Calling them “twuths” also helps differentiate them from real truths. We’re rejecting their attempt to rebrand their garbage. Calling their platform “Truth” was a deliberate attempt to confuse the public.
For what its worth, she also hired a GA RICO expert. RICO expert hired by prosecutor investigating Trump call | AP News
I’ve heard him described as THE Georgia RICO expert. So it’s not like the Fulton County DA office staff are all just learning this as they go.
The allegations that Willis was in an inappropriate relationship with Nathan Wade … will be heard by a Judge:
And so it goes…
[ETA: story from two days ago. Did I miss that one, here? The hurrier I go, the behinder I get…]
And “twuth” is also assonant with “tweet”.
This is a very serious problem of significant scale.
The MAGAtypes support Individual-ONE for a number of reasons, but we only see the shit on the surface. Racism, anti-woke, freedom to pollute the public discourse, basically just the right to be a jerk. But there are underlying issues that are being ignored because of the ostentatious perversity of the clown show (which was not started by FF von Clownstick, he just joined in and escalated).
My good friend “Arven” voted for Individual-ONE in '16 (but not '20). Arven is a very intelligent guy and was surprised by what a clusterdump he became in the WH. And he voted that way in a very solid blue state, so I think he knew it was a safe way to vote. I have to assume that he had strong objections to Ms Clinton, on some principle or other.
My point, that I am not making very well, is that a fair slice of Individual-ONE voters ticked that box because they are dissatisfied or angry with the way establisment politicians are managing the country. And the clown show of casting a smoke pall over the issues that concern them.
Belittling those people does us no favors. We seek to defeat fascism and anarcho-capitalism, but that should not be the sole end. Failing to engage with MAGAtypes on the basic issues that concern them because they are stupid simply allows those issues to ferment and get worse.
The thing is, while there were probably a number of voters like your friend – taken in by a consummate con-artist in 2016 but, having learned their mistake, did not vote for him a second time in 2020 – more people did vote for Trump in the second election than in the first. Those left today supporting him have less of an excuse than “Arven” had, not even counting 1/6.
Yep. Belittling them is what they deserve. They’re not going to change. Best to use them as an example of How Not To Be An American.
I think this is actually very true. I had read somewhere that a lot of Trump’s supporters had the following traits in common.
- Financial difficulties (business failing, bankruptcy, etc., etc.)
- Trouble with the government (non-criminal, dealing with bureauacracy, regulations, etc.,etc.)
When Trump was running in 2016, I remember scoffing at the idea of anyone who said the would have supported Bernie Sanders get upset and vote for Trump instead. Ashli Babbitt of all people had voted for Obama in previous elections. I do believe a big part of Trump’s initial appeal was the idea that he’d “drain the swamp.” i.e. Burn it all to the ground.
The mind boggles. We don’t want to belittle them, you say, yet there is no way to persuade them that Trump is not the Messiah. I think sadly we come to the realization that a third of the population is willingly a part of a populist cult and there is no solution. Unless Individual 1 dies some day. Even then probably.
If you honestly believe belittling is an effective strategy for convincing people to change their minds, well, that makes me sad.
While true, generally voter turnout was much higher. Many Dem & ind voters stayed home. That was due to heavy negative campaigning vs Hillary. That is one of three factors that cost Clinton the election.
2016- trump 62M Clinton 65M
2020- trump 74M, Biden 81M. trump picked up 12M, but the dems picked up 16M. So nearly 30M more people voted.
But the fact remains that, despite four years of knowing what Trump is all about, they voted for him anyway.
Moderating:
@eschereal, @DesertDog, @Johnny_L.A, @Odesio, @Biffster, @DrDeth:
You’re far off topic with your most recent posts. While I can understand your wish to discuss why Trump voters vote for Trump, this is not the thread for it. Please start a different thread if you wish to continue this conversation.
I think you kind of missed the point of what I actually wrote. I was observing the sad fact that a third of the American population is unpersuadable, whether you belittle them or not. Logic certainly isn’t going to do it. 33% would rather blindly follow a man facing 91 felony counts than consider a better alternative.
ETA: just saw the mod note. But if somebody is supposed to talk only about Georgia, it is difficult when so many of Trump’s… errors in judgment… are interrelated.
So Trump has been indicted in Georgia for what appears to be a degree of attempted election tampering, where he only needed roughly another 12,000 votes. Thing I don’t get is, wasn’t he asking for enough votes to TIE the competition, not surpass it? Strange ask in any event.
No. Just going on memory here, but Trump asked Raffensberger to find 11,780 votes, “which is one more than we have.” So he was looking to win in Georgia by one vote, not tie.
Alliterant.
That sounds right. But given the nature of recounts and counting errors, wasn’t Trump cutting it kind of close in his request?
I guess he was satisfied with throwing a wrench into the works so the election results stayed in a limbo of undefinition for long enough
^
This is my guess, as well. Perhaps one reason he didn’t consider what he was doing was violating the letter of the law. That is, it isn’t as if he really wanted to overturn the outcome of the Georgia election, he just wanted to generate enough confusion to keep the Electors’ votes from being counted on Jan 6. In a sense, having the total only one vote in Trump’s favor would be a better result, as it would be likely with that result, he could get interest from both Dems and Reps in taking a closer look.
Not that it isn’t obvious that Trump was trying to violate Georgia law (and Federal laws) with these shenanigans. The real damage that those who entertain the idea that Trump had any legitimate reasons for doing any of these things is that what ever works in the legal system to excuse Trump will be used heavily the next time. Regardless of how this turns our for Trump, there will be a next time.