• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Jonathan Pie - Why The Left is Responsible For This Stunning Loss

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree that the onus is on activating the apathetic and disenfranchised, as there is not much to do to appease and persuade the racists and bigots that vote Trump, but "feeding my family/paying rent/giving my kids a future" does not necessarily hold true for Trump voters:

551515t9sb3.jpg

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

What you posted doesn't actually invalidate that argument. If the % of the vote that Hillary needs falls into the % of the Trump voters that are in the lowest tier income bracket then there you go?

Only pointing that out. I don't know enough about what Americans refer to as the rust belt.
 
What do people think about all the minorities that voted for Trump despite his racism? 8% of African Americans voted for him. 29% of Hispanics voted for him. If he's just about racism why did these people vote for him and not Hilary?

Racism and sexism are not exclusive to white people or men.

We live in a world where those types of thinking are teached as basic stuff. You see lack of representation, beauty standards looking all white and all short of institutionalized hatred.

If you live in a world like this the chance of you being influenced by it is HUGE and it is called internalized racism/sexism. It is the "trump hates THE BAD LATINOS, not me, I am one of the good guys" crowd like the taco trucks dude and the muslim women from the other thread
 
Mr. Pie nails the truth on this. Discussion is absolutely the key here, and both sides have lost this art.

We need to learn how to work on compromise again.
 
Got no time for this guy and his schtick. Any of his points that were valid were already laid out in detail by people actually part of the American press - who shares a large part of the blame for this - a day or two before.

Pardon me for not being nice enough to you when you were a dumb-dumb online.
 
So voters get a pass and we shrug our shoulders, but we make threads pointing out every misstep Hillary made?
.

Hillary controls her actions and we have some small amount of control over what our political parties do.

We have zero control over what voters do, other than to influence them. You're welcome to be mad at them. I'm mad at them too.

But so what? There's nothing we can do about people being what they are. They are just part of the framework of the problem to solve, I.e how to get dumb morherfuckers to vote
 
If you think about it, where have people even achieved a successful discussion? The news tries but always ends in an argument
 
You argued on YouTube comments and with Neo Nazis - you thought you'd be changing minds? That's not where you concentrate your efforts. Those people aren't coming around.

I just made a comment on a Conan O'Brien video. Didn't reply to anyone.

When looking now, most comments are anti Trump with a lot of likes, but with some really horrendous comments by Trump supporters.
 
What do people think about all the minorities that voted for Trump despite his racism? 8% of African Americans voted for him. 29% of Hispanics voted for him. If he's just about racism why did these people vote for him and not Hilary?

I'm not going to pretend what went through their minds in having them do that.

Some people just vote against their interests.
 
With these videos, always bringing up the same message, is a problem:

Trump just won by using none of the means that were apparently the key for winning. No moderation, understanding, reaching out, etc.

So doesn't it make more sense for the left to use the same tactics Republicans have been using to win, if they actually want to win more? There's gerrymandering, propping up a fanatical grassroots movement like Tea Party, brigading online campaigns and polls, aggressive smearing of any opponents by dirty means, hacking, disinfo campaigns, straight up lying to voters, etc. Proven tactics for U.S. politics. In post-fact world you can apparently also make up your own facts and repeat them long enough so that they turn 'real', so why not that too.
 
With these videos, always bringing up the same message, is a problem:

Trump just won by using none of the means that were apparently the key for winning. No moderation, understanding, reaching out, etc.

So doesn't it make more sense for the left to use the same tactics Republicans have been using to win, if they actually want to win more? There's gerrymandering, propping up a fanatical grassroots movement like Tea Party, brigading online campaigns and polls, aggressive smearing of any opponents by dirty means, hacking, disinfo campaigns, straight up lying to voters, etc. Proven tactics for U.S. politics. In post-fact world you can apparently also make up your own facts and repeat them long enough so that they turn 'real', so why not that too.

The problem is that the Dems have been fundamentally weaker than the Repubs for a long time. They always appeal to our better angels. That's what the party is all about.
 
This is on point. Part of the blame lies with the Democrats.

Their failure to select Bernie Sanders.

Their arrogance in thinking they'd win just by showing up.

The patronising way in which they labelled every dissenter a racist/sexist/bigot, ignoring their genuine concerns and calling them deplorable.
 
I agree that the onus is on activating the apathetic and disenfranchised, as there is not much to do to appease and persuade the racists and bigots that vote Trump, but "feeding my family/paying rent/giving my kids a future" does not necessarily hold true for Trump voters:

551515t9sb3.jpg

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

See those numbers under the Trump column? Those exist, even when they're not in color.

I just made a comment on a Conan O'Brien video. Didn't reply to anyone.

When looking now, most comments are anti Trump with a lot of likes, but with some really horrendous comments by Trump supporters.

Oh, sorry. But still, it sounds like the others you engaged with were not the pliable type.
 
This guy is full of shit. He rants about political correctness having to come to an end and yet hammers Hillary Clinton for calling racists, homophobes, and bigots deplorable. A rant full of contradictions basically because he likes the sound of his own voice and can't stop for two seconds to settle down and provide some nuanced thought.
 
This guy is full of shit. He rants about political correctness having to come to an end and yet hammers Hillary Clinton for calling racists, homophobes, and bigots deplorable. A rant full of contradictions basically because he likes the sound of his own voice and can't stop for two seconds to settle down and provide some nuanced thought.

How is it a contradiction? He's speaking to a specific section of Democrats, whereas they lumped everyone who voted Trump in under the various deplorable names. That's his point.

Then again, you were actually used as an example of this (in this or another thread), so I don't imagine you'd take to kindly to it.
 
He's speaking to a specific section of Democrats, whereas they lumped everyone who voted Trump in under the various deplorable names. That's his point.

He's speaking about Hillary Clinton, who specifically said the racist, bigoted, homophobic supporters of Trump's coalition are in the basket of deplorables. I watched the video. He's a complete hypocrite. He's talking about safe spaces being poison, how people need to stop being offended, but then rants about this shit. He should pick a philosophy and stick with it.
 
He's speaking about Hillary Clinton, who specifically said the racist, bigoted, homophobic supporters of Trump's coalition are in the basket of deplorables. I watched the video. He's a complete hypocrite. He's talking about safe spaces being poison, how people need to stop being offended, but then rants about this shit. He should pick a philosophy and stick with it.

You are falsely equating intense disagreement with offense. This happens a lot here, actually.
 
Or perhaps some people hated Clinton so much, it caused them to be able to vote for someone that was a bigot, a racist and a sexist.

That's actually just how much people hate Clinton. They decided to choose Donald Trump over her.
 
How is it a contradiction? He's speaking to a specific section of Democrats, whereas they lumped everyone who voted Trump in under the various deplorable names. That's his point.

That's simply not true. She said half, in the context of voters that couldn't be swayed on count of deplorable beliefs. A mistake for sure but impressively though a game of telephone transformed it in every Trump supporter.
 
It is crystal clear. Not sure how much clearer it can be.

No, you actually haven't made clear how Pie isn't applying a contradictory double standard to Clinton over her deplorables comment. You're instead making personal attacks at me which really makes no sense since this is about him taking issue with Clinton. And even if he's talking about her supporters (which in that part of the video he specifically wasn't), how does them calling racists and homophobes deplorable (which they are) square with his plea for political correctness to end and for people to stop getting offended at insults? He wants people to speak openly and truthfully with each other, yet with the other breath wants them to... not speak openly and truthfully.
 
That's simply not true. She said half, in the context of voters that couldn't be swayed on count of deplorable beliefs. A mistake for sure but impressively though a game of telephone transformed it in every Trump supporter.

I'm talking about more than just Clinton. That's what the word "they" implies.
 
Commenting on the climate that's stifling conversation while openly courting debate isn't the same as attempting to shut down arguments with insults and labels.

Even Obama commented on this trend earlier in the year.
Safe spaces don't stifle conversation. That's a ridiculous thing to say.
 
The video is pure truth. You can silence people all you want, but when they get in the voting booth they'll be free to express themselves however they'd like. This is why dog whistling is so much more dangerous than open bigotry.

Also, it's still ridiculous that I see posts that are like: "This person is making good points, but they made one that I disagreed with, therefore everything they say is invalid." I saw this sentiment in the Michael Moore thread and even in this thread. It makes absolutely no sense. Argue with the points, not the person saying them.
 
Or perhaps some people hated Clinton so much, it caused them to be able to vote for someone that was a bigot, a racist and a sexist.

That's actually just how much people hate Clinton. They decided to choose Donald Trump over her.

It was on her to get people to her side. People don't owe her anything. This makes that thread where people were insisting that she had charisma ridiculous.
 
"Being offended doesn't work anymore"

Nail on the head.

I voted Conservative in UK if I had mentioned that in certain circles I would have been lynched. I kept it quiet until I was in the voting booth. Its called the silent Majority.

I see myself as Right, I am not a racist, I am not homophobic, I'm not sexist but I am labelled as that as I am not Left.

It is how the Conservative party in the UK will win the next election because we will have mud thrown at as all news will be how bad we are and how the left is winning.

Political engagement is lost. All people think they need to do is Twitter or Facebook and find that group of people with similar views.

Video was bang on.
 
Or perhaps some people hated Clinton so much, it caused them to be able to vote for someone that was a bigot, a racist and a sexist.

That's actually just how much people hate Clinton. They decided to choose Donald Trump over her.

This kind of hate doesn't magically spring up for no reason. It's earned through lot of effort through a long period of time.
 
"Being offended doesn't work anymore"

Nail on the head.

I voted Conservative in UK if I had mentioned that in certain circles I would have been lynched. I kept it quiet until I was in the voting booth. Its called the silent Majority.

I see myself as Right, I am not a racist, I am not homophobic, I'm not sexist but I am labelled as that as I am not Left.

It is how the Conservative party in the UK will win the next election because we will have mud thrown at as all news will be how bad we are and how the left is winning.

Political engagement is lost. All people think they need to do is Twitter or Facebook and find that group of people with similar views.

Video was bang on.

In what way would you have been lynched lol? Sounds like you are too sensitive.
 
"Being offended doesn't work anymore"

Nail on the head.

I voted Conservative in UK if I had mentioned that in certain circles I would have been lynched. I kept it quiet until I was in the voting booth. Its called the silent Majority.

I see myself as Right, I am not a racist, I am not homophobic, I'm not sexist but I am labelled as that as I am not Left.

It is how the Conservative party in the UK will win the next election because we will have mud thrown at as all news will be how bad we are and how the left is winning.

Political engagement is lost. All people think they need to do is Twitter or Facebook and find that group of people with similar views.

Video was bang on.

Ignoring the hyperbole in your post, it sounds like you would have voted conservative whether people were more welcoming of your choice or not.
 
With these videos, always bringing up the same message, is a problem:

Trump just won by using none of the means that were apparently the key for winning. No moderation, understanding, reaching out, etc.

So doesn't it make more sense for the left to use the same tactics Republicans have been using to win, if they actually want to win more? There's gerrymandering, propping up a fanatical grassroots movement like Tea Party, brigading online campaigns and polls, aggressive smearing of any opponents by dirty means, hacking, disinfo campaigns, straight up lying to voters, etc. Proven tactics for U.S. politics. In post-fact world you can apparently also make up your own facts and repeat them long enough so that they turn 'real', so why not that too.

Can you really beat the Republicans at fearmonging and ignoring facts? You need charismatic leaders and simple messaging, not fanatical movements. Obama would have these election won by a landslide...
 
I love this painting of the left as an intolerant lynch mob and the right as reasonable and open to discussion. Ridiculous. The amount of times I've been called 'sjw cuck faggot' recently for expressing alarm over trumps sexist and racist views tells me that if anything, I'm on track by not being tolerant of racist, homophobic and sexist views. You wanna have a discussion, great. You want to sneer about safe spaces and feminazis then you're going to get called. That's not 'censorship' or lynching.

Also , nothing will ever convince me that trump won because of liberal intolerance or culture wars. Trump won because Hillary Clinton, right or wrong was perceived by a whole lot of good, well meaning people as being representative of a very corrupt establishment. I tend to lean on the side who thought she was a deeply flawed choice but I would have voters for her anyway. But the negative perception of her was overwhelming and the people spoke to that with their votes
 
dems fucked up for real, cant believe we even have to entertain some of the nonsense in this video (or thread)
let it burn i say, its the only way some people will understand
 
I love this painting of the left as an intolerant lynch mob and the right as reasonable and open to discussion. Ridiculous. The amount of times I've been called 'sjw cuck faggot' recently for expressing alarm over trumps sexist and racist views tells me that if anything, I'm on track by not being tolerant of racist, homophobic and sexist views. You wanna have a discussion, great. You want to sneer about safe spaces and feminazis then you're going to get called. That's not 'censorship' or lynching.

Also , nothing will ever convince me that trump won because of liberal intolerance or culture wars. Trump won because Hillary Clinton, right or wrong was perceived by a whole lot of good, well meaning people as being representative of a very corrupt establishment. I tend to lean on the side who thought she was a deeply flawed choice but I would have voters for her anyway. But the negative perception of her was overwhelming and the people spoke to that with their votes

I think people need to get off the internet once in a while. It just isn't a place to have meaningful political discussions. This wasn't about the extreme right or extreme left(the people you find arguing about politics on the internet), it was about everyday people whose voice gets drowned out in this crossfire. The Republicans have won these people over repeatedly. No one is saying the right is made up of angels, but they are actually willing to reach out and "educate" these people (wrongly). These days a person only has to call themselves a Republican or express a slight disagreement before their entire voice is dismissed. Which side are they going to go to? We are starting to look at people as caricatures. I know Republicans in real life and they aren't as out there as you would think. Though, the ones that you usually see in the media are. Everyone needs to take a step away from social media and talk to one another in person.
 
I think people need to get off the internet once in a while. It just isn't a place to have meaningful political discussions. This wasn't about the extreme right or extreme left(the people you find arguing about politics on the internet), it was about everyday people whose voice gets drowned out in this crossfire. The Republicans have won these people over repeatedly. No one is saying the right is made up of angels, but they are actually willing to reach out and "educate" these people (wrongly). These days a person only has to call themselves a Republican before their entire voice is dismissed. Which side are they going to go to?
Wellllll if they are calling themself republican I am guessing they aren't going to the democrat side by default. No idea what you meant there. Also, yes, this rant is absolutely about how the intolerant left lost the election, with a smattering of 'Hillary Clinton is terrible'.

All you are doing here is proving my point that the left are painted as intolerant and the right as reasonable and open to discussion.its just another disgusting generalization with no basis in reality
 
Wellllll if they are calling themself republican I am guessing they aren't going to the democrat side by default. No idea what you meant there. Also, yes, this rant is absolutely about how the intolerant left lost the election, with a smattering of 'Hillary Clinton is terrible'.

All you are doing here is proving my point that the left are painted as intolerant and the right as reasonable and open to discussion.its just another disgusting generalization with no basis in reality

You're right that the right is just as intolerant as the left. I take that back.

Also it wasn't as simple as "Hillary is terrible". Pie was expressing his opinion. This is the issue exactly. He can't say something bad about Hillary without someone complaining about him having an opinion. Instead, express why you feel what he said about Hillary was flawed. Argue against his opinion rather than him.

I'm going to quote this post again because I think they put it perfectly:
One of the most dumbfounding things this past cycle was that, not only did the Clinton crowd demonize the right, they vilified the left as well, their allies! If you weren't on their specific hue of the political spectrum, then you were part of the problem. If you were too progressive, you were naive and delusional and your ideas would never have a chance of being enacted so you shouldn't even try. If you liked Bernie, well look right here, we've got this nice Bernie Bro narrative to run with to label people as sexists and racists, even Bernie himself! The implications that people wouldn't have prodded issues in Hillary's policy if she were a man. The implications that they weren't actually taking anything seriously and that they weren't gonna show up at the polls. Anyone not 100% on board with the queen was a problem.

Since the election has ended, so many people on gaf, myself included, have finally been able to step out and speak about how we were effectively chased away from political discussion here. I voted for Bernie in the primaries, and voted for Clinton in the GE, I never once ever considered anyone on the Republican side, including Trump. Voted for Obama, live in a blue area in a state that just went red, pro LGBTQ+, pro civil rights, supportive of BLM, supportive of religious tolerance [being athiest myself], etc, etc, etc. I'm on your fuckin' side and you managed to push people like me away by shutting down any concern or dissent. I can't even imagine how people on the right truly feel about you if you manage to chase your own side away. You don't want to hear it but you have to consider the perspective of other people that aren't in your left but not-too-left bubble, including poor and racist white people. Everyone has their story that brought them to the person they are today.

Despite being the side of inclusion and tolerance, your behavior echoes that of the right in that you only have compassion and empathy for the people you've decided you want to have compassion and empathy for. Don't get me wrong, it's clear as day, a ton of Trump supporters are bigoted, fucking tell them off for doing bigoted shit. But in the past few days so many on gaf have made it clear that they don't even want to entertain the idea of understanding their perspective, AKA 'why they are the way they are' AKA bigoted. They won't extend an olive branch to you so you won't extend one to them. Well, guess what? No olive branches for anyone ever. You can sit in your pile of Trump until you die, convinced that somehow hate won't breed more hate. But they're Americans, too, and they also have the power to vote.

For as shitty as America is, it's a lot less shitty than it used to be, and it blows my mind that nobody wants to be a bigger person because they've got some moral high ground to uphold instead of taking the morally high action of trying to enact change. This election has made it clear that there's a divide between urban and rural Americans. Urbanites can afford to give a shit about trans rights and the injustices of police brutality. Most jobs in the city aren't really going anywhere, and if they do, you can fall down the ladder a few steps. Yeah, it sucks to work at Mickey D's, but at the end of the day, you're at least alright. Out in the boonies, they don't have that shit. One job down and that's it. Factory closed and all those workers need something to do. Meanwhile, us cityfolk are rallying behind green energy and letting immigrants and refugees in because we're thinking of the greater future, the long game. These are things that are ultimately better in the grand scheme of things, but will only serve to make things shittier for the countryfolk. But instead of trying to understand, you've decided they're all a bunch of bigots and they can't be helped and they shouldn't be helped. Deplorable, racist, uneducated. Doesn't matter if it's true or not, if your morals are actually good, you'd find a way to help those people without giving into their hate. At least Trump had his bullshit wall, which kills the immigrant and job birds at the same time. Again, doesn't matter if the wall is viable or true, he at least offered something. Clinton didn't offer them anything, and neither did you, leaving them with Trump. Because you didn't want to give an inch in order to gain a mile. You think you're doing the right thing, but they also think they're doing the right thing. But because you don't have in interest in their perspective, you'll never find a way to fix things. That's a defeatist attitude, the idea that nothing can be done about racism and sexism.

That's why you shout them down and drown them out. If the bigots don't have a voice, then it's almost like the country is moving forward. But no, they're just silent, but the hate is still there. The hate pops up every now and again, maybe a baker somewhere doesn't want to make a cake for a gay wedding. Hits the news. We all denounce it. We send the bad press their way. We send the hate their way. They go out of business. We think we've won. Another step of progress. They go home to their kids and tell them 'the faggots are ruining this country'. We didn't win, we made things worse. Now that hate is festering into a new form. But at least we got to feel morally superior to the homophobe, if only for a moment. Again, doesn't matter that we are morally better because we didn't actually fix anything. Cycle this over a billion times and everything is worse. We could have worked to invite these people to our side, to get them under our umbrella. Bernie had a shot at it, but Clinton didn't try. What a huge step it would be to convince that side there was common ground with the socially progressive. Instead, the left was content with letting the bigots vote for the bigot so when they lost they would continue doing bigoted things. Well now they've won and we didn't want a bridge so none of them split off with us. Bonus points because the winner has terrible healthcare and economic policies and also doesn't believe in climate change. Good thing we let all those eggs gather in one basket. Half the country didn't even vote, and this toxic behavior did no favors towards getting them to take action. Be the change you want to see. I'm going to bed. This is a worthless post.
 
Man, that Pie guy is insufferable!

I agree that Clinton was a terrible candidate who ran a piss poor campaign. From here in the UK, it seemed to hinge on Trump being worse - a terrible tactic.

I also agree the 'art of persuasion' does seem to be lost, but I'd say it's a universal thing. The Internet is a difficult place to have meaningful discussion and I think it's always been quite limited in that capacity. The alt-right are equally as guilty of shouting down opposition as the left, it all depends on which echo-chamber you're in as to who is doing the shouting.

What we (the left) are more guilty of is our unbearable smugness (I'm probably going to indulge in some of that here :D)

Now, the problem with the persuasion point is, facts were the first casualty of the election. Most people only listen to, accept, or entertain views that already support their own established perspective, irrespective of one's 'persuasiveness'. How many times have you tried to discuss the election in real life with someone on the other side and successfully convinced them to heel-turn? Bravo if you did, but I imagine it's quite a rare occurrence.

Facts and logic don't stand up against Trump's appeal to 'emotions'; an approach that was identical to the Brexit campaign. It's like music, it cuts through reason like a blow torch, critical thinking be damned. When facts were checked and found wanting, people ignored them because they didn't fit their view. Facts don't matter now. Emotions rule.

So when facts and persuasion don't work, and we want to beat that kind of politicking, what are we really asking for here? Do we expect all candidates to indulge this 'post-truth' (ha!) approach to winning...? Does anyone really want that? Is there perhaps a more fundamental issue with how people view/interact with politics if they're more interested in abstract promises and controversy, over facts, policy, or legislature?

(Here comes the smug la la la-la)

As far as I'm concerned, if you voted Trump based on promises that had nothing to do with his racist or misogynist views, you may not consider yourself a racist or a misogynist, but you still got in to bed with and have legitimised a candidate (and voters) who are.

That's not name calling, either, it's what has happened.
 
Or perhaps some people hated Clinton so much, it caused them to be able to vote for someone that was a bigot, a racist and a sexist.

That's actually just how much people hate Clinton. They decided to choose Donald Trump over her.

For the most part I don't think people chose Trump over her they just seemed to stay at home and failed to vote.

The bulk of Trumps votes are just republicans voting republican. Hillary can't really stop that. Her crime was failing to get her own side on board. Which the argument in here also tries to suggest some of that was on the shoulders of liberals being insufferable and tearing their own people apart.
 
Dude hit the nail on the damn head.

Everything was so freaking binary during this election. And it's still going on.
If you're taking such a hardline stance and painting everyone with the broadest of strokes so that you're even in-fighting and shouting down voters among your own freaking party, it's time to take a big step back.

The entire election was a shit show from start to finish.
 
Blaming the voters is the path of the loser. It's not constructive, it doesn't help anything. All it can do is make things worse.

If I may disagree here.

I think blaming voters is NECESSARY because at the end of the day, your vote is your voice. For minorities, our ancestors fought, bled and in many cases died for our ability to vote. To have that voice. And so to the degree that your vote is not activated and deployed is the degree to witch you disregard all of those who came before. You can blame nobody else for what happens.

The reality is that for all of the upset people out there, the fact of the matter is that 5 million of Obama's voters stayed home on Tuesday. More than enough people to stop Donald's rise to power. They didn't vote. If these people did not want to see Trump in office and did not vote to stop that from happening by using the mechanism available to us all once every 4 years, they bear a personal responsibility for where we are.

Voters are far from the only piece of this pie and it can be argued that maybe the majority of the responsibility lies with the candidate, platform, or party. But suggesting they are free of blame and criticism seems fundamentally incorrect. The voters are the gate keepers. The first and last line of defense. Every voting-age adult is responsible for doing his or her civic duty. Not voting is ultimately on nobody else but the individual at the end of the day.
 
"Being offended doesn't work anymore"

Nail on the head.

I voted Conservative in UK if I had mentioned that in certain circles I would have been lynched. I kept it quiet until I was in the voting booth. Its called the silent Majority.

I see myself as Right, I am not a racist, I am not homophobic, I'm not sexist but I am labelled as that as I am not Left.

It is how the Conservative party in the UK will win the next election because we will have mud thrown at as all news will be how bad we are and how the left is winning.

Political engagement is lost. All people think they need to do is Twitter or Facebook and find that group of people with similar views.

Video was bang on.

+1

Not only that. Most people on both sides that think of themselves as free thinkers, are usually repeating other peoples arguments over and over again even without corroborating if they are true of not. In a sense they are the puppets of somebody else thinking.

Modern politics tend simplify really complex problems with very complex solutions. Populist like Trump or Sanders do it that way (i.e if we kick the inmigrants/blame the rich/abolish trade agreements, etc. your life will improve). The problem is that it leaves very little room for debate, you are either red or blue, there is no more room for moderates.
 
If I may disagree here.

I think blaming voters is NECESSARY because at the end of the day, your vote is your voice. For minorities, our ancestors fought, bled and in many cases died for our ability to vote. To have that voice. And so to the degree that your vote is not activated and deployed is the degree to witch you disregard all of those who came before. You can blame nobody else for what happens.

The reality is that for all of the upset people out there, the fact of the matter is that 5 million of Obama's voters stayed home on Tuesday. More than enough people to stop Donald's rise to power. They didn't vote. If these people did not want to see Trump in office and did not vote to stop that from happening by using the mechanism available to us all once every 4 years, they bear a personal responsibility for where we are.

Voters are far from the only piece of this pie and it can be argued that maybe the majority of the responsibility lies with the candidate, platform, or party. But suggesting they are free of blame and criticism seems fundamentally incorrect. The voters are the gate keepers. The first and last line of defense. Every voting-age adult is responsible for doing his or her civic duty. Not voting is ultimately on nobody else but the individual at the end of the day.

What's that old quote? the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
 
He makes a powerful argument. We have lost the art in engaging each other and listening.
 
The democrats told those former blue collar Obama voters that they'd rather get two moderate republicans for every one of them that left the party than trying to win them back. That's not staying home because you didn't get a fuzzy feeling, that's staying home because you were told to fuck off.
How were they told to fuck off? By Clinton not visiting the state enough?

Can you show me evidence that Clinton, the Dems and their campaign heaped scorn on blue collar workers? Note, not promising them "you'll get your jobs back! believe me! I have the best people to work on that! believe me!" isn't "telling them to fuck off".

It was a completely stupid thing to say and I'm not sure why we need to spend any time rationalizing how it wasn't. It was a massive win for Trump when she said that and I don't know how anyone could spin it any other way.
I literally just explained why. Care to address my point instead of just repeating your assertion?

Attack the candidate not the voters.
Like Trump did? Trump attacked every minority group out there and yet somehow he still got plenty of their votes.

I agree that the onus is on activating the apathetic and disenfranchised, as there is not much to do to appease and persuade the racists and bigots that vote Trump, but "feeding my family/paying rent/giving my kids a future" does not necessarily hold true for Trump voters:

551515t9sb3.jpg
"Economic anxiety"

I swear, people really don't want to admit how prevalent racism and misogyny are, huh.
 
Jonathan Pie is a pie.

I'm glad someone is finally going against safe spaces and the disgusting use of the word mansplaining. The anti-pc crowd have been oppressed for too long :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom