I believe a recent study claimed that many Trump supporters were worried about “losing their culture”, which is code for, “There are too many Mexicans, Muslims and Blacks”. In other words, “He may be a total asshole, but who better to stick it to those minority assholes”.
I’m not disagreeing with you; it’s probably both. In other words, “He’s going to stick it to everyone who isn’t like me, and who I can’t stick it to, but boy would I love to”.
Gee, you happened to live in a state that went 60/40 for Bernie. How wonderful for you. But, see, Democratic primaries and the general election are held in other states also. So how useful is your casual and biased bumper sticker “data” from a single state?
And by the way, if Colorado did decide the general election, Hillary wins 48 to 43. Which shows just how deeply Colorado “hatred” for Hillary cuts across the demographic: they hate her so much, they’d elect her President.
Is “philanderer” really the word we’re going to use for Trump? That implies, by and large, consent. He’s committed numerous sexual assaults. He’s virtually Bill Cosby without the drugged drinks. “Philanderer” makes him sound like Clark Gable. Complete with a cravat, cigarette, and brandy snifter.
What’s that you say? Trump did marginally better with Black voters than the candidate running against the only black incumbent in the history of the country? Yeah, not exactly an exoneration.
And you can’t beat Romney among wealthy whites, that’s just not a fair comparision. Romney is the UR classy, wealthy white person PLUS with his voting record in MA, wealthy whites could trick themselves into thinking they could vote R without sacrificing everyone else. The amount who voted for Trump, knowing it was a LITERAL fuck you to disadvantaged folks is…disturbing.
It was overt racism in most cases. It was at least partially conscious, in other words. Huge swaths of the country have bought into the scapegoat mentality that illegal Mexicans are the problem and the border wall will solve it. They do not want to recognize that it is racism, but it was overt castigation of a racial group. Same for the treatment of Muslims: they are perceived to be the problem. As with most things Trump, the supporters refuse to acknowledge the true mechanism, but it is there. And they will fully immerse themselves in it and call it something else.
Too true. And of course, dont forget the fear of and disdain for blackness.
Thank you. I failed to mention that and meant to. Lots of Trump supporters I’ve talked to say stuff like they have nothing against black people (many do)… But those damn Mexicans, or illegals, or Muslims… Etc.[insert racial group here] Like, sectional racism? Selective? I don’t know the words for it, but it’s still racism. The only difference is it isn’t hate everyone outright, just hate a select group(s) and concentrate one’s rage on them. What do you call that? I just call it racism, but it could use a better fuller description.
Racism du jour?
Obviously “philanderer” doesn’t begin to describe his many sins but it’s one of the charges that even his supporters have been forced to acknowledge is true.
A point I didn’t disagree on. I think it was an attempt to make her more relatable and folksy, etc. She embraced the already prominent use of her first name by the other side in an attempt to defray that attack on her by trying to make her less of a serious candidate for office. That doesn’t mean that the use of her first name (especially by Trump, Fox News, etc) isn’t sexist, though. Both can be true.
And I’m not “attacking” you, I’m disagreeing with you on some of what you’re saying. I can’t speak for everyone else, but I understand that when people use my first name instead of my last name or my title, then it’s often because I’m being treated with less respect because of my gender.
I agree. You usually don’t call your friends by their last name, for example.
But using a first name wasn’t limited to Hillary Clinton. Jeb Bush’s campaign signs went with “Jeb!” in part to distinguish himself from his more famous family members.
And yet, he was not called Jeb prior to that. It would have been Gov. Bush or Bush in other venues.
the problem isn’t how the campaigns decide to engage with the public, it’s how women are consistently infantilized in order to discredit them. I’ve said that at least 10 times in this thread, and everyone keeps going back to what her campaign, as if that makes it alright to treat women differently or if that’s any less an example of misogyny that women in our society regularly face. Is it REALLY so hard to accept that Clinton was both not a great candidate AND that people were misogynistic towards her? Are we really so hell bent on ignoring misogyny that DOES exist?
Well, some of us are.
In many threads here, so many guys think they’re doing something smart by searching for other reasonzzz!! Misogyny just doesn’t seem to interest them, and so even when they’ll acknowledge it, they’ll still spend a lot more energy ferreting out other reasonzzzz!.
But… but her emails! ™
We kind of do! She didn’t take it right away, but agreed to tack it on for his gubernatorial run. (Can’t remember where I read it, sorry. But it stuck with me.)
It’s context specific. (You know this; I’m just writing in general.). Nobody ever called Bill Clinton Bill publicly. In the 80s and 90’s people referred to Trump as “The Donald” in homage to Ivana’s broken English. Now he’s Trump. But Hillary Clinton is Hillary? Even Jeb Bush isn’t just Jeb. That was his slogan, but I don’t know anybody who singularly refers to him as Jeb. It’s Jeb Bush. Women are infantilized, youngified, demeaned. And it’s not to say that SOME people who refer to HRC as Hillary are doing it affectionately. It’s both, and we can learn to be nimble in our appectiation of context, right? Black and White all the time? That is ABCdarian thinking. Context.
citation needed. extraordinary claims need at least some sort of evidence.
contrary to your assertion of dismay: he still leads chants of “lock her up” at his political jamborees. and at the time people were printing pro trump shirts with slogans like “grab america by the pussy.”
so, no. a few trump supporters may have been dismayed, and probably because of the “distraction” it caused, many dismissed it as fake news, and quite a large number fully embraced it. and still do, apparently, to this day.
his misogyny, like his racism and his poor relationship with the truth, is part and parcel of his personality cult.
totally agree. the draining of the swamp was never about ending neo-liberalism or corruption – i mean look at the people he’s chosen, and his supporters embrace those choices; they say trump is doing a great job.
the draining of the swap has always been about removing “pc” agencies. ending the epa, getting religious tolerance out of schools, ending diversity programs, etc.
draining the swamp – as far as i can tell – has always been about getting liberal left-leaning people and institutions out of washington. sticking it to “those people”.
It does … and it doesn’t. In formal settings women are often referred by their first names, while men are almost always referred to by their surnames. It doesn’t matter whether they’re famous or not, it doesn’t matter whether they’re being talked about in print or on tv, or even just on a company website.
Women get the diminutive first name, men get the respectful surname.
At a time when he was pushing his celebrity status and not running for president. Not the same thing at all.
Wait, are you saying that I’m the one who isn’t appreciating nuance here? Did you read any of my responses or just decide that I needed to be corrected because I’m not appreciating the nuance that there might be mulitple reasons why people call her Hillary, WHEN I SAID THAT SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY?
