Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What The Hell Is Wrong With Donald Trump Supporters?
#1
Well they finally are not holding back any punches at repubs who are voting for Trump. Never mind the latter part of the video. It isjust insult throwing. I am posting for the earlier part and I am interested in thoughts regarding it. Is he a treasonous potential president? Are people so blind that he could literally shoot someone in broad daylight and people would still vote for him because you know....2nd amendment and all that. It is not like people have not supported someone shooting an innocent before so he is not wrong. But it sure as hell tells me there is something wrong with ole big bro America. Anyway here is the link and give me your thoughts.



1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#2
They're Fascists, that's what's wrong with them.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#3
(08-15-2016, 06:55 AM)Odin Wrote: They're Fascists, that's what's wrong with them.

I'm still not sure this is entirely fair to the Fascists.
Reply
#4
(08-15-2016, 08:54 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 06:55 AM)Odin Wrote: They're Fascists, that's what's wrong with them.

I'm still not sure this is entirely fair to the Fascists.

The True Believer appears in mass numbers in the American electorate. This was George Wallace in 1968 and Strom Thurmond in 1948. This time "race" isn't the cornerstone of the frenzy.

...Give this rhetoric a left-wing flavor, and Democrats would reject it to the extent that the Republican nominee would be winning a landslide.

Even if Donald Trump should be defeated (which he almost certainly will be) his supporters will still be there. They are the people still convinced that Barack Obama is a foreign-born Muslim Marxist soft on terrorism even when such is manifestly untrue. On the other side are people who think 9/11 an inside job.

Many are simply cranks: people of substandard learning sure of their knowledge even if their beliefs are completely contradicted in mainstream science and history. They are authoritarian -- but give them benign authority worthy of acceptance because it does people real good without leaving a trail of dead bodies and ruined lives, and they might find their way to lives founded on reality.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#5
(08-16-2016, 07:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 08:54 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm still not sure this is entirely fair to the Fascists.

The True Believer appears in mass numbers in the American electorate. This was George Wallace in 1968 and Strom Thurmond in 1948. This time "race" isn't the cornerstone of the frenzy.

...Give this rhetoric a left-wing flavor, and Democrats would reject it to the extent that the Republican nominee would be winning a landslide.

Even if Donald Trump should be defeated (which he almost certainly will be) his supporters will still be there. They are the people still convinced that Barack Obama is a foreign-born Muslim Marxist soft on terrorism even when such is manifestly untrue. On the other side are people who think 9/11 an inside job.

Many are simply cranks: people of substandard learning sure of their knowledge even if their beliefs are completely contradicted in mainstream science and history. They are authoritarian -- but give them benign authority worthy of acceptance because it does people real good without leaving a trail of dead bodies and ruined lives, and they might find their way to lives founded on reality.

Values lock is real.  Most humans will not honestly reevaluate their values unless there is a major failure of their old values that is too big to ignore.  If the Democrats hold the White House, I don't expect such a disaster will happen.  Thus, we may enter a reprise of 'sip tea and cuss at That Woman in the White House.'  This could become an altered context for the phrase 'tea party.'

In the Game of Thrones, there was a suggestion that if one stripped a Queen and marched her naked through the streets of the capitol city, she would be so diminished that she could no longer effectively rule.  I'm beginning to wonder about a political party whose establishment politicians were soundly defeated by...  Donald Trump... and then Donald Trump loses in a sea of blathering and incompetence.

Which would be the more humiliating Walk of Shame?  Would this be enough of a disaster to cause some to reevaluate values?
Reply
#6
Ah, no, it would not.
Reply
#7
(08-16-2016, 11:29 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(08-16-2016, 07:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 08:54 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm still not sure this is entirely fair to the Fascists.

The True Believer appears in mass numbers in the American electorate. This was George Wallace in 1968 and Strom Thurmond in 1948. This time "race" isn't the cornerstone of the frenzy.

...Give this rhetoric a left-wing flavor, and Democrats would reject it to the extent that the Republican nominee would be winning a landslide.

Even if Donald Trump should be defeated (which he almost certainly will be) his supporters will still be there. They are the people still convinced that Barack Obama is a foreign-born Muslim Marxist soft on terrorism even when such is manifestly untrue. On the other side are people who think 9/11 an inside job.

Many are simply cranks: people of substandard learning sure of their knowledge even if their beliefs are completely contradicted in mainstream science and history. They are authoritarian -- but give them benign authority worthy of acceptance because it does people real good without leaving a trail of dead bodies and ruined lives, and they might find their way to lives founded on reality.

Values lock is real.  Most humans will not honestly reevaluate their values unless there is a major failure of their old values that is too big to ignore.  If the Democrats hold the White House, I don't expect such a disaster will happen.  Thus, we may enter a reprise of 'sip tea and cuss at That Woman in the White House.'  This could become an altered context for the phrase 'tea party.'

In the Game of Thrones, there was a suggestion that if one stripped a Queen and marched her naked through the streets of the capitol city, she would be so diminished that she could no longer effectively rule.  I'm beginning to wonder about a political party whose establishment politicians were soundly defeated by...  Donald Trump... and then Donald Trump loses in a sea of blathering and incompetence.

Which would be the more humiliating Walk of Shame?  Would this be enough of a disaster to cause some to reevaluate values?

Nope. It has to be personalized.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#8
(08-16-2016, 11:29 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Values lock is real.  Most humans will not honestly reevaluate their values unless there is a major failure of their old values that is too big to ignore.  If the Democrats hold the White House, I don't expect such a disaster will happen.  Thus, we may enter a reprise of 'sip tea and cuss at That Woman in the White House.'  This could become an altered context for the phrase 'tea party.'

In the Game of Thrones, there was a suggestion that if one stripped a Queen and marched her naked through the streets of the capitol city, she would be so diminished that she could no longer effectively rule.  I'm beginning to wonder about a political party whose establishment politicians were soundly defeated by...  Donald Trump... and then Donald Trump loses in a sea of blathering and incompetence.

Which would be the more humiliating Walk of Shame?  Would this be enough of a disaster to cause some to reevaluate values?
Bob, Hilary doesn't have the natural appeal or the natural characteristics associated with our greatest leaders. What would it take for you to relinquish your values or re-evaluate and let go of a value?
Reply
#9
(08-15-2016, 08:54 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 06:55 AM)Odin Wrote: They're Fascists, that's what's wrong with them.

I'm still not sure this is entirely fair to the Fascists.
 I dunno, the fascist white supremacist's views were very similar to Odin's views. How are we supposed to rely on your party resolve the issue of racism among the racists when your party excludes the white ones and continues looking the other way while supporting the minority racists? As I said before, good luck with the banana republics as we enter the crisis.
Reply
#10
(08-20-2016, 12:23 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Bob, Hilary doesn't have the natural appeal or the natural characteristics associated with our greatest leaders. What would it take for you to relinquish your values or re-evaluate and let go of a value?

I've acknowledged many a time that she doesn't have a stage presence or oratory skills. She's a policy wonk. She'd do well to let her husband do the Sunday morning talk shows and play explainer-in-chief. I'm not saying I haven't got firm ideas on how the world works, but this isn't an issue where I'm locked.

The Donald? He has the stage presence. He's a 'reality' TV star, though I'm not inclined to believe that 'reality TV' has much to do with reality. His stage persona works well when he gets to design the format of the TV program and has absolute authoritarian control over everything. It has worked less well running a campaign. I think he's been firing more people from his campaign than he did from his TV show. He has zip experience in government. He seems to get more coverage retracting statements that he shouldn't have made than making statements that hold up to scrutiny.

The difference between Red and Blue on this issues is important, but the way the two people do business is also crucial. I simply don't like The Donald's style. I am very doubtful that they are going to demolish Lincoln's head on Mount Rushmore to make room for either Hillary or The Donald. Neither are obvious Grey Champion candidates. It's just that Hillary has the experience and temperament to run a government while The Donald is a TV persona.
Reply
#11
(08-20-2016, 12:54 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 08:54 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 06:55 AM)Odin Wrote: They're Fascists, that's what's wrong with them.

I'm still not sure this is entirely fair to the Fascists.
 I dunno, the fascist white supremacist's views were very similar to Odin's views. How are we supposed to rely on your party resolve the issue of racism among the racists when your party excludes the white ones and continues looking the other way while supporting the minority racists? As I said before, good luck with the banana republics as we enter the crisis.

You can show me evidence that Odin is a white supremacist (I doubt that he is a member of any ethnic minority), or you can shut up about it. Fascism and and its derivatives are insults to all but fascists -- so much that people with fascistic tendencies deny them. It's like alcoholics calling themselves "social drinkers". I have seen enough of his posts to have seen no such indication.

'Banana republic' is an insult to people who may have sophisticated mixed cultures including those of Spain, indigenous peoples of the Americas, and in some contexts Africans. As I understand your use of it, it seems to apply to American blacks whose sole connection to Africa is genetic and to Hispanics not practically European in appearance.

Are they 'banana republics' because minorities do not recognize their supposed place of subordination to white people? Tough!
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#12
(08-20-2016, 10:53 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:
(08-20-2016, 12:54 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 08:54 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(08-15-2016, 06:55 AM)Odin Wrote: They're Fascists, that's what's wrong with them.

I'm still not sure this is entirely fair to the Fascists.
 I dunno, the fascist white supremacist's views were very similar to Odin's views. How are we supposed to rely on your party resolve the issue of racism among the racists when your party excludes the white ones and continues looking the other way while supporting the minority racists? As I said before, good luck with the banana republics as we enter the crisis.

You can show me evidence that Odin is a white supremacist (I doubt that he is a member of any ethnic minority), or you can shut up about it. Fascism and and its derivatives are insults to all but fascists -- so much that people with fascistic tendencies deny them. It's like alcoholics calling themselves "social drinkers". I have seen enough of his posts to have seen no such indication.

'Banana republic' is an insult to people who may have sophisticated mixed cultures including those of Spain, indigenous peoples of the Americas, and in some contexts Africans. As I understand your use of it, it seems to apply to American blacks whose sole connection to Africa is genetic and to Hispanics not practically European in appearance.

Are they 'banana republics' because minorities do not recognize their supposed place of subordination to white people? Tough!

A lot of this is just argument by insult.  If one doesn't have a factual argument, one reverts to elementary school style calling people names.

Hillary brought this up at the Democratic convention. Supposedly, "When they go low, we go high." Nice thought. Not universal blue.
Reply
#13
(08-20-2016, 12:54 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I dunno, the fascist white supremacist's views were very similar to Odin's views.

That is a bald-faced lie bordering on slander.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#14
(08-20-2016, 12:28 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Hillary brought this up at the Democratic convention. Supposedly, "When they go low, we go high." Nice thought. Not universal blue.

Well, it was Hillary's convention, but it was Michelle Obama who said it. And afterward I posted a song by Justin Bieber to echo her statement, called "Bigger" ("and all the haters look so small from up here, because we're bigger, and love's bigger")
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#15
If Trump was such a "fascist" he wouldn't be soft-pedaling the race issue - as regards African-Americans (his approach to Hispanics and Muslims being a different story) - the way he is.

He's going out of his way to avoid saying anything that can even remotely be interpreted as anti-black. His silence re "Blue Lives Matter" etc. is deafening.
"It was better with them that were slain by the sword, than with them that died with hunger, for these pined away being consumed for want of the fruits of the earth" - Lamentations 4:9
Reply
#16
He's not silent on blue lives matter at all. What you call "silence" is deafening. He is always calling on people to support and praise the police and to bring law and order. That means he is siding more with the police on the issue of police shootings, than with blacks.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#17
Trump is spouting empty, meaningless platitudes.

This is not 1968, when "law and order" was the be-all-and-all, or very close to it.

And Trump is not even trying to make it 1968.
"It was better with them that were slain by the sword, than with them that died with hunger, for these pined away being consumed for want of the fruits of the earth" - Lamentations 4:9
Reply
#18
Bob Butler Wrote:Values lock is real.  Most humans will not honestly reevaluate their values unless there is a major failure of their old values that is too big to ignore.  
Values don't fail.  Worldviews do. One can have a belief (as Clinton does) in the efficacy of American power in foreign policy.  Others (like me) can disagree.  Yet if president Clinton decides to intervene in a way with which I disagree, and the result is positive, then she was right and I was wrong.  The question was whether intervention was wise (i.e. would it work?).  This is NOT a values issue.  Its an worldview issue that was resolved by explicit demonstration.

On the other hand one can have a moral belief (i.e. values) that proprietors have a right to exclude the wrong sort of clientele as part of their property rights.  The government can pass a law saying proprietors may not restrict access to their product/service to based on certain characteristics (e.g. race in the 1960's sexual orientation today). They lose, but this unlikely to convince them that their values were wrong.  Typically this does not happen.  Instead expression of the old value is suppressed and the fraction of the next generation who picks it up through social learning (cultural evolution) decreases, while the original holders gradually die off.  In time a new population emerges in which the old cultural phenotype is quite rare.

Values and worldviews are very different things, with very different dynamics.
Reply
#19
(08-26-2016, 04:09 PM)Anthony 58 Wrote: Trump is spouting empty, meaningless platitudes.

This is not 1968, when "law and order" was the be-all-and-all, or very close to it.

And Trump is not even trying to make it 1968.

His convention speech could almost be transported back to then.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#20
(08-26-2016, 07:21 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:
(08-26-2016, 05:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-26-2016, 04:09 PM)Anthony Wrote: Trump is spouting empty, meaningless platitudes.

This is not 1968, when "law and order" was the be-all-and-all, or very close to it.

And Trump is not even trying to make it 1968.

His convention speech could almost be transported back to then.

I somewhat disagree. Nothing during 1968 (not even Wallace) rose to the level of what we are seeing now. What we are seeing now harks back to things during the 1930s - Fr. Coughlin's spewing, Brown Shirt rallies ... or even worse stuff that happened in Europe.

Much worse in Europe. Fr. Coughlin was no big deal though, but although Nixon and Wallace were pretty bad in 1968, there was also a lot of idealism abroad in the land, especially among us boomers. Where I was, on a personal and local level, I liked that year very much, despite the disasters.

But I don't know if Trump is worse than Wallace was in 1968 or not. What is true is that the nation has shifted a lot to the right in the intervening years. I do think Trump's overall temperament is the worst ever for a major party candidate, as far as I know. Maybe Aaron Burr could compare.

Isn't it interesting that both Wallace and Trump have Mars right on the Ascendant, and in the same sign too. The Ascendant indicates the personality and manner of expression. In many ways those two are peas in a pod.

Not everyone with Mars rising is as bad, but if not arrogant troublemakers, they are often war mongers. McKinley and LBJ both had Mars close to rising, in the first house (just one of LBJ's 5 rising planets, most-ever for a candidate). So did Barry Goldwater ("extremism is no vice"). So did old fuss and feathers, General Scott. So did Bill Clinton (one among 4 planets, including Venus, Jupiter and Neptune; much more mellow, and all in sociable and charming but manipulative sign Libra). Others with Mars rising were John Adams, Al Gore, and Adlai Stevenson.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Donald Trump: polls of approval and favorability pbrower2a 537 108,070 Yesterday, 07:07 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  America Is Bombing the Hell out of Syrian Civilians nebraska 0 411 01-06-2018, 09:24 PM
Last Post: nebraska
  Why One Baby Buster Voted For Donald Trump Anthony '58 43 14,766 01-24-2017, 01:15 PM
Last Post: Eric the Green
  What if Donald Trump is the new John C. Fremont? Anthony '58 1 1,069 10-19-2016, 09:56 PM
Last Post: Einzige
  Prominent Republicans call for Donald Trump to drop out of the nomination pbrower2a 11 4,473 10-12-2016, 07:06 AM
Last Post: Odin
  Poll of the U.S. military has Gary Johnson tied with Donald Trump Dan '82 3 1,579 09-23-2016, 07:37 AM
Last Post: Anthony '58
  Americans Aren't Buying Donald Trump's Immigration Rhetoric, Polls Show naf140230 7 3,384 09-22-2016, 11:33 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  The Donald only cares about the Donald historically. taramarie 3 1,270 08-07-2016, 04:34 PM
Last Post: Anthony '58
  Donald Trump And The New Social Darwinism Anthony '58 17 9,882 08-07-2016, 03:45 PM
Last Post: Anthony '58

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)