Then why are you talking about Clinton?I talked about who won re-election despite their actions, and how this is a common theme. People aren't as self-reflective or morally sound as you think. Check yourself for that.
Then why are you talking about Clinton?I talked about who won re-election despite their actions, and how this is a common theme. People aren't as self-reflective or morally sound as you think. Check yourself for that.
I'm saying voters are much more complex than the reductions every single one of you are trying to make about Trump voters. We will vote for pure trash even as we are eating it, because people and their candidates are not the single issue as defined by their opposition. We will overlook a lot.Then why did you bring up Clinton or Bush's paintings?
Just stop being coy and say what you really mean: "America is evil to the core, and you're all just arguing over which slightly different shade of malevolence to support."
Which is, in fact, a "both sides" argument, no matter how much you fervently deny it or make "console warz" references.
I talked about who won re-election despite their actions, and how this is a common theme. People aren't as self-reflective or morally sound as you think. Check yourself for that.
We shouldn't generalize but with a party that has promoted racism and exclusivity, it's easy to label them into the following:
1. Rich people who dislike taxes
2. Christian or Catholic
3. Diet Racists
4. Racists
Find me a republican who doesn't fit any of those four categories.
I'm saying voters are much more complex than the reductions every single one of you are trying to make about Trump voters. We will vote for pure trash even as we are eating it, because people and their candidates are not single issue as defined by their opposition.
It tells the story of Michael Berg, a German lawyer who, as a mid-teenager in 1958, had an affair with an older woman, Hanna Schmitz, who then disappeared only to resurface years later as one of the defendants in a war crimes trial stemming from her actions as a guard at a Nazi concentration camp. Michael realizes that Hanna is keeping a personal secret she believes is worse than her Nazi past a secret which, if revealed, could help her at the trial.
The world is going to continue to be a bad place because there are many people like you, who refuse to challenge and call out those close to them when they are wrong. Because you love them, you see them as being above reproach and refuse to consider that they may actually be capable of negative beliefs. This is a false love.This isn't really a case of "absolving". I'm not saying people like my grandmother deserve a full pardon for their mistakes, unless they acknowledged them.
If she were to one day say that she understood that she made the wrong decision and regrets what she did? Fair enough, in my opinion.
If she still stands by it, and assuming that it's entirely out of ignorance and not because of any personal biases she may have on other people, what am I to do then? Lynch her? Never speak to her again? Wish that she burn in hell?
Would you go that far towards people you loved? Once again, I'm presenting this question towards the people who are not, on the surface, objectionably terrible pieces of shit. I'm talking about your best buddy or significant other or the guy who donated a kidney to save your life, the people who have always been there for you and have not done a single abhorrent thing to another individual.
Would you easily cut your ties with them just for one fuck-up of who they voted for?
I'm saying voters are much more complex than the reductions every single one of you are trying to make about Trump voters. We will vote for pure trash even as we are eating it, because people and their candidates are not the single issue as defined by their opposition. We will overlook a lot.
One of my favorite novels related to this subject of Nazism, personal reasons, and "good":
Bernhard Schlink's "The Reader"
This is a great post and I think it needs more attention.I think it's very easy to argue that voting for Trump was an evil act. Sure, in some cases you can argue that the voter was very ignorant or that they had other (but insufficient) reasons for voting for Trump such that they did so while lamenting a lot of what he stood for, but surely people have a responsibility to vote, well, responsibly. That you cast an evil vote accidentally is not much of an excuse.
But of course many Trump voters are basically good people, to the extent that there are good people in America. A single vote is really a pretty small act. I think the error people make is not in identifying the vote for Trump as an evil thing but in talking like voting for and supporting Trump are defining character traits. This kind of thing, basically:
I got family who voted trump. While I don't call them Nazi scum I will call them ignorant trash at best. I'll say the same for about any trump supporter.
People have this tendency to mistake moral obviousness for moral significance. There was obviously no good reason to vote for Trump -> only a bad person could have voted for Trump. But I'm sure that many Trump voters have had a much more positive impact on the world than have many Clinton voters, or otherwise win out however you want to measure how good of a person someone is (short of very implausible gerrymandered definitions). I'm sure that for almost everyone you can find a thing that they've done for obviously bad reasons that has produced at least as much harm as a single vote for Trump. It is weird to pick them out as a group and talk as if their vote makes it very likely that they are worse people than anyone else.
----------------------------------------I think a lot of people in this topic are dancing around the inevitable conclusion that as a minority I reached years ago. It's a hard conclusion, but it is true:
1. Evil is a real thing
2. A significant percentage, if not close to half, of Americans are evil people.
3. You can negotiate with some evil people, but with many you can not.
It's hard to accept but it it is the truth.
Let's not do this. You absolutely don't know how much he takes umbrage with it. The person creating a thread about this doesn't mean he considers their decision less bad than people calling them out for it.Ironically enough, you take greater umbrage with the fact that we're calling these people out than the bad decisions they've made that has earned them the label. As MLK said, the enemy is not evil itself but those who idly stand by, complaining as the efforts towards progress are made.
I don't really care what you do. Going by your OP you don't really grasp the gravity of the situation yourself, so I'm not expecting you to change the political opinion of an octogenarian.This isn't really a case of "absolving". I'm not saying people like my grandmother deserve a full pardon for their mistakes, unless they acknowledged them.
If she were to one day say that she understood that she made the wrong decision and regrets what she did? Fair enough, in my opinion.
If she still stands by it, and assuming that it's entirely out of ignorance and not because of any personal biases she may have on other people, what am I to do then? Lynch her? Never speak to her again? Wish that she burn in hell?
Would you go that far towards people you loved? Once again, I'm presenting this question towards the people who are not, on the surface, objectionably terrible pieces of shit. I'm talking about your best buddy or significant other or the guy who donated a kidney to save your life, the people who have always been there for you and have not done a single abhorrent thing to another individual.
Would you easily cut your ties with them just for one fuck-up of who they voted for?
The don't be reductive is exactly the point here, by saying that these people are all xenophobic, racists, misogynists and so on, or that they are acceptance of it is to be reductive of their views, there is a plethora of reasons to vote for someone, even if I don't agree with any of them.
I would also be quite surprised if there weren't xenophobes, racists, misogynists and homophones voting for Hillary, but those people probably decided there were more important things so they voted for Hillary based on those things they deemed more important.
Also not sure if every one of his major campaign platform points were linked to what you are saying, certainly not for a lot of people that voted, I mean sure trump might "want" to bring jobs back from china because he is a xenophobe and honestly a complete idiot (the jobs outsourced to china tend to be pretty awful low paid work), but doubt "fuck the Chinese" was what people were hearing when Trump talked about that.
Did supporting Obama mean you implicitly supported every single one of his viewpoints and actions?
Plenty of liberals didn't like what Obama did with drones, for example, but they voted for him anyway because he was much better than the opposition on most other issues.
Not every Trump voter is racist, or even okay with racism. You guys have got to get this through your heads or you'll just continue doing your own understanding of the situation a disservice.
I know plenty of rich people who are not at all racist, hate what Trump says and does on immigration and racial issues, but made the decision to vote for him because they wanted to kill the estate tax, or other economic issues. And they didn't believe Trump would follow through on what he said he was going to.
That makes them idiots, yes, but they aren't all racist.
People have this tendency to mistake moral obviousness for moral significance. There was obviously no good reason to vote for Trump -> only a bad person could have voted for Trump. But I'm sure that many Trump voters have had a much more positive impact on the world than have many Clinton voters, or otherwise win out however you want to measure how good of a person someone is (short of very implausible gerrymandered definitions). I'm sure that for almost everyone you can find a thing that they've done for obviously bad reasons that has produced at least as much harm as a single vote for Trump. It is weird to pick them out as a group and talk as if their vote makes it very likely that they are worse people than anyone else.
Mm it's missing idiots and 'both sides are the same anyways' people.
You know that Catholics are Christian, right
The defendant was on trial for allowing 300 Jewish women to burn to death. Her big secret? She was illiterate.One of my favorite novels related to this subject of Nazism, personal reasons, and "good":
Bernhard Schlink's "The Reader"
*puts on condescending hat* Stuff like this is exactly why the election was lost. Instead of calling people names, why not educate them. Oh, and don't ask me to do it because I privately know that it doesn't work. By the way, both sides. *takes off hat*
Silence is certainly an endorsement.
If you aligned with him for whatever reason, you were and are supportive of his stances.
So yea, by association if you voted for him, you're the lowest bar of American there possibly is.
*puts on condescending hat* Stuff like this is exactly why the election was lost. Instead of calling people names, why not educate them. Oh, and don't ask me to do it because I privately know that it doesn't work. By the way, both sides. *takes off hat*
This forum has serious problems if Lui Kang can get a ban. I don't expect moderators to know every forum members MO but if you can read what Lui Kang wrote and say yep he needs to be banned well you shouldn't be moderator.
He didn't say anything that was worse than what the OP is putting forward. He actually adds to the OP points to carry the discussion forward.
Really if the mods want to protect me from Lui Kang hurting my feelings then banning Lui Kang but not the OP is a hypocritical over-reactionary joke.
The biggest problem the US has is that literally half the country doesn't show up to vote, and even less in other elections. Compare this to the turnout in let's say France and Holland recently (70-80%). It's baffling that literally half of Americans don't care who their President is. I get some of the blame is on the electoral college here, but still.I think the biggest reason we lost is that a lot of younger voters fell for Russian influence and turned to Trump or third parties. Gary Johnson in particular pulled a lot of the young Bernie voters that Hillary didn't get and could have turned this election around.
This forum has serious problems if Lui Kang can get a ban. I don't expect moderators to know every forum members MO but if you can read what Lui Kang wrote and say yep he needs to be banned well you shouldn't be moderator.
He didn't say anything that was worse than what the OP is putting forward. He actually adds to the OP points to carry the discussion forward.
Really if the mods want to protect me from Lui Kang hurting my feelings then banning Lui Kang but not the OP is a hypocritical over-reactionary joke.
The biggest problem the US has is that literally half the country doesn't show up to vote, and even less in other elections. Compare this to the turnout in let's say France and Holland recently (70-80%). It's baffling that literally half of Americans don't care who their President is. I get some of the blame is on the electoral college here, but still.
45% of the country did not vote for Trump. Trump got something like 27% of the country to vote for his racism and bigotry. Most voters stayed the fuck home.It doesn't have to be the exact same thing to be a point worth considering. It is obviously not the same thing.
But you're making the same argument, that nobody could possibly have voted for Trump without being okay with every single thing he said. It's so fucking shortsighted to say that.
Some of you need to actually talk to some center-right Trump voters or previous Obama voters and actually listen to why they voted for him. You'll learn something.
I fucking hate Trump, but you're deluding yourselves by turning this into a "45% of the country are Nazis!" situation in your minds. It is so obviously not true that it boggles the mind that you could even believe that. And you will lose again if you continue to think about it that way.
Also an issue, if we had mobile voting platforms or even some sort of voting from your smart phone it would be simply the best. But poor people are forced out when it comes to voting as they have less ability to get to the polling places on time.
45% of the country did not vote for Trump. Trump got something like 27% of the country to vote for his racism and bigotry. Most voters stayed the fuck home.
Regardless of their reasons for voting for Trump, all Trump voters are garbage.
We don't need them for future elections, they can be pushed aside and ignored.
We need the people who didn't show up.
I totally get where you're coming from, OP. My grandma also chose to vote to enable a racist to run the country because she decided that wasn't so bad as to be worth voting against her fucking tax cut, and I also get very offended when people point this out, because she is very nice to me, which should really excuse all of that, because I am very important.
Or mail-in ballots.
I think the biggest reason we lost is that a lot of younger voters fell for Russian influence and turned to Trump or third parties. Gary Johnson in particular pulled a lot of the young Bernie voters that Hillary didn't get and could have turned this election around.
Or mail-in ballots.
Making voting more convenient and easy would increase turnout greatly. Making it a holiday or putting it on the weekend, a federally-sanctioned and distributed ID that works for voting, more polling places, more open hours, more amenities for people stuck in lines, a decrese in gerrymandering, etc.
But we have one political party hellbent on depressing turnout.
You know, the one currently in power right now.
less inconvenient but still annoying compared to some sort of online voting. And sure I know there are issues with that too but it would be the peak of mass voter turnout.
You know what keeps getting lost in these types of conversations? Even if I accept the premise of voting for Trump bc the GOP is that much better than the Democrats (I dont) the GOP still had like 17 candidates to choose from but picked Trump anyway