Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 04-04-2020, 02:45 AM
Wrenching Spanners is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
No response? The suggestion was made that the reputation that Trump supporters are uninformed bigots is undeserved; that they are aware of facts and competent to form opinions; that they are not simply gulled dolts dripping with ignorance. I gave Trump supporters a chance to demonstrate that claim.

If Mr. Spanners cannot answer, how about the other Trump supporters in the thread? @ Shannon of — Would you be kind enough to answer these simple yes/no questions?
Just saw this, even though I coincidentally answered your questions a few minutes after you made this post. Were you really expecting me to answer you in the middle of the night? You're certainly not dissuading me from the idea that the left is, shall we say, emotionally over-reactive when it comes to Trump.
  #202  
Old 04-04-2020, 03:30 AM
Shannon of is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
I'm neither Republican nor Democrat. I'd strongly consider voting for a Republican other than Trump if there were any other GOP candidates. I have many friends and relatives who are die-hard Trump supporters. Almost all of them use Fox News as their primary news source. Here's what they've told me about why they support Trump:

• He's really a good guy; it's just that the MSM has vilified him.
• He's an embarrassment, but I know he won't cave to Democratic demands.
• He tells it like it is.
• When liberals criticize Trump, they criticize me because I agree with him on the issues.

I also have conservative friends who hate Donald Trump and feel that Trump has ruined the GOP. They want their party back.

I'd like to offer a little twist on the OP for Trump supporters. Suppose there were another GOP candidate for president, one who firmly upholds the GOP platforms on all major political/social issues including abortion and the right to bear arms, but who behaves with dignity, isn't sending thin-skinned or self-congratulatory tweets, is well-educated and knowledgeable, chooses excellent advisors and listens to them, and who has integrity. Would you vote for that candidate over Donald Trump in 2020?
Well, nelliebly, you're asking if I'd vote for a candidate who talks a great game, sits up straight and uses the proper fork, does not engage in unseemly behavior (especially not in public! There's a reason why we have doors, Donald); certainly didn't go to some troglodyte mill like UPenn--even worse, the Wharton School of Business (nicknamed "Double Dunce" by the real business schools); and, as a man of integrity, would always whisper a kindly "x-y-z!", not pretend to like her cat to get another date, and never bully a cashier about a return policy..hmm, I don't know, I really like Trump...
  #203  
Old 04-04-2020, 07:27 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
Just saw this, even though I coincidentally answered your questions a few minutes after you made this post. Were you really expecting me to answer you in the middle of the night? You're certainly not dissuading me from the idea that the left is, shall we say, emotionally over-reactive when it comes to Trump.
Thanks for your answers! I hope other Trump supporters will respond. And sorry if I don't keep track of exactly which shifts SDMB posters "work."

Obviously I disagree with some of your answers(*), but you did answer! Will other Trump supporters show us as much?

(* - To pick one example, tell us of any pre-Trump Cabinet Secretary as grotesquely unqualified as DeVos, Perry or Carson.)

Last edited by septimus; 04-04-2020 at 07:28 AM.
  #204  
Old 04-04-2020, 08:12 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of View Post
I appreciate you, Wrenching Spanners, for your refreshing post. You kinda got it perfectly. Though admittedly a moron who voted for Trump, with little to say in my defense, I'm still distressed by the uncharitable discourse of this thread. The warm fuzzy values of inclusiveness, tolerance, open-mindedness, etc., championed by certain people on the Left, strangely vaporize (or "vaporise", I suppose, to Wrenching Spanners) when it comes to me. Evidently, to have tolerance and respect for all human beings, of whatever origin or self-creation, stops short of people who voted for Trump. Perhaps it's thought that people who voted for Trump are less than human.

It would be a fun exercise to go back through this thread and insert my name after every fearful, hateful, gratuitously generalized opinion about Trump supporters, then stand back and look at how I, as a fellow American person, have been thoroughly insulted, degraded, ostracized, humiliated, judged, and condemned. Where is the inclusivity? Where is the tolerance and respect?

Anyway, to answer the question that started this thread, I voted for Trump for the following reasons:
1. He was the Republican presidential candidate.
2. I dislike and distrust Hillary Clinton, as well as her platform.
3. I don't think Trump is a monster, at all. He's a sinful guy like you and me. That's what I think. But what do I know, being an egregiously stupid right-wing voter?
4. I have several deeply rooted beliefs which, the last time I looked, I'm entitled to as an American, that are being systematically dug up, defamed, and put on trial, on a grand public scale, starting in kindergarten.
5. It looks like the Democrats keep trying to put people into groups. When did I stop being an individual and become part of a category? It is a chilling thing to consider that I'm condemned because of the box that you put me into in the first place.

Moronically Yours, Shannon of
And right-wingers call democrats "snowflakes".

1. Fair enough.
2. Fair enough.
3. Trump is demonstrably worse than the average "sinful guy". You can try and give him a pass, but you're only justifying and normalizing a bigot and a pathological liar who is wholly unfit to run his own business, let alone be POTUS.
4. What are those beliefs? You carefully avoid sharing what they are but play the victim card because they have been challenged since your childhood. Perhaps you know that they are beliefs that are indefensible.
5. It's human nature to group people based on various criteria, including moral values. Democrats are hardly the first or only group that does this. Stop deflecting and projecting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of View Post
Well, nelliebly, you're asking if I'd vote for a candidate who talks a great game, sits up straight and uses the proper fork, does not engage in unseemly behavior (especially not in public! There's a reason why we have doors, Donald); certainly didn't go to some troglodyte mill like UPenn--even worse, the Wharton School of Business (nicknamed "Double Dunce" by the real business schools); and, as a man of integrity, would always whisper a kindly "x-y-z!", not pretend to like her cat to get another date, and never bully a cashier about a return policy..hmm, I don't know, I really like Trump...
I can't make heads or tails of what this even means.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #205  
Old 04-04-2020, 08:12 AM
MikeF is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
Wrenching Spanners said "Getting the outright lies out of the way first, of course Trump had a lot of bombast, some of it untruthful." This is certainly minimizing Trump's inability to tell the truth about almost anything. Lying about crowd sizes? No big deal. Muslim's dancing in the streets? Pass. "I'll release my taxes"? Bombast. "We have the virus under control"? No biggie. "I knew this was a pandemic before anyone called it a pandemic"? Just Trump being Trump. Regardless of his or Republican policies on anything, it is beyond my comprehension how anyone can support such a pathological liar. One cannot believe a single word he says. My greatest fear is that he gets into another war based on complete bullshit. (Although his lying and ineptitude concerning the current crisis may cost more lives than all of our mid-East misadventures combined, he's already calling himself and his polices the best).

So please, please explain to me how you can ignore all his lies. I mean "bombast".
I don't know if self-quoting is bad form but I'd still like an answer from Wrenching Spanners or any other Trump supporter.
  #206  
Old 04-04-2020, 08:46 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
I don't know if self-quoting is bad form but I'd still like an answer from Wrenching Spanners or any other Trump supporter.
I'd love to hear the answer as well. But as Shannon Of demonstrated so well, it's likely to be as much maligned lifelong victims of the evil Democrats.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #207  
Old 04-04-2020, 09:25 AM
Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitterSport View Post
I don't understand this criticism of people who don't support Trump. Things he did in his first year were horrific and unprecedented for a US President, or at least a modern one. The Mueller report laid out how terrible he was as a candidate and President. He was doing things that would have unraveled another president on a regular basis. Just because he's gotten worse, more incompetent, coarser, more petulant, doesn't mean that the earlier criticism was wrong -- it was as bad as it got, from, say, President Wilson forward, until it got worse again.

If I'm being tortured and someone asks me how bad is the pain, and I give it a ten because I can't imagine any worse pain, and then the torturers come up with something even worse, my previous ten was still valid -- I couldn't imagine worse pain.

Similarly, I thought his obvious graft, lies, and campaign violations were really awful, worse than anything before. I didn't expect the level of incompetence at the border that would have him separating parents from children and then losing track of the children! I thought that was the worst, but then I didn't expect him to be treasonously fishing for dirt on his political opponents! I thought that was the worst, but then I didn't expect him to respond so badly to the current crisis!
Things like this is why I can't take seriously the fanatic anti-Trump contingent:
"Things he did in his first year were horrific and unprecedented for a US President"

G.W. Bush started a war under false pretenses (not the only one he started, but I digress), more than a hundred thousand civilians died. Dead, men, women, children, a war, a MF war based on lies plus all the other bloody ramifications that stemmed from that and further military adventurisms by previous US presidents.
But your moral compass is so out of whack you think Trump (who, mind you, hasn't actually started any wars) actions are "uniquely horrific".

The real cherry on top is that the guy running against him wholeheartedly agreed and enabled that same war, and he is supposed to be better than Trump.

What a joke.
  #208  
Old 04-04-2020, 10:15 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
I'd like to offer a little twist on the OP for Trump supporters. Suppose there were another GOP candidate for president, one who firmly upholds the GOP platforms on all major political/social issues including abortion and the right to bear arms, but who behaves with dignity, isn't sending thin-skinned or self-congratulatory tweets, is well-educated and knowledgeable, chooses excellent advisors and listens to them, and who has integrity. Would you vote for that candidate over Donald Trump in 2020?
As I have detailed earlier in the thread, I do not hate all GOP values and most certainly do not agree with all Dem ideologies.

I think the AOC crowd are only slightly less dangerous than Trump and if I am being completely honest, I hate Trump the person more than anything else.

That all said, I think the far right mainstream GOP like Mike Pence would ruin this country, but if Mitt were running against Joe? That would give me pause to consider.

Call it the Trump effect, but some moderate Republicans I once thought were bad for our country now seem tame in comparison to the 80 IQ child we have in office now.
  #209  
Old 04-04-2020, 10:21 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
Things like this is why I can't take seriously the fanatic anti-Trump contingent:
"Things he did in his first year were horrific and unprecedented for a US President"

G.W. Bush started a war under false pretenses (not the only one he started, but I digress), more than a hundred thousand civilians died. Dead, men, women, children, a war, a MF war based on lies plus all the other bloody ramifications that stemmed from that and further military adventurisms by previous US presidents.
But your moral compass is so out of whack you think Trump (who, mind you, hasn't actually started any wars) actions are "uniquely horrific".

The real cherry on top is that the guy running against him wholeheartedly agreed and enabled that same war, and he is supposed to be better than Trump.

What a joke.
It's telling when you can't defend a position on its merits, raise an immaterial subject that has no bearing whatsoever, attack it to distract and change the subject.

That's the joke. And it's not funny anymore.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #210  
Old 04-04-2020, 12:11 PM
Happy Fun Ball is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The down hill slope
Posts: 3,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
Most of these are demonstrably false.
The State Department is still there, no seeming difference in effectiveness.
The judicial branch has politicized the judicial branch. Trump has appointed some of the best judges on there.
Journalistic institutions have damaged their own reputations through obvious bias and incompetence.
I have not seen any sign of weak relationships with Canada and Europe. Russia and North Korea are as they have always been. Russia is much weaker now because of low oil prices.
The EPA is still there, pollution and carbon emissions continue to fall.
Profiting off of government service has been normal for living memory. Clinton raised hundreds of millions for her foundation from countries she was negotiating with and nobody batted an eye.
The rule of law is still here.
His opponents have called him a traitor and an enemy of the country.
How do we know that the intelligence agencies have been hurt? The campaign against ISIS was notably better under him than Trump but other than that I can't see any difference.
Now that it is the weekend, I can respond.
You said:
The rule of law is still here.
Is it? Really?

Trump administration blocks prosecution of drug dealers.
Trump attacks judges and prosecutors.
Trump administration seeks do-over for convicted cronies.
Trump argues he is above the law.

And of course there are the hundreds of subpoenas that Trump is ignoring. These are working their way through the courts so maybe the rule of law isn't dead here but the Trump administration sure is trying to kill it.

And then of course there is this whole fiasco:

Impeachment of Donald J. Trump for Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Justice.

And this whole fiasco:

Russian interference and the obstruction of justice.

And then I could go into all the retaliation the Trump administration has done to punish it's perceived enemies; Comey, McCabe, Atkinson,, Vindman, Sondland, the other Vindman, and more I can't even remember.

Now it may be that you think this is all OK, but I doubt you would feel that way if these were actions taken by Obama. You were vociferous in your condemnation of the Obama Administration (sometimes with good reason, I admit) so I can't imagine you would suport a Democratic Administration attacking the rule of low like this, but maybe I am wrong.
  #211  
Old 04-04-2020, 12:22 PM
Happy Fun Ball is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The down hill slope
Posts: 3,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
Most of these are demonstrably false.
The State Department is still there, no seeming difference in effectiveness.
The judicial branch has politicized the judicial branch. Trump has appointed some of the best judges on there.
Journalistic institutions have damaged their own reputations through obvious bias and incompetence.
I have not seen any sign of weak relationships with Canada and Europe. Russia and North Korea are as they have always been. Russia is much weaker now because of low oil prices.
The EPA is still there, pollution and carbon emissions continue to fall.
Profiting off of government service has been normal for living memory. Clinton raised hundreds of millions for her foundation from countries she was negotiating with and nobody batted an eye.
The rule of law is still here.
His opponents have called him a traitor and an enemy of the country.
How do we know that the intelligence agencies have been hurt? The campaign against ISIS was notably better under him than Trump but other than that I can't see any difference.
In response to me saying:

He has politicized our judicial branch and used his bully pulpit to instill doubts in its integrity


You said:

The judicial branch has politicized the judicial branch. Trump has appointed some of the best judges on there.


Oh come on.

By the way, I never said anything about the judges he has nominated. Most of them are just fine and perfectly acceptable though I don't agree with much of their ideology. I am talking about Trump using the bully pulpit to instill doubt in the integrity of the judicial branch.

Last edited by Happy Fun Ball; 04-04-2020 at 12:25 PM.
  #212  
Old 04-04-2020, 12:41 PM
Happy Fun Ball is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The down hill slope
Posts: 3,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
Most of these are demonstrably false.
The State Department is still there, no seeming difference in effectiveness.
The judicial branch has politicized the judicial branch. Trump has appointed some of the best judges on there.
Journalistic institutions have damaged their own reputations through obvious bias and incompetence.
I have not seen any sign of weak relationships with Canada and Europe. Russia and North Korea are as they have always been. Russia is much weaker now because of low oil prices.
The EPA is still there, pollution and carbon emissions continue to fall.
Profiting off of government service has been normal for living memory. Clinton raised hundreds of millions for her foundation from countries she was negotiating with and nobody batted an eye.
The rule of law is still here.
His opponents have called him a traitor and an enemy of the country.
How do we know that the intelligence agencies have been hurt? The campaign against ISIS was notably better under him than Trump but other than that I can't see any difference.
In response to me saying:

He has weakened our trust in journalistic institutions and spread conspiracy theories.

You said

Journalistic institutions have damaged their own reputations through obvious bias and incompetence.


With some institutions you are right, but that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about Trump spreading conspiracy theories. I am talking about Trump saying that the press is lying (lugenpresse) when their is clear footage showing that they are telling the truth (do I really need to link examples?). Again, are you really OK with your government (of whatever party) regularly undermining the integrity of the press?

If a journalistic institutions damages it's credibility by being lying, propaganda spreading, pieces of shit, that is one thing (and I agree with you that there are many cases of this on both sides of the political spectrum). If the government actively tries to damage the press that is something else entirely. It bothers me that you are OK with this. Are you going to be OK with this when a Democratic Administration does it? I won't be and have not been in the limited instances where it has happened.

Last edited by Happy Fun Ball; 04-04-2020 at 12:43 PM.
  #213  
Old 04-04-2020, 03:28 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
As I have detailed earlier in the thread, I do not hate all GOP values and most certainly do not agree with all Dem ideologies.

I think the AOC crowd are only slightly less dangerous than Trump and if I am being completely honest, I hate Trump the person more than anything else.
...
Sure the "Young Turks" have some crazy ideas, but if you actually pin one down, usually they will admit that they know the ideas as listed are impractical, they are mostly talking or starting points.
  #214  
Old 04-04-2020, 10:39 PM
Shannon of is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4
No, I get you. He's rough hewn,. I lived in New York in the '80s, and he was The Trump and Mr Showbiz and all that. He was handsome then. And he did amazing work in the hotel industry, in the building industry in general. The idea that he has an IQ of 80, or is stupid in any way, is preposterous. Someone in this thread even said that he is "unfit to run his own business." What? That's like saying Mrs See is unfit to make chocolates, (Californians will get the reference.)

I mean, let's be real. He went to the Wharton School of Business at UPenn. He was wildly successful in business and enterprise, worked deals and negotiated with hard-ass unions, international suppliers, mega-contractors, construction crews, primadonna architects, you name it. He made it work, with all kinds and sorts of people, which requires intelligence, understanding, perception, and imagination, and would leave no room for bigotry and racism, not if you want to get things done. You just can't say he's stupid or racist or a bad businessman. The fruits of his life prove the opposite.

I'm pretty sure that the Left, or Democrats, or whatever you want to call the filet mignon of "you guys" believe that the MSM are unbiased in their coverage of Donald Trump and have uncovered shocking truths.

"We guys" disagree. Which brings me to my next point--you guys have NPR, SNL, Oprah, The Tonight Show, the NYT, the Washington Post, the LA Times, MSNBC, CBS, and all the other broadcast news outlets; you took the helm of public education (which was my reference to kindergarten--it was not a personal reference); you own Hollywood, Broadway, TV entertainment in all its array. Seriously, you really can't stand that we have...Fox News? How is it even possible that such a powerful cadre of opponents wouldn't try to bring Trump down?

I truly believe any of his excesses, lies, and mistakes are in keeping with the office he holds. The reason he's so thoroughly hated is primarily because of what he looks like (weird) and how he acts (crazy), and secondarily because he's distastefully old-fashioned: he loves America and wants to protect our interests and make us prosperous, yes, in a money and revenue way, right down to the flyover guy.

You know I'm telling the truth--if Obama told the same lies, made the same mistakes as Trump (and did, in his own ways), do you think the MSM would have vilified him the way they do Trump? It's because Obama played ball and his social programming ideals pleasantly aligned with theirs. Trump doesn't scratch their backs and make nice, he yells at them because of their outlandish bias and contempt for him, his programs, and his ideals. Probably the POTUS shouldn't do that, but I'm kind of glad he does. It's been so long since anyone looked out for us as Americans, as a sovereign people.
  #215  
Old 04-04-2020, 11:56 PM
Shannon of is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
I'd love to hear the answer as well. But as Shannon Of demonstrated so well, it's likely to be as much maligned lifelong victims of the evil Democrats.
It should have read "...much-maligned, lifelong..." Smiley, smiley, smiley! I want to keep hammering home the fact that Republicans, just like Democrats, have both smart AND stupid constituents. That that is something I have to emphasize is a sad statement about the prejudice that exists among many Democrats, some in my own family (who get self-conscious when we're in her car together, listening to NPR--she can't really call her own sister a conservative moron...or can she?).

You know, in my original post, I was being purposely gentle and sensitive, to amuse myself, and to get my points across, but also to try to steer the conversation toward a more polite course. As a thread it was game at first but, like a party that's fallen off the fun curve, it was starting to get ugly. Redirecting the course was none of my business, really, and certainly no one asked me to do it. Honestly, in my contrarian heart, I was hoping someone would wheel on me and reply with a vituperative smear of my intelligence and character, in keeping with the tone the thread was taking (which MikeF, was it?, started politely enough, if somewhat provocatively in the last bit of his gambit).

I'm kind of sorry that no one took the bait to crush me, what fun it would have been!, but it does shed new light on an old prejudice I confess to: that, as a group, Democrats are incorrigibly mean-spirited and spiteful. Everyone has been really nice to me here, considering I'm a Republican. Maybe it would be possible to have dinner together without one of us leaping across the table with a knife, or even getting agita.

Last edited by Shannon of; 04-04-2020 at 11:58 PM. Reason: punctuation error
  #216  
Old 04-05-2020, 01:09 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Sure the "Young Turks" have some crazy ideas, but if you actually pin one down, usually they will admit that they know the ideas as listed are impractical, they are mostly talking or starting points.
Would they though?

That shit that went down at Evergreen College a few years ago? Those "woke" students and their "micro aggressions"... that is POTENTIAALY the future core of the democratic party.

While I have voted democrat for 2 decades, THAT is what republicans are afraid of and I do not blame them.

Maybe I have been listening to Jordan Peterson too much, but IMO that wing of the democratic party WOULD have (and still may) push many moderates to the right if not for the trainwreck of villany and lies that exist in the GOP at the moment.
  #217  
Old 04-05-2020, 01:18 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of View Post
The idea that he has an IQ of 80, or is stupid in any way, is preposterous.
I own and stand by that comment. Just listen to the man talk, his vocabulary is severely limited and (unintentionally) comical, which is certainly appealing to his lower IQ base because he sounds like an everyman (albeit with Daddy's money and no love for those poor supporters).

Listen to Reagan, HW Bush, Clinton and Obama (hell even Pence) and tell me that Trump "sounds" intelligent.

I understand your oratory skills are not the single definition of intelligence. But I do know that a person who CONSTANTLY reminds me of how smart he is almost EVERYTIME he speaks and at the most bizarre and awkward moments is generally not a smart person.

I would place a not insignificant amount of money that he is one of - if not THE - single most unintelligent POTUS (relatively speaking) in our history.

Last edited by chargerrich; 04-05-2020 at 01:19 AM.
  #218  
Old 04-05-2020, 01:21 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
Would they though?

That shit that went down at Evergreen College a few years ago? Those "woke" students and their "micro aggressions"... that is POTENTIAALY the future core of the democratic party.

While I have voted democrat for 2 decades, THAT is what republicans are afraid of and I do not blame them.

Maybe I have been listening to Jordan Peterson too much, but IMO that wing of the democratic party WOULD have (and still may) push many moderates to the right if not for the trainwreck of villany and lies that exist in the GOP at the moment.
About the Evergreen College, that was a wonder of a propaganda fear mongering from the right:

https://psmag.com/education/the-real...rgreen-college
Quote:
Yet Weinstein continued to insist that the protesters were mainly concerned with his email. Though Weinstein calls himself a progressive, he went on the rabidly right-wing, anti-immigrant Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News shortly after the protests. Carlson claimed that white people had been forced off campus, which was not true. He then played a clip of the protest, framing it to suggest, falsely, that the protest had been a response to Weinstein's email alone. Weinstein co-signed that version of events, and did not correct Carlson when he said that the core demand of the protesters was that white people leave campus—which, again, was completely false. Participation in the Day of Absence was voluntary, and student demands did not include any discussion of forcing students off campus.
Quote:
Weinstein's tweet went out to around 110,000 Twitter followers; Breitbart News also picked up his comments. As a result, Evergreen organizers were once again deluged with hate mail. The RSVP link for the 2018 Day of Absence received over 200 messages from troll accounts with names like "Bad Idea," "AK 47," and "Adolf Hitler." The response overwhelmed the website, making it difficult for organizers to notify participants about a change of venue.*

Some online trolls even threatened to show up at Evergreen itself. Zoé Samudzi, a speaker at the 2018 Day of Absence and co-author of the forthcoming book As Black as Resistance: Finding the Conditions for Liberation, was contacted by the Carlson show; the producer asked her questions about whether she really wanted to be associated with such an event, apparently trying to provoke a controversial response. In the end, the 2018 Day of Absence proceeded without any violence or confrontation on campus. Samudzi tells me she gave a well-received talk to an engaged audience that, like the student body at Evergreen, was mostly white.

"I think that there's a particular cowardice in the university not sponsoring the Day of Absence," Samudzi says. "I think that we're seeing how a lot of university administration, regardless of how liberal they're purporting to be, really capitulate to the social and political pressure that's put on them by the far right. I think that that's really the big threat to academic free speech."

Right-wing media personalities like to present left-wing students—especially black left-wing students—as dangerous totalitarians, threatening democracy. But the truth is that students have limited power, and limited ability to make themselves heard. Right-wing media has been eager to amplify Weinstein. In contrast, students at Evergreen have struggled to get their stories out. Weinstein left Evergreen with a generous pay-off, and now has a successful Patreon and enjoys flattering coverage in the New York Times. Students on campus, meanwhile, lost anti-racist programming, and faced far right harassment, without any tangible recompense.

Despite threats and administrative hostility, these students refused to let the Day of Absence die. Still, that shouldn't obscure the way that Carlson, Weinstein, and others misrepresented the nature of the event, encouraged harassment, and stirred up protest in a nearly successful effort to suppress anti-racism on campus. That seems a whole lot like a curtailment of free speech—unless, of course, you have convinced yourself that students don't have anything to say.
As for Jordan Peterson, yes, you need a better source of information.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson
  #219  
Old 04-05-2020, 01:25 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
Sometimes low hanging fruit is just asking to be picked. And sometimes low hanging nutty statements are just asking to be ridiculed.
Again, that was not why I pointed that out. You were wrong by nutpicking, and calling it "low hanging fruit" is just again a fallacious attempt at making the nutty statements as if all the left and liberals are like that.
  #220  
Old 04-05-2020, 02:16 AM
Wrenching Spanners is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Tell us of any pre-Trump Cabinet Secretary as grotesquely unqualified as DeVos, Perry or Carson.
If you want a direct equivalent of Betsy Devos, go have a look at Obama Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker. As for Perry, he was governor of Texas for 15 years and had a political career dating back to 1984. I get the irony that he was selected as Secretary of Energy after calling for the Department of Energy to be abolished, but there's no question that he had the political experience to be qualified as a cabinet member. Carson was light on political experience, but has a distinguished career as a surgeon and medical director. Just go take a look at the man's awards. Example: "In 2008, U.S. News & World Report named Carson as one of 'America's Best Leaders'". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Ca...rds_and_honors

I'm not going to participate in a hijack about Trump cabinet appointments, but this is the kind of irrationality from the left that I'm highlighting. You don't like somebody because they're associated with Trump and you don't like their politics, and therefore they're unqualified. It's just another example of the "us vs them" mentality causing both sides to be politically entrenched.
  #221  
Old 04-05-2020, 02:30 AM
Wrenching Spanners is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
I don't know if self-quoting is bad form but I'd still like an answer from Wrenching Spanners or any other Trump supporter.
I'm not a Trump supporter, although I seem to be taking their side. I probably would have voted for Jeb Bush over Hillary Clinton if you'd like a different descriptor of my perspective.

I already gave my answer. Trump supporters viewed Trump the same way they viewed PT Barnum, or the same way the audience views professional wrestling. They didn't care about the lies. They were interested in the circus and the outrageous performances.
  #222  
Old 04-05-2020, 06:50 AM
msmith537 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
I'm not a Trump supporter, although I seem to be taking their side. I probably would have voted for Jeb Bush over Hillary Clinton if you'd like a different descriptor of my perspective.

I already gave my answer. Trump supporters viewed Trump the same way they viewed PT Barnum, or the same way the audience views professional wrestling. They didn't care about the lies. They were interested in the circus and the outrageous performances.
The problem is that that they aren't picking someone to run the Greatest Show on Earth or a reality show. They are picking someone to be the head of the largest economy in the world with the most powerful nuclear-armed military on the planet.

And the Trumps supporters I know don't support him because they think he's entertaining. They legitimately believe in what he's doing and think he's doing well at it. I wouldn't call them "idiots", because by any objective standard they are smart and educated (many of them are at least). But a lot of them have this weird way of looking at the world. I wouldn't go so far as calling them "conspiracy nuts", but it's more like they think that everything the public sees and knows and hears on the news is total bullshit, but they have the inside scoop because they know a guy who knows a guy whose cousin does XYZ for whoever.
  #223  
Old 04-05-2020, 07:14 AM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 685
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
About the Evergreen College, that was a wonder of a propaganda fear mongering from the right:

https://psmag.com/education/the-real...rgreen-college




As for Jordan Peterson, yes, you need a better source of information.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson

Rational Wiki is not a reputable cite. Noah Berlatsky is dishonestly misrepresenting what happened to Bret Weinstein.

I won’t be back to defend this point, because it’s not a matter for debate and I have better things to do, but if anyone wants to know why Berlatsky’s account of the Evergreen scandal is bullshit, I’d recommend these two videos:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FH2WeWgcSMk

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A0W9QbkX8Cs&t=1221s

Last edited by Unreconstructed Man; 04-05-2020 at 07:15 AM.
  #224  
Old 04-05-2020, 07:33 AM
RitterSport's Avatar
RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of View Post
No, I get you. He's rough hewn,. I lived in New York in the '80s, and he was The Trump and Mr Showbiz and all that...
If you lived in NY in the '80s, you'd know he was The Donald, not The Trump. And, he was never known as Mr. Showbiz back then, since he wasn't in show business at all, so I don't know where the heck you got that from.

The rest of your post seems equally out there, so I won't bother to respond to the rest, except to say that he was never a wildly successful business man.
  #225  
Old 04-05-2020, 08:38 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of View Post
No, I get you. He's rough hewn,. I lived in New York in the '80s, and he was The Trump and Mr Showbiz and all that. He was handsome then. And he did amazing work in the hotel industry, in the building industry in general. The idea that he has an IQ of 80, or is stupid in any way, is preposterous. Someone in this thread even said that he is "unfit to run his own business." What? That's like saying Mrs See is unfit to make chocolates, (Californians will get the reference.)

I mean, let's be real. He went to the Wharton School of Business at UPenn. He was wildly successful in business and enterprise, worked deals and negotiated with hard-ass unions, international suppliers, mega-contractors, construction crews, primadonna architects, you name it. He made it work, with all kinds and sorts of people, which requires intelligence, understanding, perception, and imagination, and would leave no room for bigotry and racism, not if you want to get things done. You just can't say he's stupid or racist or a bad businessman. The fruits of his life prove the opposite.
I will be charitable and assume you had no idea that the Trump organization was investigated by the FBI and found guilty of discrimination against blacks seeking to rent apartments on their properties. I will extend my charity further to the fact that you were unaware that Trump has declared multiple bankruptcies across multiple businesses, including casinos, hotels, airlines, product lines, etc. The list is long and does not speak well of his business abilities. Being in a charitable mood, I will again assume that you did not know that Trump has a long history of screwing over contractors by not paying them, to the point where he had trouble finding companies who would be willing to work with him. He was black listed by banks who would not lend money to him because he screwed them over as well. Trump's charitable foundations were shut down because they were found to be fraudulent. As was Trump University.

I'm sure that you had no idea about any of this. But you are welcome to do your own research and come back to share with us whether this changes your mind in any way about Trump's abilities to run his own business.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of
"We guys" disagree. Which brings me to my next point--you guys have NPR, SNL, Oprah, The Tonight Show, the NYT, the Washington Post, the LA Times, MSNBC, CBS, and all the other broadcast news outlets; you took the helm of public education (which was my reference to kindergarten--it was not a personal reference); you own Hollywood, Broadway, TV entertainment in all its array. Seriously, you really can't stand that we have...Fox News? How is it even possible that such a powerful cadre of opponents wouldn't try to bring Trump down?
You're free to disagree. You're not entitled to your own set of facts. That you cling to a single news source that informs your 'alternative facts' in the face of evidence to the contrary says more about you than the MSM you call "a hoax".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of
I truly believe any of his excesses, lies, and mistakes are in keeping with the office he holds. The reason he's so thoroughly hated is primarily because of what he looks like (weird) and how he acts (crazy), and secondarily because he's distastefully old-fashioned: he loves America and wants to protect our interests and make us prosperous, yes, in a money and revenue way, right down to the flyover guy.
He was a known liar and failure before he took office. He revealed himself to be a pathological liar and bigot while running for office. He continues to show himself to be a pathological liar, bigot and intellectually/mentally unfit for the office. Furthermore, he has put the country in far deeper debt while serving to profit himself at the cost to all tax payers. The flyover guys have not benefited in any way, despite what they want to believe.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of
You know I'm telling the truth--if Obama told the same lies, made the same mistakes as Trump (and did, in his own ways), do you think the MSM would have vilified him the way they do Trump? It's because Obama played ball and his social programming ideals pleasantly aligned with theirs. Trump doesn't scratch their backs and make nice, he yells at them because of their outlandish bias and contempt for him, his programs, and his ideals. Probably the POTUS shouldn't do that, but I'm kind of glad he does. It's been so long since anyone looked out for us as Americans, as a sovereign people.
This is a profoundly false narrative that you are fed by your steady diet of Fox & other right wing news sources. Trump has done more damage to this country than any single president in our lifetime. When all is said and done, he may well be the worst president in the history of this nation. The greatest reveal by far is how willingly ~63M joined the MAGACult because Trump has appealed to their most base instincts of ignorance, fear and bigotry. And they willingly continue to consume a steady diet of delusional lies. That Trump has the slightest interest in looking out for anybody but his own narcissistic self interests is more self-delusion on your part.

If you think I'm wrong, prove me wrong. Provide evidence that shows how Trump has made American lives demonstrably better. Not how he's made you feel by appealing to your common moral values or self-esteem. How are American lives materially better because of specific policies implemented by the Trump administration to date?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 04-05-2020 at 08:41 AM.
  #226  
Old 04-05-2020, 08:38 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Rational Wiki is not a reputable cite. Noah Berlatsky is dishonestly misrepresenting what happened to Bret Weinstein.

I won’t be back to defend this point, because it’s not a matter for debate and I have better things to do, but if anyone wants to know why Berlatsky’s account of the Evergreen scandal is bullshit, I’d recommend these two videos:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FH2WeWgcSMk

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A0W9QbkX8Cs&t=1221s
Thanks for sharing, that is the version of events that i have believed and is the bat shit crazy/scary ultra progressive wing that works to push any moderates out of the party.
  #227  
Old 04-05-2020, 08:47 AM
Wrenching Spanners is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Again, that was not why I pointed that out. You were wrong by nutpicking, and calling it "low hanging fruit" is just again a fallacious attempt at making the nutty statements as if all the left and liberals are like that.
I don't know why you're going down this tangent, but Asahi's statement deserved to be called out and ridiculed. Here it is again:
Quote:
This is why I've said that it's time for rural white America to experience the worst of COVID.
You're effectively saying I should just ignore it because it's eccentric, or doesn't represent mainstream left thinking. Why should I?

More to the point, while Asahi’s statement might be, ahem, unique, I do believe that liberal animosity towards Trump supporters frequently crosses the line into hostility. Here’s a thread full of people ending friendships because of the level of their animosity. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=872570 That animosity is less straightforward when it comes to the subject of rural voters, although not by much. Here’s a thread with several anti-rural comments. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=872638 The prize-winner: “This is the harsh reality, the abortion thing is to make themselves feel important because they really don't contribute much to this country. These people aren't farmers, America's bread basket is owned by a few millionaires and billionaires now. Everybody else is just getting by and spreading ignorance while the rest of us pay to support their mismanaged states.” I’ve cherry-picked the worst, but it’s one of at least a half-dozen that are dismissive of rural voters. So no, it’s not just one individual, and yes, there genuinely is rancour from the left, as represented by the SDMB, directed at both Trump supporters and rural voters. Asahi’s message may be a harsh outlier, but it represents actual sentiments of the left. Does everyone on the left have those sentiments? No. But I believe there's enough of that sentiment present that it's visible to the general public and fosters partisanship.
  #228  
Old 04-05-2020, 08:55 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
I don't know why you're going down this tangent, but Asahi's statement deserved to be called out and ridiculed. Here it is again:


You're effectively saying I should just ignore it because it's eccentric, or doesn't represent mainstream left thinking. Why should I?

More to the point, while Asahi’s statement might be, ahem, unique, I do believe that liberal animosity towards Trump supporters frequently crosses the line into hostility. Here’s a thread full of people ending friendships because of the level of their animosity. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=872570 That animosity is less straightforward when it comes to the subject of rural voters, although not by much. Here’s a thread with several anti-rural comments. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=872638 The prize-winner: “This is the harsh reality, the abortion thing is to make themselves feel important because they really don't contribute much to this country. These people aren't farmers, America's bread basket is owned by a few millionaires and billionaires now. Everybody else is just getting by and spreading ignorance while the rest of us pay to support their mismanaged states.” I’ve cherry-picked the worst, but it’s one of at least a half-dozen that are dismissive of rural voters. So no, it’s not just one individual, and yes, there genuinely is rancour from the left, as represented by the SDMB, directed at both Trump supporters and rural voters. Asahi’s message may be a harsh outlier, but it represents actual sentiments of the left. Does everyone on the left have those sentiments? No. But I believe there's enough of that sentiment present that it's visible to the general public and fosters partisanship.
Feel free to hang on to whatever slight helps you justify your dislike of democrats, progressives or liberals of whichever stripe.

Unlike many right wing policies, these wrong sentiments expressed by angry left-wing nuts are not part of any progressive policy, nor is there any reason to think they will be.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #229  
Old 04-05-2020, 09:17 AM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
If you want a direct equivalent of Betsy Devos, go have a look at Obama Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker. As for Perry, he was governor of Texas for 15 years and had a political career dating back to 1984. I get the irony that he was selected as Secretary of Energy after calling for the Department of Energy to be abolished
Wait a second here... Perry is most known not for calling for DoE to be abolished, but for forgetting in a debate that it was an agency he wanted abolished. This was the moment of stupidity that effectively ended his primary bid. It's hard to imagine a more glaring disqualification.

Quote:
Carson was light on political experience,
You misspelled "zero political experience". Nothing. Zip. Nada. Not "light". Unless you're thinking of his joke of a presidential bid where he got curbstomped for snoozing through debates.

Quote:
"In 2008, U.S. News & World Report named Carson as one of 'America's Best Leaders'". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Ca...rds_and_honors
An award for doctoring from a media outlet. Wow. No wonder he's done absolutely nothing in his tenure in Trump's cabinet.

Quote:
I'm not going to participate in a hijack about Trump cabinet appointments, but this is the kind of irrationality from the left that I'm highlighting. You don't like somebody because they're associated with Trump and you don't like their politics, and therefore they're unqualified.
You literally started a highjack about Trump's 2 least qualified cabinet appointments, you deceptively fluffed their credentials, and then you pretend we're the irrational ones. You should cringe in shame and hide under a rock somewhere, this is a pathetic performance.

Last edited by HMS Irruncible; 04-05-2020 at 09:18 AM.
  #230  
Old 04-05-2020, 11:06 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
... You literally started a highjack about Trump's 2 least qualified cabinet appointments, you deceptively fluffed their credentials, and then you pretend we're the irrational ones. You should cringe in shame and hide under a rock somewhere, this is a pathetic performance.
Blame me for the DeVos-Perry hijack. I was trying to list some of the most egregious or criminal conduct by Trump and see if right-wingers had a worthy opinion, or were even aware of his crimes and incompetence.

But I'm afraid they'll have a glib answer for everything. And at the end of the day they'll accept a lot of buffoonery from Trump if they get their anti-voter judges, their tax cuts for the rich, their Wall, and so on.
  #231  
Old 04-05-2020, 11:47 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
I don't know why you're going down this tangent, but Asahi's statement deserved to be called out and ridiculed. .
Full stop, besides showing all that you miss the point spectacularly, of course it was a statement that deserved to be ridiculed; read it again. You missed that I did agree with that by talking about a nitpick, you then are going on by blissfully ignoring that your tangent was a fallacy, the rancour you see is just bias confirmation as you pointed at one nutty statement of one that is criticized strongly (even by me in more that one occasion).
  #232  
Old 04-05-2020, 02:02 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
Would they though?

That shit that went down at Evergreen College a few years ago? Those "woke" students and their "micro aggressions"... that is POTENTIAALY the future core of the democratic party.

...t.
Those arent the Political leaders, just some students.
  #233  
Old 04-05-2020, 02:06 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Rational Wiki is not a reputable cite. Noah Berlatsky is dishonestly misrepresenting what happened to Bret Weinstein.

I won’t be back to defend this point, because it’s not a matter for debate and I have better things to do, but if anyone wants to know why Berlatsky’s account of the Evergreen scandal is bullshit, I’d recommend these two videos:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FH2WeWgcSMk

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A0W9QbkX8Cs&t=1221s
Youtube is even a worse cite to use.

BTW what you claim as not being a reputable source is like reporting that Wikepedia is not also, it is not Rational wiki or Wikipedia what one has to look for, but the cites and sources they link to.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 04-05-2020 at 02:07 PM.
  #234  
Old 04-05-2020, 02:09 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
Thanks for sharing, that is the version of events that i have believed and is the bat shit crazy/scary ultra progressive wing that works to push any moderates out of the party.
Problem is that is using the very same unreliable narrator the right wing has been using.
  #235  
Old 04-05-2020, 02:24 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
It is interesting to me that in controversial items like this that it usually gets the ones that were misled by conservative or corporate media to shoot the messenger. Instead of them demanding better from the ones that gave them the info who were not as sincere, accurate or maintained a reasonable perspective about an issue.


https://www.huffpost.com/entry/everg...b090964295e8fc

https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-...test-evergreen

Last edited by GIGObuster; 04-05-2020 at 02:25 PM.
  #236  
Old 04-06-2020, 08:57 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shannon of View Post
It should have read "...much-maligned, lifelong..." Smiley, smiley, smiley! I want to keep hammering home the fact that Republicans, just like Democrats, have both smart AND stupid constituents. That that is something I have to emphasize is a sad statement about the prejudice that exists among many Democrats, some in my own family (who get self-conscious when we're in her car together, listening to NPR--she can't really call her own sister a conservative moron...or can she?).

You know, in my original post, I was being purposely gentle and sensitive, to amuse myself, and to get my points across, but also to try to steer the conversation toward a more polite course. As a thread it was game at first but, like a party that's fallen off the fun curve, it was starting to get ugly. Redirecting the course was none of my business, really, and certainly no one asked me to do it. Honestly, in my contrarian heart, I was hoping someone would wheel on me and reply with a vituperative smear of my intelligence and character, in keeping with the tone the thread was taking (which MikeF, was it?, started politely enough, if somewhat provocatively in the last bit of his gambit).

I'm kind of sorry that no one took the bait to crush me, what fun it would have been!, but it does shed new light on an old prejudice I confess to: that, as a group, Democrats are incorrigibly mean-spirited and spiteful. Everyone has been really nice to me here, considering I'm a Republican. Maybe it would be possible to have dinner together without one of us leaping across the table with a knife, or even getting agita.
What's wrong? Are you no longer amused?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #237  
Old 04-06-2020, 09:18 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Problem is that is using the very same unreliable narrator the right wing has been using.
Bret Weinstein is about as far left is I find comfortable and in no way would he be considered conservative (unless you interview some of the Evergreen snowflake trans protesters i guess).

The youtube videos listed are interviews with Bret and his own words so I find your comment confusing.
  #238  
Old 04-06-2020, 09:43 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
Bret Weinstein is about as far left is I find comfortable and in no way would he be considered conservative (unless you interview some of the Evergreen snowflake trans protesters i guess).

The youtube videos listed are interviews with Bret and his own words so I find your comment confusing.
That one can be an unreliable narrator has nothing to do with his or her ideology.

The cites I made come from the other academics and students involved in the issue, point being that just following one testimony and the spin the right wing put on it is not a good way to then follow with just "belief" as a way of finding the truth.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 04-06-2020 at 09:46 AM.
  #239  
Old 04-06-2020, 10:54 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
That one can be an unreliable narrator has nothing to do with his or her ideology.

The cites I made come from the other academics and students involved in the issue, point being that just following one testimony and the spin the right wing put on it is not a good way to then follow with just "belief" as a way of finding the truth.
I do understand and consider your point valid, however I would posit that Bret is one of the most credible testimonies (along with his wife who was a teacher there as well) and his recalling of the particulars and opinions on the event itself are - IMO - in no way right of center.

At the end of the day, the videos make pretty clear what happened there and it was about as ultra left, Antifa-esque and militant as it gets. That is the arm that - IMO - makes the democratic party look unappealing to moderates like me.

Just because Bret Weinstein's view is critical of the way those delusional snowflakes (and the University President) acted does not make him anywhere near right of center.
  #240  
Old 04-06-2020, 12:53 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Youtube is even a worse cite to use.

....
Yeah, linking to a youtube as a cite, except for something like a speech or news conference is worthless.
  #241  
Old 04-06-2020, 03:03 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
I do understand and consider your point valid, however I would posit that Bret is one of the most credible testimonies (along with his wife who was a teacher there as well) and his recalling of the particulars and opinions on the event itself are - IMO - in no way right of center.

At the end of the day, the videos make pretty clear what happened there and it was about as ultra left, Antifa-esque and militant as it gets. That is the arm that - IMO - makes the democratic party look unappealing to moderates like me.

Just because Bret Weinstein's view is critical of the way those delusional snowflakes (and the University President) acted does not make him anywhere near right of center.
Again, mistaken perceived threats or misunderstandings are likely in issues like this, (BTW others besides the University president were cited, you just ignored that) just remember what took place with the MAGA students confronted by the native American that were in the news recently, almost all got the reasons and facts wrong in that event, even if video was present.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 04-06-2020 at 03:05 PM.
  #242  
Old 04-07-2020, 08:37 AM
MikeF is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,810
I'm still waiting for a reply to my question in post #146. Apparently, Wrenching Spanners is not a Trump supporter and Shannon of, while quoting Quicksilver's follow up request in post #215 , dodged the question. I understand that SD is not the place to find many Trump supporters so maybe someone can link me to a rational argument that defends Trump's daily lies? Yeah, right.

Its interesting that Spanners equates Trump supporters with professional wrestling fans. I made a similar point in some post long ago. However, I don't see them as equivalent. There are one and the same. (Apologies in advance to any WWE fans who see it as the pure BS that it is.) The office of the President and the federal government are not there for entertainment purposes.
  #243  
Old 04-07-2020, 08:48 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
The office of the President and the federal government are not there for entertainment purposes.
Oh yeah? Then how do you explain the orange clown and the accompanying daily circus?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #244  
Old 04-08-2020, 07:20 AM
MikeF is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,810
To misquote P.T. Barnum - "There's a sucker born every minute."
  #245  
Old 04-08-2020, 07:23 AM
MikeF is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,810
Missed edit window - Apparently, Ivanka has created 15 million new jobs! I knew she was special but, wow!
  #246  
Old 04-08-2020, 01:45 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Salon.com doesn't seem overly certain of the Orange Commander's honesty. In another article they explain that Trump personally, and other close friends, have large stockholder stakes in the French manufacturer of hydroxychloroquine.

I remain grateful to GOP supporters who have illuminated the partisan divide by addressing such charges in this thread. Thanks in advance.
  #247  
Old 04-08-2020, 06:18 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
Missed edit window - Apparently, Ivanka has created 15 million new jobs! I knew she was special but, wow!
As Aaron Rupar tweeted,

Quote:
Aaron Rupar

@atrupar
Trump just told the completely egregious lie that Ivanka Trump "created over 15 million jobs." That would be more than twice the total number of jobs created in the country before coronavirus wrecked the economy.
https://www.indy100.com/article/trum...t-work-9455876

Amazing indeed.
  #248  
Old 04-09-2020, 02:19 PM
MikeF is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,810
And now its news that Trump only lied twice in a briefing. Extra! Extra! Read All About It! President is Down to Two Lies per Briefing! (Neither of which have anything to do with the alleged purpose of said briefing.)

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/08/polit...l-8/index.html
  #249  
Old 04-13-2020, 02:36 PM
Sdowiat is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 61

Why support Trump


First- my position so that you can see where I stand. I'm not necessarily a Trump supporter I'm a conservative... I support rules, policies and decisions that I think support conservatism, regardless of who the come from. I'f the Democrats will support personal responsibility and conservatism in their decision making I'll support THEM.

I want to focus on this part of your statement / questions Is there ANY evidence that he has ever taken responsibility or even admitted ANY failure, being wrong or shortcoming?

Answer: Your premise of the question seems to be that "If he could / would just come clean and admit that he's made mistakes and not always been right, that people such as yourself would be more understanding and accepting of him. REALLY? He knows full well that the people who dislike him are NEVER going to be more accepting and that admitting ANY faults or mistakes would only give them more ammo!

And he's right. The best thing that he can do here is just double down. Most rational people know that the media hate him and is out to get him. They will go to all kinds of ridiculous extremes ( TDS ) to oppose EVERY SINGLE THING he does... And it makes Trump look like the more levelheaded reasonable between the two of them.
  #250  
Old 04-13-2020, 02:38 PM
Sdowiat is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 61

Dems as well


Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Right, just like how most white Republicans opposed Civil Rights in the 60s, most Republicans opposed gay rights in the last couple of decades, and most Republicans oppose trans rights now. This isn't a defense, by any means.
Most Democrats ALSO apposed Gay Rights & marriage the last couple of decades.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017