This election cycle, I don’t think vilifying people for their political beliefs is what’s going on. Debating Trump’s credentials as the mantel of the social conservative agenda is legitimate. Clinton’s hawkish foreign policy decisions and recent TPP change of heart is well worth discussing regardless of any voters past voting history.
Our current America: The Reality Show extravaganza has no time for that at all.
First you need to be aware that it is not just liberals the ones that are worried about it. Even conservative leaning scientists already figured out that this issue should not had been politicized, but powerful interest groups managed to do so.
Thinking that we will have time to adapt does grossly ignore the cost of that adaptation and ignores also that many other species on earth will not have time to do so.
Now why is it that not much of this has been put on heavy rotation? When you consider that groups like the Mobil Corporation fund PBS, and NOVA depends a lot on the Koch brothers the reason why it’s not should be more obvious than the less notice it gets in the corporate media.
[QUOTE=glowacks;19719977
That said, I don’t know a ton about the issue. .[/QUOTE]
Then why would you not try to find out who does know a ton about the issue? Why would you listen to anyone else who doesn’t?
I think it depends on what you mean by villianizing?
Is calling out racism, xenophobia, homophobia, sexism villianizing?
I agree there is no need to make it personal, or an excuse to attack another. But now is not the time for good people to hold their tongue lest they offend.
Racism, xenophobia, homophobia and sexism all deserve to be called out. It’s the 21st century, it’s time for zero tolerance for some things.
If you want to be a deplorable, or a hateful Christian, it’s your right, have at it. But do not expect the rest of us to watch quietly and not call you out for it. Expect pushback. Yes, it should be respectful, but it should never, ever be silenced, in my opinion!
Some opinions that pass for “political” are in no way political. There is nothing political about religious bigotry, for example. It’s just fear and hate. Calling such a thing political is only a means to remove seriousness from it. “It’s just my political belief, I’m entitled to it.” It is not political, it is greater than that, it is dehumanizing, and those who believe it ARE villians.
Put another way, do those things constitute a ‘political opinion’? I think it’s on the public at large to ask that, Republicans not voting for Trump need to answer. ‘Will you vote for Trump?’, is not as important as, ‘The majority of your party IS voting for Trump, why are they wrong?’.
If people want to stop being cast as villains, they need stop acting like villains and defending villains.
I am a moderate. If I lived in Europe I’m not sure whether I’d be aligned with a left-of-center party or a right-of-center party. I like to think I’d be one to “bridge the gap” and propose centrist compromises.
But the U.S. is not Europe. We have one party that pursues centrist policies and one whose only overriding doctrine is bat-shit insanity. It’s silly to pretend that those who vote Republican have the slightest clue, or that their opinions are based on anything but ignorance and vileness. That would be like a a 2nd-grade teacher who, faced with an outlier like “2+2=3,” declares “Well, let’s respect Billy, maybe he’s half-right. Let’s say 2+2 = 3.5.”
No.
I don’t have a problem for people who vote republican in general. I have partisan streaks, and I sometimes am rude but I try to be respectful. However Trump is a whole new animal.
As far as I’m concerned, the majority of people who support Trump can be divided into two camps.
Those too clueless, ill informed, or plain dumb to realize how destructive and unqualified he is.
Those who realize his is destructive, unqualified, dangerous, etc but are so blinded by partisanship that they will support him anyway.
I never felt that way about Romney, McCain or Bush. I don’t feel that way about 99% of republican senators, governors or representatives. I don’t think most people who supported Kasich, Cruz, Jeb, etc. were either stupid or amoral. I disagree with the policies of Romney or Kasich, or thousands of other GOP politicians. But I did not think they were dangerous and deeply unqualified the way Trump is. I disagree with most GOP politicians, and I disagree with most GOP voters on the issues. But before Trump, I never questioned their morality or intelligence the way I do now.
But I do feel that way about Trump and his supporters. This is a whole new political animal. Trump is a mentally unstable petty dictator who only cares about feeding his own ego. The idea that an informed, moral person could support him is beyond me. That doesn’t mean you have to support Clinton, but Trump has given off too many red flags too fast.
Even if Clinton wins (and she probably will) the fact that 50 million people think Trump is qualified to be president says a lot of bad things about our country. It says a lot of adults are ignorant or amoral. In my view, most Trump supporters are either extremely dumb and ignorant, or they are totally amoral and will side with whoever has an R next to their name. This election will really change how democrats view republicans, because only about 20% of normal republican voters are going to choose to sit this one out or vote third party. The other 80% will fall in line. If a moral, competent republican were picked to be the presidential candidate, he would probably garner 60-65 million votes. Trump will probably garner 45-55 million. I have a respect for those 10-20 million republicans who choose not to vote for Trump. But not for the rest.
The idea that the OP is proposing, no matter how dangerous or destructive a politician is we should all try to get along, is wrong. Getting along is nice and all, but not when getting along means a deeply ignorant narcissist who has a track record of targeting his enemies by any means necessary is running for president.
As Goldwater said, “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue”
There are 55 million registered Republicans in the country. Many of them hold college degrees; some of them doctorates. Many of them have been involved in academics or careers pertaining to business, political science, technology, aerospace, engineering, economics, history, etc. Some have worked in the State Department. Some have served in the military. Some work in health care. Some work in tech start-ups. Some work in education. Some work in agriculture. Some have traveled extensively abroad. The elderly generation of Republicans has lived through many different presidential administrations. Some are very low-income, some are very high-income. Some live in cities, some live in rural areas.
With all due respect, when you say that Republicans don’t have the “slightest clue,” or that their opinions aren’t based off of anything but ignorance…maybe the ignorant one is you. Certainly some or even many are ignorant, but plenty are not. The one making broad generalizations here, is you. The one painting with a broad brush, is you.
It is entirely possible. Imagine if a pro-lifer says, “Pro-choicers believe that a fetus does not qualify for personhood rights, or, even if the fetus does, that the mother’s interests override the fetuses,'” vs. a pro-lifer who says, “Pro-choicers are baby killers.”
In both instances, the pro-lifer is saying what he or she considers to be true and accurate, but the way it is portrayed comes across very differently.
You are supposed to promote the false equivalency that is famous among low information voters that ‘both parties are equally bad’.
Sure Trump is being sued for raping a 13 year old girl and has shown a total lack of the emotional and mental qualities necessary to be president, but Hillary deleted some emails. Ergo, to low information voters, both are equally bad.
Sorry, but ever since Ben Carson appeared it is clear that being bright in one matter does not guarantee that on a vast number of other important issues a good number of them will not have a clue.
Got it. I guess I should say some nice things about them, then. The Trump supporters who plotted the terrorist bombing in Kansas sure do seem enthusiastic; and the Republican legislators who push through laws intended to prevent black people from voting sure are hard working in their subversion of democracy.
**Stop villainizing people whose political opinions differ from yours.
**No.
Many Americans pay little attention to politics; party alignment for them may be based on accident or vague memory. I myself was aligned with moderate Republicans in my early adulthood. I hardly paid attention to partisan politics until the excesses of Gingrichism.
But in this election, many Americans* including a large majority of Republicans* will vote for Donald Trump. Please tell us what you think of these Trump voters, Velocity. Are they well informed, with or without doctorates? Should their opinions on political matters be given equal weight as that of citizens who do have a clue?
ETA: A sincere “hats off” to all Republicans who vote for Hillary. But those who do vote for Trump are worthy only of contempt, whether they “have doctorates” or not. Prattling a list of a dozen different occupations these vile or misinformed creatures have doesn’t change that.
Except that there comes a point where extremism undermines and even destroys the liberty it is supposed to be defending, and immoderation in the pursuit of justice ends up being thoroughly unjust.
It all depends on how you define “liberty”, "justice, “extremism” and “moderation” - and that question remains despite any resounding sound-bite (don’t forget - it usually takes a degree of hollowness to create a resonance).
I think Trump’s base is right wing authoritarians.
Certain articles have found authoritarianism is a strong predictor of support for Trump:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533
However there was research questioning if authoritarianism was specific among Trump supporters. However, even that study found authoritarianism was high among Republican voters and low among Democratic voters. So irrelevant of whether the above info is true, authoritarianism is a major trait among modern republican voters.
So you’re probably why it matters. It matters because right wing authoritarians (RWAs) generally are not compatible with liberal democracy. Liberal democracy is founded on concepts like minority rights, a working government, representative government, etc.
Deep down, RWA types do not share these values. They really don’t even care for democracy, as can be seen with how hard the modern GOP is trying to suppress the vote of anyone who disagrees with them (voter ID laws, abolishing early voting, making voter registration harder, etc) as well as how some of them are promoting the idea that the only reason they lose an election is due to fraud. RWA personality types are more supportive of a draconian police force (just so long as they target people the RWAs consider themselves superior to, ie minorities), they suppress the votes of those they do not agree with, they blindly support war, etc.
These are people whom a significant minority think terrorism and violence is an acceptable response if they do not get their way at the ballot box. Right wing militias are becoming a serious problem.
These people need to be demonized. RWA types are the kinds of people who give birth to the KKK, who suppress minority rights, who help military juntas and fascists come to power.
I have no problem with moderate republicans like Kasich or his supporters, and I have no problem with libertarian republicans. But RWA types can pose a major threat to democracy and order if they are allowed to get out of hand. Terrorism, anti-democracy activities, oppression of women and minorities, paramilitary groups, brutal policing, etc. are all traits that RWA types tend to support.
People talk about the threat that Islamic Jihadists pose, but those people are arguably just the RWAs of their culture. In the US, the RWA types are Trump supporters, abortion clinic bombers, militia members, people who call for ‘second amendment remedies’ when democracy doesn’t give them the results they want, etc.
Preach, General Clark! (yeah, I know, you’re not him)
We can disagree about taxes or budget priorities without being disagreeable. But you can’t take offense when you back a candidate who is an openly racist, bigoted, xenophobic, ignorant, bombastic, warmongering, misogynist sexual predator and are vilified for it. You can be an asshole without supporting Donald Trump, but you can’t support Trump without being an asshole.