I kind of had it with MM, felt like he was content for a while preaching to the converted - taking the easy bucks. Maybe it was me.
Anyway, he really IDs my perspective in these four Youtube minutes - almost refreshing to listen to someone trying to avoid stereotypes, cliches and being ‘liberally’ judgemental.
I don’t agree he actually says he will actually vote for Trump (though he has said since Brexit he thinks Trump will win):
Moore doesn’t mention the one little problem with throwing ‘a human Molotov cocktail into the system that stole their lives from them:’ Trump will destroy not only the system but the world.
Hope you can live with that if you put him into office. Enjoy the US economic downfall caused by his isolationism and empty threats to the rest of the world.
A giant “FUCK YOU” to the system doesn’t solve any problems.
I know because I tried it at work and now I’m unemployed and drink a lot.
Hey, but Putin and Kim Jong Un likes him. What could possibly go wrong?
I doubt that’ll happen.
Wow. And Michael Moore demonstrates something commonly lacking. Nuanced thinking.
Can you summarize what he said about Trump supporters that you think nails it?
The title of the youtube video is false. On the right side, someone has (illegally) uploaded the full movie. In the last ten minutes or so, Moore implores people to vote for Hillary, even if - especially if - they hate her.
Everything he said in te four minutes is sharper and more incisive than the last six months on this message board.
Look on the bright side, if you’re lucky you might even get a democracy worth the name out of this because whatever this is, is an embarrassment to the idea.
I don’t see a smiley-face; is it possible you don’t know Moore is a strong supporter of Hillary and hates Trump?
In the excerpt, Trump empathizes with Ohioans. Rage can make voters behave irrationally. He goes on to plead with voters to sober up and use their brains.
I think you need to rearrange the words here. I’m having a tough time finding your point.
He does give a good explanation for some Trump supporters: he explains their motivations, which are legitimate.
But for this particular (and maybe not even majority) portion of Trump supporters, it doesn’t excuse them from the civic laziness which characterizes the vast majority of all voters, of whatever type.
Most people don’t know shit about the candidates, and most people don’t know shit about how governance works. They think voting for Trump is going to make their situation better? They’ve been watching too much reality TV. If you can’t see that Trump is a total bullshitter–and if you think Trump is really a Molotov cocktail thrown at the system–then you deserve whatever your civic laziness brings upon you.
Trump is a pretend Molotov cocktail, just like his TV show is a world of make-believe.
You can’t just sit on your ass watching TV all the time and then expect one bullshitting guy to come along a make everything better.
It’s been interesting over the last year or so seeing fellow liberals trying to explain Trump’s rise and appeal to other liberals. It’s fairly straightforward, unless maybe you live in an area dominated by the blue tribe or if you’ve never read or heard anything from a conservative POV. You would also need to be slightly ignorant of recent political trends, like the growing backlash against the Republican establishment in the last decade. Like the Tea Party.
Seeing such bewilderment also reminds me of the asymmetric ideological Turing test hypothesis, which says that, for whatever reason (maybe due to uneven media representation), conservatives can predict, identify, and accurately mimic liberal positions, but liberals can’t do the same for conservatives. I don’t believe it in general, but sometimes I wonder.
Right. That tactic, which is much more wise than hysterically calling anyone and everyone who disagrees with any wacky “progressive” idea a racist, might actually change minds.
I dunno. I read somewhere that it’s better to villainize the opposition. I can’t remember exactly where, but I’ll link to it once I do.
Well, maybe you’re right. Shame we can’t set up a control Earth and test this.
I don’t think that’s quite right; from the pov of someone who feels disenfranchised/unrepresented, a vote for the establishment/Goldman Sachs candidate is to spite themselves.
The choice they feel they have is to not vote or vote Trump.
Look, these people are desperate, they feel at this point they literally have nothing to lose. And who can argue against that with the gov $13 trillion in debt and the middle class evaporating - wtf happened?
Their side got into power, that’s what happened. And they are too blind to see and acknowledge that fact.
… is where I disengage, and repeat the comment about the last six months on this board.
John Mace wrote: “…hysterically calling anyone and everyone who disagrees with any wacky “progressive” idea a racist…”
Except no one actually does that. Let’s use a little logic here. It seems pretty logical that actual racists, whom no one denies the existence of, would oppose anything coming from the first black president. How, then, can it be inaccurate to say that racism is a component of opposition to the President’s policies?