Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

whembly wrote:Mad Dog Mattis has been confirmed:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/senate-trump-cabinet-confirmations/index.html?sr=twCNNBRK012017senate-trump-cabinet-confirmations0544PMVODtopPhoto

Seems like a good choice.

Relapse wrote:The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

That's a remarkably large leap of logic. Like, Toyko 2020 gold medal winning large. Care to explain?

 whembly wrote:
Mad Dog Mattis has been confirmed:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/senate-trump-cabinet-confirmations/index.html?sr=twCNNBRK012017senate-trump-cabinet-confirmations0544PMVODtopPhoto

Not surprised. A qualified candidate with support from both sides. Although, with a GOP controlled congress, I wouldn't be surprised if even the really bad ones get through without a fight.

Yup, its the fault of a handful of dumbasses taking an excuse to be gakky.

Not an antiestablishment populist wave on both sides that one party crushed and the other was overtaken by, not a last minute akward leak from the FBI that started to tank Clintons ratings in the last two weeks. Not resigned and disgruntled voters staying home in key districrs. Nor any one of hundreds of other things.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Mad Dog Mattis has been confirmed:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/senate-trump-cabinet-confirmations/index.html?sr=twCNNBRK012017senate-trump-cabinet-confirmations0544PMVODtopPhoto

Not surprised. A qualified candidate with support from both sides. Although, with a GOP controlled congress, I wouldn't be surprised if even the really bad ones get through without a fight.

Mattis was a shoe-in, but yeah, even the demonstrably unqualified and monstrously inappropriate ones like DeVos will be confirmed.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

Lol.

Rump won an extremely close race, and the R's lost in both the house and senate. Trump's popularity is the lowest of any incoming president, and he's not even done anything yet. Vaktathi said it better than I can, but this was a populist wave, not a "those darn liberals" wave.

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

you're confusing the people doing silly stuff in the streets with "liberals" or whatever as a monolithic group.


Having experienced the Portland events of a few weeks ago, the people causing issues there were mostly just there because it was an excuse to to naughty things, not part of the organized protest group for the most part. The kids from under the Burnside bridge were just looking for an excuse to trash the Pearl district

Besides, if we're talking people doing silly stuff under the cover of politics, a year ago we were talking about those fine patriots from Idaho and Nevada making their stand against Federal aggression by taking over and trashing an Oregon bird refuge...

The tension on all sides has ratcheted up and all sides are doing increasingly stupid things.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

Lol.

Rump won an extremely close race, and the R's lost in both the house and senate. Trump's popularity is the lowest of any incoming president, and he's not even done anything yet. Vaktathi said it better than I can, but this was a populist wave, not a "those darn liberals" wave.

As it stands, it's straight up Republican control.

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

If that's genuinely true, that a majority of R voters actually voted for Drumpf out of some ridiculous sense of "feth you libtards" then I suggest y'all get that SkyNet running toot sweet, as y'all obviously can't handle the big boy responsibility of voting.

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

Lol.

Rump won an extremely close race, and the R's lost in both the house and senate. Trump's popularity is the lowest of any incoming president, and he's not even done anything yet. Vaktathi said it better than I can, but this was a populist wave, not a "those darn liberals" wave.

As it stands, it's straight up Republican control.

Which is different to what you said, now isn't it?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

Lol.

Rump won an extremely close race, and the R's lost in both the house and senate. Trump's popularity is the lowest of any incoming president, and he's not even done anything yet. Vaktathi said it better than I can, but this was a populist wave, not a "those darn liberals" wave.

As it stands, it's straight up Republican control.

Which is different to what you said, now isn't it?

Not at all, unless you count a party controlling the House, Senate, and office of the President as doing badly.

Relapse wrote:

Not at all, unless you count a party controlling the House, Senate, and office of the President as doing badly.

I don't count loosing seats during a time when the non-incumbent party in the white-house tends to do well historically as "did well". Nor is it a repudiation of "those darn liberals".

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Not at all, unless you count a party controlling the House, Senate, and office of the President as doing badly.

I don't count loosing seats during a time when the non-incumbent party in the white-house tends to do well historically as "did well". Nor is it a repudiation of "those darn liberals".

However you view it, it's going to be an interesting next couple of years, for good or ill. The Supreme Court could end up becoming quit conservative.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Rump won an extremely close race, and the R's lost in both the house and senate.

They were expected to lose control of the Senate and have a significantly narrower margin in the House. They also picked up two Govenorships and made significant gains in State legislatures. Still, nice try at spinning this election as a loss for the Republicans.

Relapse wrote:
The Supreme Court could end up becoming quit conservative.

Justice Ginsberg is going to live forever. She'll be like Granny from the Beverly Hillbillies, sitting up on the bench knitting away while the other eight Justices hear the case.

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Not at all, unless you count a party controlling the House, Senate, and office of the President as doing badly.

I don't count loosing seats during a time when the non-incumbent party in the white-house tends to do well historically as "did well". Nor is it a repudiation of "those darn liberals".

However you view it, it's going to be an interesting next couple of years, for good or ill. The Supreme Court could end up becoming quit conservative.

I doubt it. The only liberal justice who is at all old is RBG, and she'll hold on with pure determination before she's replace with an anti-abortion judge. Remember, most justices retire, and I seriously any of the liberal/moderate leaning ones will trust Trump with a replacement (a man who has held views apposed to pretty much every right we have). Scalia was a shock to everybody and he was not exactly the picture of elderly health.

 feeder wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

If that's genuinely true, that a majority of R voters actually voted for Drumpf out of some ridiculous sense of "feth you libtards" then I suggest y'all get that SkyNet running toot sweet, as y'all obviously can't handle the big boy responsibility of voting.

This is an oversimplification. It's not just "feth you", its that people genuinely did not want to live in the society that they perceive that progressives (distinct from "classical liberals") are trying to create. That's a big difference than just a simple "feth you".

Progressives did much of this to themselves...safe spaces, trigger warnings, 31 genders, de-platforming speakers for differing ideas, and constant accusations of this or that -ism leveled against well meaning people.

 Breotan wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Rump won an extremely close race, and the R's lost in both the house and senate.

They were expected to lose control of the Senate and have a significantly narrower margin in the House. They also picked up two Govenorships and made significant gains in State legislatures. Still, nice try at spinning this election as a loss for the Republicans.

Where exactly did I say this was a "loss" for the republican party? I'm sure you have the quote.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jasper76 wrote:


This is an oversimplification. It's not just "feth you", its that people genuinely did not want to live in the society that they perceive that progressives (distinct from "classical liberals") are trying to create. That's a big difference than just a simple "feth you".

Progressives did much of this to themselves...safe spaces, trigger warnings, 31 genders, de-platforming speakers for differing ideas, and constant accusations of this or that -ism leveled against well meaning people.

The irony of people complaining aobut "safe spaces" while similatiously misunderstanding what they are and what they do, and then trying to turn the entire country into a "safe space" will never cease to amuse me.

 jasper76 wrote:
safe spaces, trigger warnings, 31 genders, de-platforming speakers for differing ideas, and constant accusations of this or that -ism leveled against well meaning people.

I honestly find this entire list hilarious.

So if I understand this correctly, Trump was elected because some people need a space safe from safe spaces, are triggered by trigger warnings, can't count past 2 genders, and decided the best solution to people being "de-platformed" by private entities for saying stupid things is to de-platform not the people who run those entities but the people who voiced disagreement with differing ideas? And in response to "constant accusations of this or that -ism" these same persons have assumed that the people the accusations were leveled at were just well meaning? Sorry but I pay attention to the news and more than a fair number of the "de-platformed" were not remotely well-meaning. I feel like this entire narrative of events needs to be referenced in the dictionary under hypocrisy.

It is truly a wonderland we live in.

The attitude of 'those darn liberals' hasn't been working out for the GOP, unless you really feel like Trump is a good candidate. But if the same people exclaing that position want to double down on it then by all means do so. I think it's an irrational, unjustified viewpoint and I think the GOP is going to crash and burn while refusing to accept any responsibility for the outcome. But I could be wrong. The point is, if you blame the liberals and it isn't actually the liberals at fault then the results aren't going to be to your liking. The GOP is eating a dish of their own making either way, we'll be front and center to see how palatable it is.

 jasper76 wrote:
Progressives did much of this to themselves...safe spaces, trigger warnings, 31 genders, de-platforming speakers for differing ideas, and constant accusations of this or that -ism leveled against well meaning people.

All of which are wildly exaggerated by conservatives.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
The irony of people complaining aobut "safe spaces" while similatiously misunderstanding what they are and what they do, and then trying to turn the entire country into a "safe space" will never cease to amuse me.

Remember, when conservatives want safe spaces it's called "freedom of speech".

It is what it is. People don't like that stuff, that's where they saw the country headed under Democratic leadership, so they voted against it.

Definitely not saying this was the only reason people voted for Trump, but it was definitely a factor.

As to whether oppoisitin to my laundry list ends up being hypocritical, I don't particularly care.

From my perspective, things like trigger warnings and safe spaces are antithetical to what I perceive as the function of higher education. De-platforming speakers obviously has free speech implication, and I am pretty much a free speech absolutist.

 jasper76 wrote:

 feeder wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The actions of these people demonstrate why Trump won.

I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him. It couldn't possibly be the anti-intellectualism fostered by the American right. Or the continual demonization of government at all levels. Or the way nationalism is presented as the only way forward, all others who dare question being deemed "unpatriotic". No it has to be those darn liberals, it's their fault!

Actually, many people have gotten sick of the liberals who are tolerant until they are disagreed with. They simply don't want to support the politicians who support these types. This is why the Republicans did so well this election with the Senate, House and Presidential races.

If that's genuinely true, that a majority of R voters actually voted for Drumpf out of some ridiculous sense of "feth you libtards" then I suggest y'all get that SkyNet running toot sweet, as y'all obviously can't handle the big boy responsibility of voting.

This is an oversimplification. It's not just "feth you", its that people genuinely did not want to live in the society that they perceive that progressives (distinct from "classical liberals") are trying to create. That's a big difference than just a simple "feth you".

Progressives did much of this to themselves...safe spaces, trigger warnings, 31 genders, de-platforming speakers for differing ideas, and constant accusations of this or that -ism leveled against well meaning people.

Oh, ok. Some ridiculous "feth you libtard strawman" then.

Have a great weekend, y'all!

 jasper76 wrote:
It is what it is. People don't like that stuff, that's where they saw the country headed under Democratic leadership, so they voted against it.

Definitely not saying this was the only reason people voted for Trump, but it was definitely a factor.

Based on exit polling, where the main concerns were economic and safety, I'd say it was a pretty insignificant factor.

As to whether oppoisitin to my laundry list ends up being hypocritical, I don't particularly care.

Then why say them?

From my perspective, things like trigger warnings and safe spaces are antithetical to what I perceive as the function of higher education.

Than you obviously don't actually know what they are. But, then again, most people who complain about them don't.

De-platforming speakers obviously has free speech implication, and I am pretty much a free speech absolutist.

Firing people for saying racist things (the most common example) had nothing to do with free speech, and everything to do with profit and PR.

@feeder: There's a difference between voting from priniciples, however flawed they may be, and voting out of spite.

I'm sure there are some people out there who did vote Trump out of pure spite, I'll grant you that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
It is what it is. People don't like that stuff, that's where they saw the country headed under Democratic leadership, so they voted against it.

Definitely not saying this was the only reason people voted for Trump, but it was definitely a factor.

1. Based on exit polling, where the main concerns were economic and safety, I'd say it was a pretty insignificant factor.

As to whether oppoisitin to my laundry list ends up being hypocritical, I don't particularly care.

2. Then why say them?

From my perspective, things like trigger warnings and safe spaces are antithetical to what I perceive as the function of higher education.

3. Than you obviously don't actually know what they are. But, then again, most people who complain about them don't.

De-platforming speakers obviously has free speech implication, and I am pretty much a free speech absolutist.

4. Firing people for saying racist things (the most common example) had nothing to do with free speech, and everything to do with profit and PR.

1. Conservatives are quite openly opposed to progressive culture. I don't personally think its an insignificant part of their motives, according to what they themselves have been saying. Which is not to say they didn't think the economy was the #1 issue.

2. Because I perceive some of these issues to be manufactured, and some to even be pernicious.

3. I'll just skip over your rude assumptions here.

4. I was more talking about guest speakers at universities being de-platformed. Some college banned Richard Dawkins, protestors showing up to silence Milo Whats-His-Name, etc.

 jasper76 wrote:
People don't like that stuff, that's where they saw the country headed under Democratic leadership, so they voted against it.

Really? Cause HRC might have lost, but she got more votes. It would be more accurate to say "some people don't like that stuff." The continued interpretation of an electoral college win that hung on extremely close races (seriously 100,000 people decided the outcome...) as some kind of sweeping rejection of the "direction of the country" makes no sense what-so-ever. The race was close enough you could chalk the final outcome up to a whim of the universe.

Definitely not saying this was the only reason people voted for Trump, but it was definitely a factor.

I would challenge that it's such a small factor it isn't particularly relevant. I think the biggest reason Trump won is a very well targeted campaign. Trump managed to suppress his opponents voter base*, call out the Democratic party fairly accurately for not advancing social causes as much as it talked about them (something that became starkly represented by the scandal between the DNC and Bernie Sanders), and simultaneously managed to drum up a lot of people who have probably not been regular voters in the past by presenting a laundry list of ideas targeted to appeal to them. In response HRC's campaign played a completely defensive game, gave him mountains of their own air time and publicity, and didn't get out their own candidate's message.

Trump won because he somehow managed to organize an extremely well targeted campaign that took advantage of the electorate, while the Clinton campaign utterly failed to inspire anyone. It's not a product of anything the liberals specifically did, but rather an outcome of the current electoral makeup of the county. Honestly I'd bet there's a degree of forgone conclusion involved as well. How many people in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, and Ohio stayed home thinking Hillary Clinton's win was assured? Probably more than a few, and in any other election their staying home probably wouldn't have effected the outcome much, but in this race?

*by this I mean he convinced them that voting for HRC wouldn't get them anywhere not that any force was involved. Trump made a lot of targeted statements to inner city and working class Democrats that I think were both accurate, and specifically said not to convince them to vote for him but to call attention to how little they'd gain voting for his opponent. The goal of saying "why not give me a chance" to African American communities wasn't to get those groups to actually give him a chance. The goal was to make them wonder why they should bother voting for the same party that generally does little for them at all.

As to whether oppoisitin to my laundry list ends up being hypocritical, I don't particularly care.

Know what, I can respect that.

From my perspective, things like trigger warnings and safe spaces are antithetical to what I perceive the function of higher education. De-platforming speakers obviously has free speech implication, and I am pretty much a free speech absolutist.

I've lived on college campuses, or near them, for the better part of the last ten years. I have never seen these safe spaces people are convinced permeate higher education. I've never seen trigger warnings anywhere but on Tumblr. I have in fact seen far more complaints about safe spaces and trigger warnings than I have seen actual safe spaces* and trigger warnings.

*I'm purposefully excluding things like AA, self-help groups, and group therapy. I have seen them labeled as "safe spaces", but they don't seem to be the kind of things people who complain about safe spaces are complaining about. I'm just assuming no one in their right mind is opposed to a self-help group for battered women working through their trauma, or addicts helping to keep each other clean disallowing the presence of attitudes completely counter-productive to the purpose of the meeting.

I think jasper is closer to the truth than you guys think... people were tired of the progressive outrage machine...

Just as people were tired of Bush's "compassionate conservatiism" in 2008.

It's party fatigue.

Now bake me a cake!

@Lord of Hats: I was specifically talking about Trump voters, sorry if that didn't come through.

I do believe that the concept of a "safe space" is appropriate in a therapeutic setting.

Happy Day of Emperor's Ascension!



And I see the run-of-the-mill anarchists have hijacked the protests, either that or anti-Trumpers really hate roadside trash cans.

 jasper76 wrote:
4. I was more talking about guest speakers at universities being de-platformed. Some college banned Richard Dawkins, protestors showing up to silence Milo Whats-His-Name, etc.

And the fact that conservatives consider this a reason to vote for Trump shows how dysfunctional the whole conservative side is. Freedom of speech does not mean the right to have a university host you as a speaker, and the "OMG THEY DIDNT INVITE MY FAVORITE BESTEST FRIEND EVAR TO SPEAK" outrage from conservatives is just plain ridiculous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jasper76 wrote:
It is what it is. People don't like that stuff, that's where they saw the country headed under Democratic leadership, so they voted against it.

This isn't saying good things about the level of awareness and intelligence of Trump voters then, given that all the safe spaces/trigger warnings/etc have to do with private citizens making choices about what rules to set for their personal property, not government policy. Voting for Trump isn't going to make any of that stuff change.

From my perspective, things like trigger warnings and safe spaces are antithetical to what I perceive as the function of higher education.

And just what function is that? Offending people in some bizarre masochistic ritual of seeing how much of a everyone can be before students drop out?

De-platforming speakers obviously has free speech implication, and I am pretty much a free speech absolutist.

How can you be a free speech absolutist if you don't support the right to say "nah, we don't feel like inviting you"?

So Paul Ryan is talking about his big plan to replace Obamacare. Instead of subsidies for insurance he want tax credits. Ryan seemed oblivious that the subsidies in ACA are tax credits. This is meant to be the smart guy in the Republican party everyone. Holy fething gak.

Any how, the other big idea is to get rid of the income section of the subsidy. So assuming the overall subsidy total is the same, what Ryan is planning is to massively reduce the subsidy for low income people in order to give money to high income earners.

Good job white working class, once again you voted to have less money so wealthy people can have more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I love this. Trump's winning is everybody's fault but the people who paved the way for him.

The party of personal responsibility won't even take responsibility for the man they nominated and elected.