Well you had to pay to get in, so I doubt a lot of non-Trumpers would bother.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT1| From Russia with Love
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Really? I guess they're collecting for the 2020 election.
It's weird I can say that without joking.
aspiegamer
Member
Okay, now this one is funny. I am capable of laughter! Improvement.
We all know this is would only come up in his lame duck months.
Favorite part is that Conway suggests a dead sculptor AND spells the name wrong. Although "Rodan" (like the Godzilla enemy) would have gotten max laughs).
rokkerkory
Member
In one month Trump has cost tax payers 11.3 million dollars (that's almost as much as Obama in a year)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-month-year-a7586261.html?cmpid=facebook-post
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-month-year-a7586261.html?cmpid=facebook-post
GutsOfThor
Member
It's all right 'cause it's all white!
metalslimer
Member
Do presidential campaigns have to pay for the security that goes along with setting up rallies during a reelection run?
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Revolving door of people
ErasureAcer
Banned
Trump is doing rallies to recruit for positions.
"Hey you with the MAGA hat on. You bought that online right? You know your cyber. You're hired." And, "Lady, you have a wonderful smile. You're now ambassador to Mozambique.
"Hey you with the MAGA hat on. You bought that online right? You know your cyber. You're hired." And, "Lady, you have a wonderful smile. You're now ambassador to Mozambique.
Even more amazing that this was how they did it in the 1830s
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Someone ought to ask if the RNC is reimbursing the government for his trips
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Trump loves himself some Andrew Jackson
Blocking that thread was one of the best GAF decisions I've made in a while.
I have no idea why I even go into that thread. It's just page after page of people going:
It's literally filled with the worst political posters of the last year making bad arguments.
"Back up to 40% on Gallup. Wonder how long it will be before it stabilizes in the 30s."
Knowing the way this world is heading, it'll go higher than Lincoln by the end of the year.
Pessimism aside, I do wonder how SNL will get under his skin tonight. He'll probably forget the loving crowds by the evening as that show comes on.
Knowing the way this world is heading, it'll go higher than Lincoln by the end of the year.
Pessimism aside, I do wonder how SNL will get under his skin tonight. He'll probably forget the loving crowds by the evening as that show comes on.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Nate Cohn, this is kind of really stupid!
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/833051614793576448
Trump's agenda is white supremacy and Jeff Sessions is the main vote you can cast on that.
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/833051614793576448
Trump's agenda is white supremacy and Jeff Sessions is the main vote you can cast on that.
Thought SNL was on a 2-week break. Which means perfect time for Trump to go batshit and do all the 'Big stuff!' he said he is gonna do next week.
It really does get exhausting listening to people who, for the most part, have no skin in the game and push forward ideas and strategies that have long been discredited.
Cross-posting from OT:
"How about this: every time someone says that Milo and his ilk aren't obvious white nationalists and nazis - the "lol just joking, so edgy" defense doesn't give infinite plausible deniability, especially when one repeatedly espouses their rhetoric - the entire right wing gets to be lumped into their category. Since apparently Milo is just another conservative, that must mean that the average conservative is approximate to Milo."
No one's even responded to my posts, which I guess signifies that they don't have a counterargument prepared and I am therefore right by default. That's how it works now, right???
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
The way the right has rallied around Milo (a NeoNazi) for being violently protested against for trying to endanger the lives of minorities is just fucking weird honestly.
Even the mainstream/non-Trumpy right are aligning themselves with a guy who writes "Muslims do get rapey."
All Republicans are bad.
Even the mainstream/non-Trumpy right are aligning themselves with a guy who writes "Muslims do get rapey."
All Republicans are bad.
They're managing to undermine their own argument by putting forth someone who explicitly and openly doxxes people as targets for focused harassment as the poster child for why white nationalists need to not only have platforms, but also have platforms free from effective criticism.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Unless a church allows me to give a speech to their congregation (with no criticism or protesting mind you) about why all churches should be burned to the ground and why late term abortions are great, then there is no free speech.
It's not even just the right, there's people on the left doing it too. It's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever seen.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Milo's Nazi fans shot a protester literally two weeks ago >_>
I mean, come on, people.
I mean, come on, people.
I have no idea why I even go into that thread. It's just page after page of people going:
It's literally filled with the worst political posters of the last year making bad arguments.
Sad thing is that I'm super duper pro 1A; and that thread is still insane to me. I get Berkeley's position - based on the fact they are a state school, they literally have no choice in the matter barring an "imminent" (which means 90+% likely) threat of violence, they have zero recourse, since they were not the ones who invited him. The chancellor's letter basically spells out what they are doing and why they have to do it:
http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/01/26/chancellor-statement-on-yiannopoulos/
Dude, if you can't tell the difference between free speech of a private institution (like a church) and free speech without penalty from the government (you know, the Trump-ran government now); I don't know what to tell you. In terms of violence - I will point you towards the Vietnam protests in the past - the reason past violence doesn't immediately disqualify a speaker is because otherwise you could easily suppress anyone's speech by causing violence. Anytime a BLM speaker would be invited; all it would take is a couple of shitheads causing violence, and boom, by that definition, universities would be obligated to block those speakers from speaking. You don't want the Trump government defining "good speakers" versus "bad speakers".
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Cybit, CPAC is a private institution.
Germany isn't letting the Nazis come back.
https://twitter.com/Wahlrecht_de/status/833058066388152322
Germany isn't letting the Nazis come back.
https://twitter.com/Wahlrecht_de/status/833058066388152322
Also, you get to pick any random member of the congregation to defend the entire church. And if that one person fails to do so, then they've proven you unequivocally right!
It's because they see themselves as more likely to be misconstrued as "racist" when they were genuinely just being edgy as a lazy substitute for dark humor or expressing themselves poorly - which in all fairness, has happened before a few notable times... but also rarely happens in a manner that has actual lasting consequences against people who weren't genuinely shitty people and from what I've seen the pushback is always stronger when someone was merely unintentionally abrasive - than they are to be the victims of harassment campaigns against minorities. Which while technically a valid statement, it's not one I have an ounce of respect for.
I think the problem is partially stemming from people not realizing that a person's action being called out as "racist" or "problematic" or any other gentler way of expressing distaste does not mean that person is automatically condemned to Racist Hell to serve their term as Milo's cellmate and partially stemming from people not being able to empathize with outgroups.
TiredofWinning
Member
Where can I watch the Trump rally?
im sure it will be on fox news
Oh, I thought we were talking about Berkeley.
Fuck the CPAC dudes. They are abhorrent for inviting him.
We were actually talking about Maher inviting him on his show and washing his balls.
In your nightmares
To expand on my own point, with regards to CPAC I think they are choosing someone particularly shitty to rally themselves around, which doesn't exactly do any valid meta-level principle they may invoke much favor. Milo being terrible doesn't invalidate the general principle of free speech, but choosing the guy who uses his platform to dox individuals for targeted harassment as their example case makes it reallyyyy easy to muddy the waters. Well, I'm not sure if saying "muddy the waters" is a fair term because this is actually exactly what they arguing for on an object level. I guess it's more like when confronted on the muddiness of their water, they just dumped another bucket of dirt in. They've managed to screw up their own chance to deflect into "we're just defending free speech".
I think there are merits in exposing the contents of hateful rhetoric to the public eye and in fact think that part of why the alt-right metastisized is because people due to the "don't look at the comments" aversion developed their own vision of what the alt-right is yet are too scared to actually read their manifestos, but it's something that must be done with great care. If someone is going to go as far as to encourage a widely televised even "debate" with a nazi, they had damn well better be prepared to make sure they don't lose, or at the very least show up with a salient grasp of the relevant facts and statistics to not get rolled over. I've heard it said that not allowing nazis to speak is a slippery slope, so I contend that allowing them to speak also can be a slippery slope as well.
This is what I get for being in the Berkeley thread about the Dalai Lama at the same time. All the threads they cross my brains.
As for Maher, I don't watch him - but unless he was going to make a legit fool out of him on his show, I don't see the point of inviting him. If you can invite him to steal his soul - fantastic. Otherwise; I don't see the crossover between Maher viewers and Milo lol. I am guessing based on your washing his balls comment that it did not go well for Maher.
I am also an advocate for massive sunshine on hate speech in order to permanently get rid of it. Then again, I come from a culture where they try to "hide" things that are unsavory, and it ends up backfiring all of the time. In a world where the internet exists and access to that speech is readily available for those who want to believe it, I think sunshine and exposing that speech for the hateful bile it is over and over again is what actually gets a large mindshift change against it rather than trying to hide it, which makes folks innately curious about it. Basically, trying to suppress it can create a Streisand effect. I wonder had we engaged more substantively with Trump's rhetoric rather than just calling it hateful and racist (which it was), but explaining why it was hateful and racist over and over again, would that have changed the election? I don't know. :/
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
I only saw clips of the Maher show but that was the first time I had actually seen milo on video. He is very much not what I imagined him to be. Still hate him though.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Rassssssssssssssss has Trump has 55% approval and 0% undecided.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/trump-job-approval
Sure, Jan.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/trump-job-approval
Sure, Jan.
RastaMentality
Banned
I hope conservatives would protest the first amendement with such ferocity if a BSU invited Louis Farrakhan to speak at Texas A&M.
soul creator
Member
*Let me go check out The Lego Batman Movie and get my mind off politics for a few hours*
*end credits come up* "Executive Produced by Steven Mnuchin"
*end credits come up* "Executive Produced by Steven Mnuchin"
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
People should really follow the potentially stolen Nintendo Switch thread on Gaming Side. More twists and turns than any novel could have.
Yeah, I agree. I think the key is to be careful of how we cast that sunshine to avoid presenting them in a flattering light. My own mistake was assuming that Trump would appear as unhinged to the general public as he does to me. But he did not, and the media airing all of his rallies with just a crawl saying "wow these sure are some terrible things that are being said!" did a lot more to help Trump than it did to hurt him. Because like you said, it's imperative that we explain why his rhetoric is hateful and racist. Signal boosting it without doing so is even worse than doing nothing, because it's pretty much indistinguishable in terms of effect from people who agree with the bile sharing it.
But in the context of the last election I think this is actually pretty difficult to do on a large scale. For one, it's a lot easier to say something hateful and racist than it is to prove why it is hateful and racist. It also takes more time to explain, especially in a setting where there's no moderator calling out logical fallacies. Then there's the issue of current cable news formats not being conducive to the boring ventures through logic and argument structure required to dismantle these hateful and racist statements, with people just yelling over each other. Then there's people refusing to watch programs that challenge their preconceptions. Then there's the issue of the media's - and the media consumer's - attention span allowing for practically infinite plausible deniability because they never preserve or create context to parse all the stories that fly through. Diligence will be needed to enact structural changes to combat this inequality.
I think it is something doable, and something that must be done, but I think it will also be a difficult road. But on the other hand, as conditions continue to unravel the prevalent chaos will eventually overwhelm each of these factors anyways: I don't think the Republican death grip is sustainable despite all of this just because of how continuous the controversy is. If emails can be hammered into a game changer after constant coverage, I think all of this will eventually weigh down the Republicans do much. It would be much better if we could fix the system, but I think even this system can only obfuscate so much.
- Status