Not nearly as strong as the leftist glue of smug self righteousness and perpetual outrage.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a “leftist”
Have you looked at some of the numbers when it comes to what our government is doing? How much we spend on healthcare, the war on drugs, and what we are getting in return?
If so: why the hell are you NOT outraged?
This is a non-responsive cite. Let me try to explain. Your thesis is that “the sheer joy of seeing one’s opponents (or those perceived as social rivals) have pain and suffering [is] the “glue” that unites Trump and his supporters”, right? My post that you quoted laid out my reasons for supporting conservative principles and candidates, and in the general election of 2016 President Trump was the more conservative of the two major-party candidates. I want to see those policies adopted. That’s the “glue”. That it upsets liberals has very little to do with it (I called it an “ancillary” benefit, as in secondary / not the primary purpose).
I’ve made the observation before that Trump is following the basic pattern of a con game, like a pigeon drop. The way the con works is you convince the target that he’s in on the con and the two of you together are going to take money from somebody else. But the real target is you and the con man is going to take the money which you will supply for the supposed con. The point is that the target knows he’s working with a con man and knows that a crime is occurring. He just doesn’t understand what his role is.
That’s the relationship between Trump and his supporters. The supporters think they’re working with Trump to beat the liberals. They know that the con is going on so they are not dismayed by reports of how Trump is lying. They’ll deny it publicly to defend Trump but they actually support his lying - because they think he’s doing it on their behalf.
But the reality is Trump is conning them. Trump doesn’t give a damn about his supporters or their interests. The only thing he cares about is himself and his interests. He’s lying to them to get their votes.
And thereby you prove my point. Everything I said was 100% correct, and yet you find it so very wrong.
Trump’s gotten in two conservative supreme court noms pushed through in a row. One of which any other pol would have folded on like a cheap suit the second the first allegation came out. Supreme court noms were a single issue many republicans held their nose to vote for Trump over, and he has delivered. And if that makes you upset, I can guarantee you that conversely pleases others to just as high a degree.
I have no doubt that Trump is not a “real conservative”. I have no doubt that he is self-serving. But he has run conservative policies and at the end of the day that’s what his “conned constituents” really care about.
Regarding West Virginia, Don Blankenship comes to mind. For those who don’t remember, Blankenship was the chairman and CEO of the mining company who owned the Upper Big Branch coal mine in WV which had an explosion in 2010 that killed 29 miners. He was convicted of conspiring to violate mine safety standards and served a year in federal prison. He then went on to run in this year’s Republican senate primary and barely lost. I don’t know what the solution is to reduce the influence people like him have on rural communities, but guys like Blankenship are a big part of the problem.
You can be 100% correct and still be full of hate. For example: when a woman accuses someone of rape, your first kneejerk response could be to shout, “BUT WAIT! This guy could be innocent! It’s entirely possible that no one tried to rape her!”
Sometimes I wonder while I still hang around this place. Then I read a post like this, and then I remember why. It’s a great post which put a lot of thoughts I had into clarity, thank you for sharing it with us.
I could easily name you 5 self-styled liberals here at this board who excel at hating. Gun owners and gun rights activists are particular targets of their hatred. I’ll leave it at that since this isn’t The Pit and I am not going to derail the thread. If that doesn’t suit you, take it up with the concierge.
Gun owners and gun rights activists are responsible for more than 30,000 deaths a year. What did gays do to earn the disdain that the right has for them?
Sorry, dude; we took the precaution of setting the goalposts in concrete. Please give up your futile attempt to move them before you injure yourself.
Why is it that people only refuse to “derail” the thread when called to provide cites to back up their shit, when they obviously didn’t worry about derailing the thread with the completely irrelevant one-liner in the first place?
I am among very very many of the silent majority who voted for Trump in 2016. We, or perhaps I should say I (because I don’t want to speak for us), expected defeat that November night, because of all the predictions for Clinton. But then as the results came in I realized that there are very many of us, and while Trump isn’t one to be very proud of being behind (the buffoon is often un-Presidential; conduct unbecoming we called it in the military), he’s basically a blow-hard who spouts some stupid shit but I seriously doubt he’s a racist pig.
But there are many of us, and we are decent people. We are minorities and immigrants. I am a minority and an immigrant. We are rich and we are poor. We couldn’t talk openly about our support of Trump because the liberals would reply so strongly emotionally, and not talk objectively about the issues. So we kept quiet until we voted, and then we spoke with our votes.
I like being a minority because I can talk to other people and they often presume I’m anti-Trump because of that. But often I meet immigrants who are happy with what Trump is doing; and I try very hard to not steer the discussion, I try to find out where they come from, what their stances and positions are. I think I’m pretty good at hiding my biases when I do this. You’d be amazed at how many I’ve run into, it’s a surprising finding (usually it’s in an Uber and they’re the driver, scrambling to make a living).
I learned this in college when I was voted hall president in my dorm. I could talk to the minority students because they felt “safe” talking to another minority and I wasn’t a white person (which is a problem that they feel this way, IMHO), and I could talk to the white students because I’m comfortable doing so, and I initiate polite conversations. I engage people, from all walks of life.
You will often find leftists being more the hate mongers than the rightists. Rightists do stupid stuff also, I’m not saying they don’t, but the ugliness displayed among the leftists and many here on this board display staggering amounts of ignorance. I see it here so many times, in so many threads. If we are fighting ignorance then the SDMB is a target rich environment. We’ll be at it for a long time.
You guys are cry babies. You let your buttons be pushed by the liberal media, and they play you guys like puppets. You buy their shit, and they continue to sell their shit because it sells to you.
Trump’s crotch grabbing? Sure, I get it. Locker room kind of talk, but from a very rich adult man who should know better. Inappropriate as all hell? Certainly. Young males would talk that way more when they were in high school and perhaps during college days. But most of us grow up. I’m sure I’ve said similar kinds of things (though I’ve never grabbed, nor even hinted at it). I likely said some pretty vulgar things during my Marine Corps days, amongst my Marine Corps brethren and not intended to be captured on videotape. Fortunately for me I don’t think any of it ever was.
But when you’re rich and growing up, you start living by your own set of rules and you don’t have to blend in and try to be accepted like many of us common folks do – your money and status ‘validate’, to some degree, your ugly behavior. Look at the Clintons. Hillary has treated The Help like scum, lower than dirt. This isn’t just on the right or left, it’s from both sides and there are rich and powerful nice people, and there are rich and powerful assholes. Now, are more of the rich and powerful assholes conservative, or are they liberal? Who knows? I don’t, nor do I presume to. But the point is it’s more a function of wealth and power than, I think, political leanings.
Power corrupts. And people are human; it’s part of the human condition.
It’s like young kids in athletics – when I coached baseball and soccer, we told the kids to share, be a team, play together. But as the kids got older and there were budding superstars on a team, I could see that they played by different rules, and the behavior accepted from them would not be accepted from Joe Common Teammate. I wasn’t coaching then, but it was clear that
How do you think a Barry Bonds, who is the greatest baseball player I have seen so far in my lifetime, gets to be a standoffish prima donna? Because he lives by different rules. It wasn’t all of a sudden, it started little by little, when he was in youth baseball (Bullitt’s theory, based on my years of experience – I certainly wasn’t there).
Trump and the Clintons live by different rules. They can be bonafide jerks and assholes, and they have been, at times. But Trump is not a seasoned politician – he hasn’t learned, since his early 20s, to be careful how he says things for fear of alienating a group of people. Like the Clintons have for the most part. Professional politicians have learned to be more gentle in their language, because if they haven’t then they often do not get voted in because they do not appeal to enough people.
I admire people who are rich and powerful and strong leaders, in whatever walks of life (and “rich” doesn’t always mean monetary wealth), who are also humble, kind, and generous. Who aren’t dicks. Who aren’t assholes. I’m fortunate to belong to a church with several like that in my congregation.
Trump is the one I wanted leading this country. And so far I’m happy, for the most part, with what he’s doing. Perfect? No, far from it. Thin-skinned and junior high-ish in his behavior? Certainly, and far too often. Again, conduct unbecoming. You’re the President, for criminy’s sake. Act like one. Be gracious. Be kind. Be polite. Don’t try to be divisive, which is often the result of his behaviors and antics.
What will happen in 2020? I hope he gets re-elected, but we shall see.
And, I’m not here to argue for or against Serwar’s thesis.
Let’s see if I got this straight. The charge for which you requested a cite was that some right-wing Dopers append a celebration of liberal discomfort to whatever other reason they may think they have. In response I cited HurricaneDitka’s referring to the “benefit” of “poking [liberals] in the eye.” But this is “non-responsive” because the enjoyment of eye-poking was appended to some other argument; it was just a “secondary purpose”, an “ancillary benefit.”
Is English your first language?
That is the way of law justice in the US (and the UK). Not only must the charge be laid but the charge must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. I have long championed presumption of innocence here. Your way is the way of the lynch mob.
A rather strange denouement given your first response in the thread.
Let me ask a question please. Did you watch Kavanaugh’s testimony at the Senate hearing? What was your reaction?
I’m not asking what you read about the testimony. I’m not asking if you watched excerpts on FoxNews. I’m not inviting a discussion of my question’s relevance. I’m just asking if you watched a significant amount of the actual unedited testimony of Brett Kavanuagh on Sept. 27. Thanks in advance.
ETA: I’ve asked the same question of Quartz in another thread, but he hasn’t deigned to answer. Quartz? Can you hear me?
Did… did you read my post? I am genuinely curious. Are you really incapable of comprehending that THIS IS NOT A LEGAL CASE? Kavanaugh wasn’t charged with anything, nor will he BE? The hearing has nothing to do with criminal charges? Therefore “beyond all reasonable doubt” DOES NOT APPLY? Because KAVANAUGH WAS NOT ON TRIAL? This. Was. A. Job. Interview. Not. A. Criminal. Court. Case. If any legal standard applies, it would be “the preponderance of evidence” not “beyond all reasonable doubt”.
Also. I am not a judge. I am not a jury. I am not an executioner. I can say that Kavanaugh is a rapist or OJ is a murderer. Kavanaugh isn’t a convicted rapist and OJ isn’t a convicted murderer but I am not the legal system. Or do I have to let OJ babysit my kids because he wasn’t convicted, so I’m not allowed to think bad things about him?
I watched on Thursday. Blasey-Ford, and Kavanaugh both. I did not listen to the pundits give their impressions of what was being said. I listened to the testimonies and to the questions and answers. I thought BK’s initial letter that he read was a powerful statement and I really liked it. But his handling of the questions was not very good. Not very respectful towards the Senators. And I watched on both CNN and on Fox, but not the pundits.
In the end I am glad he was confirmed.
What did you think of Ford’s testimony? Did you find her credible? And how did you reconcile whatever you felt about her testimony with your opinion of Kavanaugh?
I’m not asking to judge - if you tell me that you did not find her credible in the least, I will accept that that is your view on the matter and leave it at that. I am just curious.