Presidential election, 2016

[Eric the Green]

(11-10-2016, 11:14 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(11-10-2016, 10:41 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: mikebert, I think we need to change our model of what unrest and response to inequality looks like in the USA. We live in a crisis time of unrest, and probably the regeneracy is occurring. People expect change, but the change people expect and hope for is reactionary. The problem for us in the USA who are liberals, is that the model of unrest for the USA is not like the French or English or Russian revolutions. It's more like Nazi Germany. People in the USA respond to economic stress by seeking to go backwards. Bullshit is the appropriate description of what Americans believe. Those in America who can still think are responding by pouring out into the streets. But the regeneracy appears to be the vast movement out in the breadbasket of deplorables who voted for Trump.

He says he will unify the country around him, but I don't see it happening. Unrest is going to grow from both sides. When Trump responds by putting the activists in jail or shooting them down, what violence will this spark? Are the people blocking the pipeline a foretaste of things to come? Do the anti-deplorables have enough firepower to fight back? I don't know. But I don't see any other way to describe this other than as a 4T. The weather is going to collapse, the economy will plunge, and the country will continue to split. Trump will cause crisis after crisis until the nation breaks down. Foreign troubles will engulf us as well. The collapse will be real, even if the culture war mindset remains on the red side.

How violent it will be remains to be seen. But the 4T is upon us, and the record of 4Ts, recurring on a regular cycle, is violent. It is clear that this is not a revolution against the real elites; it is a battle between the people and two different mindsets. It will be more than a crisis in the mind, though, because total collapse will be real and all around us. And the response by the people to it will be state violence directed against the liberals. And the liberal side will lash out against the state. I don't know if the blue side is ready for secession yet, but it's the only viable answer now. The coasts should separate from the flyover breadbasket of deplorables. But I don't know if we can defend ourselves, or how much of the state we can appropriate to do it.

The idiots like Galen who believe our problem is SJWs are in power now. What they do with it will surely be called a crisis. Without social justice, no civil society can survive.

This is why anti-Fascist forces in the US and other Western countries need to ditch all of the pacifist bullshit and get armed. The Fascists are heavily armed. The Fascists have infiltrated law enforcement and the military. Such entities may not protect unarmed anti-Fascists and may not protect our institutions. An insurgency may ultimately be required. Learn how to shoot, get armed. Do it soon. Before it's too late to start that process. Hide your guns. Do not end up like the Jews in Germany did.

Again, individuals arming will not work. It must be an organized resistance, with foreign help, and military weapons.

[Anthony '58]

But my status as one of the roughly 3% who voted for Obama in 2012 (and also in 2008) and for Trump on Tuesday, was vindicated big time.

[Eric the Green]

(11-10-2016, 11:10 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: MEMO to protesters:

Who did you vote for? If it was not Clinton, or, if you did not vote, or, if you were not eligible to vote, then please go home. You have no standing. None whatever.

Thank you for your attention.

https://youtu.be/gEMWLpEf3cE?t=14m08s

You are unmutual!

[Kinser79]

(11-09-2016, 11:31 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(11-09-2016, 06:49 PM)taramarie Wrote: Someone posted this. What are your thoughts?

The Supreme Court will be dominated by conservative justices for a generation.

- Yes if Kennedy retires or Trump wins a second term, as is likely.

Same-sex marriage will likely be outlawed on a national level.

- No since it would take a constitutional amendment.

A woman's right to choose will end.

- No, not even if Roe v. Wade is overturned, which is unlikely since the Chief Justice said he'd uphold it.  If it's overturned, states will make their own choices, so abortion will be banned in some states and permitted in others.

Social Security will be cut. Or even eliminated.

- This is going to happen eventually anyway because the money will run out.  Whether it can be cut on purpose to sustainable levels depends on how much pull Ryan has - and if Trump is smart, it won't happen until after the 2020 election.

The rich will get more tax breaks.

- Billionaires already pay no taxes.  That won't change.

Medicare will be cut or repealed.

- It might be cut.  It won't be repealed.

Obamacare will be repealed.

- Outright repeal is still unlikely since it can be filibustered; however, Obamacare is collapsing financially, so it will probably be cut beyond recognition.

We are likely to head into a recession, possibly a depression.

- Doubtful in my opinion.  There may be a recession if enough illegal immigrants are deported, but that will only hurt the billionaiires as median wages will rise as deportations outpace the fall in GDP.

There will be no action on climate change.

- No substantive action at the federal level, yes.  But that was likely true anyway.

Our international relationships will be destroyed.

- No.  People deal with us because we are the most powerful nation in the world, not because they like us.  That won't change.

NATO will be crippled or disbanded.

- Unlikely.  Congress understands the importance of NATO even if Trump doesn't.

Oil drilling, fracking, and pipelines will get tax benefits and govt subsidies.

- No new subsidies will be passed.  Regulations may be relaxed.  The keystone pipeline will be approved.

We are likely to end up in a war with Iran.

- I don't think so, but it depends mostly on how irrational Iran is.

We might see the end of the free press.

- No.  Citizen's United guarantees a free press and it won't be reversed.

And, because this man believes in revenge, there may be mass incarcerations.

- No.  Trump won't pursue mass prosecutions, and federal law enforcement doesn't have the manpower anyway.

If you're not terrified, you haven't been paying attention.

- If you're not relieved, you haven't been paying attention.

I'm quoting this because it is 100% accurate.

[Kinser79]

(11-10-2016, 04:04 AM)Galen Wrote:

(11-09-2016, 07:50 PM)Danilynn Wrote: Guess what, Gen X is grown up and before 2024 we WILL TAKE the majority regardless of party affiliation in the house and senate. And we are a catalyst for change. We are ruthless and if we can't fix, we will watch it burn to re-build it.

You left out the part where Xers have little sympathy or patience for the snowflakes that are busy rioting.  Danilynn it would be best to follow the link and read the entire article since the irony will not be lost on you.  Fortunately it seems to be localized to Millies in college who believe in the SJW bullshit.  Millies in the real world tend to be saner.

In all seriousness the victory of the God-Emperor of the Shitlords will of course spell the end of the SJW bullshit fest.  The So-Called Homelanders are already in open rebellion against the late wave Millie SJW types.  Hopefully these adaptives will adopt the little patience for this tripe that it seems their Nomad parents have.

[Eric the Green]

Those who condemn social justice are condemned to suffer for the lack of it.

[playwrite]

(11-09-2016, 11:31 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(11-09-2016, 06:49 PM)taramarie Wrote: Someone posted this. What are your thoughts?

The Supreme Court will be dominated by conservative justices for a generation.

- Yes if Kennedy retires or Trump wins a second term, as is likely.

Same-sex marriage will likely be outlawed on a national level.

- No since it would take a constitutional amendment.

A woman's right to choose will end.

- No, not even if Roe v. Wade is overturned, which is unlikely since the Chief Justice said he'd uphold it.  If it's overturned, states will make their own choices, so abortion will be banned in some states and permitted in others.

Social Security will be cut. Or even eliminated.

- This is going to happen eventually anyway because the money will run out.  Whether it can be cut on purpose to sustainable levels depends on how much pull Ryan has - and if Trump is smart, it won't happen until after the 2020 election.

The rich will get more tax breaks.

- Billionaires already pay no taxes.  That won't change.

Medicare will be cut or repealed.

- It might be cut.  It won't be repealed.

Obamacare will be repealed.

- Outright repeal is still unlikely since it can be filibustered; however, Obamacare is collapsing financially, so it will probably be cut beyond recognition.

We are likely to head into a recession, possibly a depression.

- Doubtful in my opinion.  There may be a recession if enough illegal immigrants are deported, but that will only hurt the billionaiires as median wages will rise as deportations outpace the fall in GDP.

There will be no action on climate change.

- No substantive action at the federal level, yes.  But that was likely true anyway.

Our international relationships will be destroyed.

- No.  People deal with us because we are the most powerful nation in the world, not because they like us.  That won't change.

NATO will be crippled or disbanded.

- Unlikely.  Congress understands the importance of NATO even if Trump doesn't.

Oil drilling, fracking, and pipelines will get tax benefits and govt subsidies.

- No new subsidies will be passed.  Regulations may be relaxed.  The keystone pipeline will be approved.

We are likely to end up in a war with Iran.

- I don't think so, but it depends mostly on how irrational Iran is.

We might see the end of the free press.

- No.  Citizen's United guarantees a free press and it won't be reversed.

And, because this man believes in revenge, there may be mass incarcerations.

- No.  Trump won't pursue mass prosecutions, and federal law enforcement doesn't have the manpower anyway.

If you're not terrified, you haven't been paying attention.

- If you're not relieved, you haven't been paying attention.

Just those three bolded statements alone show a complete ignorance of how our monetary and economic system works.  

It this sophomoric economic belief system that keeps Trump voters doing stupid.

[pbrower2a]

Stupid voted and the con artist won. That is the simplest explanation.

[Anthony '58]

(11-10-2016, 06:50 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Stupid voted and the con artist won. That is the simplest explanation.

And cowardice lost:

If Elizabeth Warren or Andrew Cuomo had the guts to run against the Clinton Crime Family, Trump would have been toast.

[Mikebert]

I might have been hasty. I got out my spreadsheet and ran some more simulations. A 2008 critical election may still be preserved if Trump serves a single term and is replaced by a Democrat (or third party candidate) whose party then wins three in a row.  That is Obama = Nixon-Ford, Trump =Carter, New person = Reagan-Bush. Generally, critical election are followed by strings of 3, 4 5, or even 6 sequential victories by one party.  But such long strings haven't happened since 1932-52. The Reagan-Bush string was only 3 long.  Most would think since 1980 began that string 1980 would be the critical election.  I use an oscillator to identify critical elections. I have found that a plot the fraction of the preceding 30 years that had a Democratic president shows an oscillator the turning points of which occur at critical elections. 



I prepared this graph several years ago and plotted out the results of various options.  The blue dashed line shows the results of a Democratic victory in 2016 with a second term in 2020.  The purple line shows the results of  Republican victory in 2016 and loss in 2020.  The red line shows the effects of a Republican victory in 2016 and 2020. What this says is a two term Trump presidency will invalidate 2008 as a critical election because there was no clear turnaround in 2008. A Clinton victory would cleanly establish an obvious trend change in 2008 like the ones around 1968, 1932, 1896 and 1860. A single term Trump presidency followed by three Democrats would also do the trick. 

A single Trump term is not that hard to imagine.  He has toyed with running for president, never took it seriously and then decided what the hell, why not?  And he won, mission accomplished.  Now that he has won, he has proved his point (that he could do better than all the other clowns).  But the man is 70; he is not a politician, he never dedicated his life to public service.  I suspect he will figure four years is enough, he proved his point, he should show now get on with life for the few good years he has left. Will his base support Pence or Christie or whoever runs in 2020? It is entirely possible they lose, particularly if President Trump is not very popular.

[radind]

I stayed away from this site for several months to hopefully let the endless speculations die down. It seems that i was too optimistic. Perhaps things will improve by Jan 2017.

[pbrower2a]

(11-10-2016, 09:11 PM)Mikebert Wrote: I might have been hasty. I got out my spreadsheet and ran some more simulations. A 2008 critical election may still be preserved if Trump serves a single term and is replaced by a Democrat (or third party candidate) whose party then wins three in a row.  That is Obama = Nixon-Ford, Trump =Carter, New person = Reagan-Bush. Generally, critical election are followed by strings of 3, 4 5, or even 6 sequential victories by one party.  But such long strings haven't happened since 1932-52. The Reagan-Bush string was only 3 long.  Most would think since 1980 began that string 1980 would be the critical election.  I use an oscillator to identify critical elections. I have found that a plot the fraction of the preceding 30 years that had a Democratic president shows an oscillator the turning points of which occur at critical elections. 



I prepared this graph several years ago and plotted out the results of various options.  The blue dashed line shows the results of a Democratic victory in 2016 with a second term in 2020.  The purple line shows the results of  Republican victory in 2016 and loss in 2020.  The red line shows the effects of a Republican victory in 2016 and 2020. What this says is a two term Trump presidency will invalidate 2008 as a critical election because there was no clear turnaround in 2008. A Clinton victory would cleanly establish an obvious trend change in 2008 like the ones around 1968, 1932, 1896 and 1860. A single term Trump presidency followed by three Democrats would also do the trick. 

A single Trump term is not that hard to imagine.  He has toyed with running for president, never took it seriously and then decided what the hell, why not?  And he won, mission accomplished.  Now that he has won, he has proved his point (that he could do better than all the other clowns).  But the man is 70; he is not a politician, he never dedicated his life to public service.  I suspect he will figure four years is enough, he proved his point, he should show now get on with life for the few good years he has left. Will his base support Pence or Christie or whoever runs in 2020? It is entirely possible they lose, particularly if President Trump is not very popular.

All bets are off on whether we will have a free and fair election in 2020. Even if the Presidential nominee is not Donald Judas Trump, no Republican nominee is going to let something like fairness keep him from getting elected. I would not be surprised if the Trump Administration starts building some 'working resorts', most likely in the High Plains with brutal winters and infernal summers, for political dissidents. Dachau would have fit my concept of that sort of 'working resort'.

Long live the Queen!

[pbrower2a]

(11-10-2016, 09:16 PM)radind Wrote: I stayed away from this site for several months to hopefully let the endless speculations die down. It seems that i was too optimistic. Perhaps things will improve by Jan 2017.

The only things that will get better in January 2017 will be skiing conditions on the slopes.

[pbrower2a]

E-book to read at leisure about the gullible people who vote for the likes of Donald Trump:

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drb...arians.pdf

We now live in an authoritarian state, and it might become a full-blown dictatorship in January 2017.

Oh, a warning (explicit film -- beware if you are sensitive to extreme violence):





Sic semper tyrannis!

[Bob Butler 54]

A few CNN articles...

Team Trump is already filled with Washington insiders 

CNN Wrote:To shape his administration, President-elect Donald Trump is drawing squarely from the "swamp" he has pledged to drain.

Trump's transition team is staffed with long-time Washington experts and lobbyists from K Street, think tanks and political offices

.  

This leaves me of mixed mind.  As he is not experienced in politics and government, he needs professional help.  If he leans too much on their advice, though, he could end up breaking his promises to be a change maker, to make Washington behave differently.  It's too soon, though, to really know how this will play out.  If the initial trend follows though, the idea that he is a Robber Baron who will make empty promises to the base while ruling to the benefit of the Robber Baron class might well build.

I also don't know whether he will listen to the professional political establishment types any better as president than he did as a candidate.

Reports of racist graffiti, hate crimes in Trump's America

CNN Wrote:Fears of heightened bigotry and hate crimes have turned into reality for some Americans after Donald Trump's presidential win.

Racist, pro-Trump graffiti painted inside a high school. A hijab-wearing college student robbed by men talking about Trump and Muslims.

While Trump has been accused of fostering xenophobia and Islamophobia, some of his supporters have used his words as justification to carry out hateful acts.

Anti-Trump demonstrations hit second day; Portland police say protest is 'riot'

CNN Wrote:Americans protesting Donald Trump's victory in the presidential election took to the streets for a second night of demonstrations and vigils in several US cities.

Rallies heated up in Portland, Oregon, where police publicly declared a "riot" due to "extensive criminal and dangerous behavior" and are calling the protest "unlawful" in tweets on the police department's Twitter page.
"After several orders to disperse, police have used less lethal munitions to effect arrests and move the crowd," another tweet added.

Police tweeted that projectiles had been thrown at officers, and cars had been damaged.

These last two concern me more taken together than each standing alone.  Looking at history, it takes two to spiral.  Escalating rhetoric and violence gets inflamed more if opposing groups are each attempting to make a larger splash than the other.  Thus far, the Not My President (NYP?) movement and the racist deplorables aren't bashing head to head.  Will this change?  How long before announcements of upcoming demonstration will start drawing counter demonstrators?

I have been dubious about the portrayal of Trump as a fascist.  I've long disliked the whole Republicans are fascists and Democrats are communist idiocy.  Still, I didn't like Trump's flirting with racist and violent words during the campaign.  I can sort of understand why he did it as a candidate.  Throwing such words to the deplorable wing of the Republican base would be like throwing chum into shark infested waters.  It would build the excitement.  It seems to me to be one thing to do this as a candidate, though, and another to do it as president elect.  He's got to start governing, to set the tone of what he intends to advocate.

If he doesn't at least try to throw cold water on a potential spiral of violence, well, he isn't my president either.  A racist demagogue might be expected to encourage an atmosphere of hate, fear and violence.  If he doesn't try to dampen the spiral, to relieve the fears, then perhaps the fears are justified.

One must remember, though, that CNN is part of the corrupt establishment vast left wing liberal conspiracy.  They are obviously lying in an attempt to undercut the effectiveness of the glorious new US Government.  (Insert images of US flags flapping in the wind with bald eagles spiraling in the air above.)  Treason trials and censorship boards will fix the problem?  Tune to Faux News for a fairer and more balanced account of the spiral.

[pbrower2a]

(11-11-2016, 01:48 AM)taramarie Wrote: What is the answer of what to replace the current hostile environment? Here have been a few suggestions by someone that i know. A fellow millennial. I totally agree with this list.

"1. If they are complete strangers and you don't have some type of skill-set in persuading people (negotiator, educator on related topics, etc) I would not even bother. Frankly, it takes a lot of patience that I don't see in many people. If you view the person you are trying to persuade as an adversary, there is a good chance that things will go south by the end of the exchange.

The rest of these are assuming you have some type of relationship to the person, even if you are just acquaintances. I also think that they mainly work with in-person interactions. For the specific situation you gave, I think social media is a horrible mismatched medium to use. Without an actual physical body to interact with, these tools get harder to use.

2. Active listening, labeling and mirroring. This is most of what you will be doing. People have their own ideas of what the term "systemic racism" even means. Let someone explain their views/understanding. Resist the need to label them ("you are ignorant, racist, etc"). That will derail the entire conversation. The individual can't absorb information while trying to defend him/herself. You need to know what they know. Mirror back what they said, so both parties can confirm that you understood their viewpoint correctly. Once they confirm it, you can actually *start* the conversation.

3. Don't force someone to admit you are right. That's not the point of the interaction and if someone senses this, they will instinctively resist what you say.

4. Rinse and repeat. When you get to the end of step 2, you can start providing information. But even with that, the persuader has to stay even-tempered and non-judgmental. Avoid starting sentences with "Why". Why is accusatory and puts people into defense mode."

I doubt that the political environment will become any less hostile. The election of Donald Trump is the possible end of all relevance of liberalism in America except in a few states and cities. America is about to become a brutal, authoritarian, hierarchical world. Humanistic values have given way to the values of planters and Gilded-Age plutocrats. The worst parts of the American heritage have prevailed, and they will be in power for perhaps far longer than one term of a Presidency.

If America has been divided on the President largely for the melanin content in his skin, then Donald Trump is going to divide us on class and ethnicity as a cultural Apartheid comes into existence. Know well that even if you are white you have only one excuse for appreciating anything outside the moronic swill of country music, tabloid media, reality television, and fundamentalist Christianity. We are in for a very bad time.... think of the dissolution of Yugoslavia.

If you are a visible minority because of religion or ethnicity, then form your own ethnic neighborhoods (ghettos in the Jewish sense) as fortresses to defend yourselves from outsiders and to preserve what you have every right to consider superior about your heritage. If you are white and nominally Christian and you have any eccentricities that cause you to prefer Bach to country music, then use your heritage as an excuse for difference. Put up that German, Italian, Polish, or Finnish (among others) with pride. The Union Jack can do, too: British and American culture are not the same.

Do not be afraid to send your kids abroad for education. Latin-American countries have some excellent colleges and universities, and they are much less expensive than American money-churners. Countries with declining populations might offer attractive schooling. Sure, your kid might become a Finn, but that I can imagine far worse -- like becoming an American dullard or wasting one's potential. Getting away from the glass ceilings in America (which will go lower and be more rigid -- the analogy will be to  ceilings so low that one will have to bend one;s knees to negotiate one's way in life.

If you are part of a liberal and humanistic culture then you identity as an American is now shaky. But if you like your culture full of substance, then you have no cause for pride in America. That cause for pride died on November 8, 2016.

Do not try to convince the fanatics on the other side of your rightness. I talked to one Trump supporter and almost came to blows. The fellow said that America needed to vote in accordance with "God's Law", which meant voting against abortion, same-sex marriage, and scientific secularism.

I have my idea of what "God's Laws" are -- the logical dialectic, mathematical rules, and fundamental realities of physics. The basic rules of human decency (which Donald Trump and the fascist wing of American politics make a sick mockery) can be derived, but somehow they are best put into prophecy (do not murder, do not steal, do not perjure yourself, do not make fraudulent oaths, follow parental guidance until such is no longer necessary, have some loyalty to a group, do not endanger marriages) for the instruction of children who are unready to understand why those laws exist.

If you have a religious tradition, then use it to find pretexts for your difference. I consider "Do not exploit others economically" as a worthy corollary of "Thou shalt not steal". Economic exploitation is one of the greatest possible sins, and it will be the cornerstone of the AmeriKKKan economy. (I am tempted to use Black nationalist language of the 1970s... we are all ni**ers now). If you are a Christian of any kind, then know the Sermon on the Mount well, for in it Jesus offers his only economic and political wisdom. He never said, "Sell all your possessions and give them to the rich so that you can follow Me". In Jesus' time the rich were heirs and criminals who had done nothing to earn respect. We may be back there very soon.

Consider starting a small business. Yes it is hard -- but so will be life as a farm or factory laborer, a miner or logger, or domestic servant. Such middle-class jobs as there are will increasingly go to the well-connected who toe the political line beginning with membership in the pro-Trump equivalents of Hitlerjugend, Balilla, or Young Pioneers. The most fanatically devoted will get the chances to attend diploma mills (and American colleges and universities will become those because politics will matter more than creativity and curiosity) where they get to learn to be teachers of the ideological junk or brutal cops. Small businesses demand that the owner and likely his family each work 70 to 80 hours a week -- but so will industrial work. The post-democratic America wil have plenty of work and demand that it be done; it will no longer make pay relate in any way to productivity. Any surplus of productivity will go to the rapacious Master Class devoid of any human decency. 70 to 80 hours a week in a restaurant that your family owns with the privilege of keeping most of the profits within the family is surely better than working 70 to 80 hours for near-starvation pay.

Remember -- it is back to the plantation of the Jim Crow era and the sweatshop of Gilded-Age early capitalism. Count on the Right making America look like a Marxist stereotype of capitalism.

Above all, recognize who your real Savior might be.

KARL MARX

[radind]

There are many who just don't agree with the Obama/Clinton policies. 
The speculation about racial motives is misguided and counterproductive to any real dialogue.

[playwrite]

(11-11-2016, 10:30 AM)radind Wrote: There are many who just don't agree with the Obama/Clinton polices. 
The speculation about racial motives is misguided and counterproductive to any real dialogue. 

Reports of racist graffiti, hate crimes post-election

Quote:'Trump!' written on Muslim prayer room door in NYC

Graffiti in high school: 'Trump,' 'Whites only,' 'White America'

San Diego State University president calls incident 'hate crime'

Middle school students: 'Build the wall!'


Graffiti: Neither black lives nor black votes matter

Graffiti about 'safe space' at Louisiana university

Nazi-themed graffiti in Philadelphia

Black doll hung from curtain rod at college

'Deportation' letters handed out at school

What world are you living in, Radind???
There's a lot of scared people that would sure like to join you.
Unless, of course, your world is call "ignorance is bliss"

[radind]

(11-11-2016, 11:42 AM)playwrite Wrote:

(11-11-2016, 10:30 AM)radind Wrote: There are many who just don't agree with the Obama/Clinton polices. 
The speculation about racial motives is misguided and counterproductive to any real dialogue. 

Reports of racist graffiti, hate crimes post-election

Quote:'Trump!' written on Muslim prayer room door in NYC

Graffiti in high school: 'Trump,' 'Whites only,' 'White America'

San Diego State University president calls incident 'hate crime'

Middle school students: 'Build the wall!'


Graffiti: Neither black lives nor black votes matter

Graffiti about 'safe space' at Louisiana university

Nazi-themed graffiti in Philadelphia

Black doll hung from curtain rod at college

'Deportation' letters handed out at school

What world are you living in, Radind???
There's a lot of scared people that would sure like to join you.
Unless, of course, your world is call "ignorance is bliss"

I am living in the real world. There are too many projections about large groups of people. There are nut cases on both sides ( recall the acts of violence at Trump rallies and the current street violence).
There is a problem when acts by a few are attributed to the group at large ( regardless of which side is considered).
I try to look at the data and not make too many assumptions and speculations.

Many people did not like Obama's policies , but that had nothing to do with race.
Unfortunately we live in a country divided by totally different worldviews and I don't see a solution. It would help to have tolerance on both(all) sides.

[radind]

(11-11-2016, 02:24 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(11-11-2016, 02:20 PM)radind Wrote:

(11-11-2016, 11:42 AM)playwrite Wrote:

(11-11-2016, 10:30 AM)radind Wrote: There are many who just don't agree with the Obama/Clinton polices. 
The speculation about racial motives is misguided and counterproductive to any real dialogue. 

Reports of racist graffiti, hate crimes post-election

Quote:'Trump!' written on Muslim prayer room door in NYC

Graffiti in high school: 'Trump,' 'Whites only,' 'White America'

San Diego State University president calls incident 'hate crime'

Middle school students: 'Build the wall!'


Graffiti: Neither black lives nor black votes matter

Graffiti about 'safe space' at Louisiana university

Nazi-themed graffiti in Philadelphia

Black doll hung from curtain rod at college

'Deportation' letters handed out at school

What world are you living in, Radind???
There's a lot of scared people that would sure like to join you.
Unless, of course, your world is call "ignorance is bliss"

I am living in the real world. There are too many projections about large groups of people. There are nut cases on both sides ( recall the acts of violence at Trump rallies and the current street violence).
There is a problem when acts by a few are attributed to the group at large ( regardless of which side is considered).
I try to look at the data and not make too many assumptions and speculations.

Many people did not like Obama's policies , but that had nothing to do with race.
Unfortunately we live in a country divided by totally different worldviews and I don't see a solution. It would help to have tolerance on both(all) sides.

Self reflection of damaging behaviour that helps with dividing people and the nation as a whole. Correcting it. Listen more and try to understand these people and find a solution together. But first and foremost how we converse with each other is number one. Shoot down labels need to stop.

You are correct. It probably helps one's perspective to be a citizen of another country. Keep the dialogue flowing.