whereas Cruz is in both the neoliberal and the fundamentalist regions. I suspect there are a lot of Republican voters who only fit in my first circle - but they don’t realise that for many of their leaders that is the unimportant one.
9 Likes
Labels are dumb.
1 Like
I don’t think so. They keep me from getting poisoned.
14 Likes
