Author Topic: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?  (Read 33468 times)

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #150 on: August 28, 2018, 11:45:23 AM »
You take a twist with this argument that I believe is invalid. I was referring to literal Confederacy apologists (which may even be a smaller group than those who show a Confederate flag), and you immediately segue over to an assertion of a totally different interpretation that is "often the tack taken by alt-liberals".  I see that argument as another attempt at false equivalence by avoidance of math. There are many tens of millions of Americans who have had views supporting the Confederacy.  How many Americans do you think fit into the category of being an "alt-liberal" who often addresses any difference in policy as advocacy for slavery? And remember, part of my argument is that conservative media intentionally promotes false narratives to exaggerate that kind of opposition, because it is the best strategy to distract from the fact that millions of citizens at the core of the Republican party will actually defend the slaveholding Confederacy.

Let's restate the points in sequence to show you that I didn't shift topics:

ME: I've seen many statements made in the form of "If you believe in slavery...etc"
YOU: There are many people who believe in the Confederacy and therefore are apologists for slavery (not what I was talking about, as the people I'm referring to aren't actually acquainted with anyone who fits that description)
ME: The way "if you believe in...etc" is used tends to be directed towards anyone who doesn't agree wholesale with the position the poster takes. So for instance anyone who agrees with Trump that 'both sides' at Charlottesville were imperfect falls into this category.
YOU: No, I am talking about literal Confederacy apologists.
ME: But you were responding to what I was talking about, which was not about Confederacy apologists.

See my point? I already agreed with you that insofar as people may literally be Confederacy apologists there is something negative to say about that position. However what I'm talking about is not actually a specifically defined group that is being denounced (although on the surface it's portrayed that way), but rather something more like - in set theory terms - Me-prime. Anything that is not my belief is that evil thing, which I will call slavery/fascism, etc. Contesting the position of such a person means, according to them, defending or even being one of those evil white supremacist fascist dogs protesting at Charlottesville. I won't even go into my opinion on categorizing everyone at that protest under the moniker "white supremacist" or "fascist", which evidence on the scene didn't bear out in my opinion; but that's a separate matter really from what I'm discussing.

I guess what I'm saying is that many liberals seems to have taken a page out of W's playbook, "if you're not with us you're against us." The Biblical version of that quote is meant to say that if you don't believe in good then there's only one other game in town, but the way it's used now it means if you're not in my political/social club you're the enemy. These sorts of people (of which you're not one) have become rather evangelical in their liberalism.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #151 on: August 28, 2018, 11:48:50 AM »
Quote
I won't even go into my opinion on categorizing everyone at that protest under the moniker "white supremacist" or "fascist", which evidence on the scene didn't bear out in my opinion; but that's a separate matter really from what I'm discussing.

If you are at an event, and you look over and see even a couple of Nazis at your event, I would suggest you reconsider your attendance.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #152 on: August 28, 2018, 12:18:37 PM »
Quote
I won't even go into my opinion on categorizing everyone at that protest under the moniker "white supremacist" or "fascist", which evidence on the scene didn't bear out in my opinion; but that's a separate matter really from what I'm discussing.

If you are at an event, and you look over and see even a couple of Nazis at your event, I would suggest you reconsider your attendance.

So there is no circumstance you can ever envision where you might have "common cause" with a Nazi?

Never say never.

Edit: I guess you'll also be a no-show to protest efforts to ban Mein Kampf from University Campuses.

scifibum

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #153 on: August 28, 2018, 12:30:29 PM »
Nazis have badly broken moral compasses.

Multiply that by the fact that political activism is always about something controversial, not about whether babies should be allowed to nap or about whether the USA should just go ahead and hand over the keys to DPRK.

It's a really safe rule of thumb, as such things go.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #154 on: August 28, 2018, 12:33:27 PM »
Quote
I won't even go into my opinion on categorizing everyone at that protest under the moniker "white supremacist" or "fascist", which evidence on the scene didn't bear out in my opinion; but that's a separate matter really from what I'm discussing.

If you are at an event, and you look over and see even a couple of Nazis at your event, I would suggest you reconsider your attendance.

No doubt you are correct that the optics aren't great for people standing side by side with a bona fide Nazi. Is what you're concerned about in life primarily optics? There are times when, strategically, you might want to distance yourself from a cause because you don't like who else is for it, and I get that. But what you're implying now is that anyone who does not take this precaution basically is the same (for all public intents and purposes) as the person standing next to him. Therefore by that logic everyone at Occupy Wall Street must either a commi-socialist, or at least kept company with them and must not be much better. Or alternatively by that logic, whomever votes for someone must be counted as guilty by association with whomever else voted for that person...right?

Now there are limits to these analogies, because standing next to someone in person sporting a swastika would certainly impact me more greatly than knowing abstractly that I voted for the same person as that same neo-Nazi. However the impact of the proximity of those whose beliefs intersect with mine in one area but are insanely divergent else shouldn't logically impact how I am assessed as a person. "Well, you were standing physically near the bad guy, so that's worse than agreeing with him about this at a distance." That's the argument I basically don't accept. But as I mentioned that's a side issue as I didn't want to divert attention into this being about the characteristics of the individuals at Charlottesville.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #155 on: August 28, 2018, 12:34:51 PM »
Quote
Edit: I guess you'll also be a no-show to protest efforts to ban Mein Kampf from University Campuses.

Correct. I'll send a strongly worded letter condemning censorship. I can conceive of agreeing on some point with a Nazi. I can't conceive attending an event and raising my fist in the air next to them, chanting slogans with them, or helping them make banners.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #156 on: August 28, 2018, 12:40:32 PM »
If you are talking about a discussion, on line or IRL, then proximity also matters. Doesn't mean you can't participate, but you have an opportunity to distance yourself. You can say "hey we should defend our borders", but still call out the guy who characterizes Mexicans generally as lazy, dirty, violent rapists.

I generally do see people not drawing that distinction or dismissing it, but I likewise also see a lot of people defend everything Trump says because they agree with his policies or goals. There's an opportunity to say Trumps "he speaks perfect English" is racist AF, and still support him having the event in general and calling attention to a border patrol guy who did a good job.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #157 on: August 28, 2018, 12:52:41 PM »
Quote
Anything that is not my belief is that evil thing, which I will call slavery/fascism, etc. Contesting the position of such a person means, according to them, defending or even being one of those evil white supremacist fascist dogs protesting at Charlottesville.
Context is important.  This isn't (always) about "ANYTHING" that is not my belief.  There are some truly objective evil views being professed.  There are some truly objectively fascist ideas being put forward. 

This framing of the conversation, as if it's ONLY about "the other" is disingenuous.  I get it though.  How do you defend the indefensible?  How do you accept their votes and their money while telling them to keep their ugly opinions to themselves? 

Better to ignore it and claim that it is the other side unfairly painting you with a wide brush.    Avoidable though.  Just take a few steps away from the toxic people.  Or, you know, scour the web for Antifa spotting like some sort of cryptozooligist so you can point and say, "It's not just our side!"

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #158 on: August 28, 2018, 01:06:12 PM »
Just because you like Trump, and he says he likes his steak well done, does not mean that you approve of well done steak. If you defend him for liking steak well done, then now you own it. You ought to call him out on it and say that you don't like steak well done. You are also no longer invited to my barbecue.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #159 on: August 28, 2018, 01:18:16 PM »
Just because you like Trump, and he says he likes his steak well done, does not mean that you approve of well done steak. If you defend him for liking steak well done, then now you own it. You ought to call him out on it and say that you don't like steak well done. You are also no longer invited to my barbecue.

I like steak well done. So there.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #160 on: August 28, 2018, 01:24:00 PM »
I like steak well done. So there.

You try to pick something non-controversial. :)

But you're definitely not invited to my barbecue, and I'm not coming over for dinner. But I won't ignore you for life on all other topics.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #161 on: August 28, 2018, 01:30:23 PM »
All it takes is:

Listen, the man can make a mean potato salad, and for that he will always be welcome at my BBQ's.  However, I cannot abide his desire for a well done steak.  If he will not turn from this abominable stance he can damn well grill his own meat!

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #162 on: August 28, 2018, 01:34:48 PM »
You ought to call him out on it and say that you don't like steak well done. You are also no longer invited to my barbecue.

I like burnt meat, just as long as cardboard isn't easier to chew. :)

That said, "well done" on steak is a bit of a travesty all the same, it kills the flavor.  8)

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #163 on: August 28, 2018, 01:36:40 PM »
Listen, the man can make a mean potato salad, and for that he will always be welcome at my BBQ's.  However, I cannot abide his desire for a well done steak.  If he will not turn from this abominable stance he can damn well grill his own meat!

On his own grill, with his own equipment, and meat.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #164 on: August 28, 2018, 01:37:59 PM »
Quote
Anything that is not my belief is that evil thing, which I will call slavery/fascism, etc. Contesting the position of such a person means, according to them, defending or even being one of those evil white supremacist fascist dogs protesting at Charlottesville.
Context is important.  This isn't (always) about "ANYTHING" that is not my belief.  There are some truly objective evil views being professed.  There are some truly objectively fascist ideas being put forward. 

This framing of the conversation, as if it's ONLY about "the other" is disingenuous.  I get it though.  How do you defend the indefensible?  How do you accept their votes and their money while telling them to keep their ugly opinions to themselves? 

I'm not trying to frame the conversation 'as' anything; rather as I mentioned earlier I am only reporting what I actually observe happening on my social media and with people I know. The context of my post was that, in reply to jasonr's comment that people on the right see their entire worldview under attack, Greg then said that right-wing media goes to work creating propaganda blowing up minor extremist positions as 'the left.' My post merely stated that I don't get any of my observations from what media corporations write, but rather right from the liberal people themselves who say the things that alarm conservatives. It's not more complicated than that. And yes, I do perceive that the invective isn't limited to literal Nazis and fascists. It's facile to the extreme to denounce something already ridiculous to the vast majority of people and think you're being real or edgy or something. But the reason I think it really is edgy is because the circle of what counts as fascist or racist has been steadily widening such that you can see it widely said (not by a majority of people, mind you) that all white people are either racists or abet racism; or are privileged and can't speak about such things; or that those in power (men, white people, etc) are oppressors; or that "if you don't think you're a racist then you're part of the problem." The list goes on and I've seen all of the above repeatedly. Most of it can be roughly categorized as either a virtue-signalling clarion call or else as a dumpster-sized Kafkatrap. Which isn't to say that literally none of what these people say makes sense; some of it does. But the general tenor of it scares even me, and I'm not on the team they're most often railing against.

It goes without saying that most people don't make posts like this or blog about social justice. However the currents in a culture usually come from a minority anyhow so I see the numbers issue as being somewhat specious. It only ever takes a minority, often a vast minority, with no one contesting them. So for those just now who, rightly, say that you can vaguely agree with something a Nazi says but you should make it clear to distance yourself publicly from their garbage, I think it should be plain that the same is true for what I'm calling the 'alt-left'. I, myself, can agree with denouncing racism and facism (duh), but I would no sooner set foot in an Antifa rally as I would at a Nazi rally. I am happy to support the thing they claim to support without wanting anything to do with them, and I've said so before in threads on this topic. We had one specific thread about the branding of causes and how some causes have been branded in such a way as to make them seem very unsavory whereas they should in reality have broad appeal. Part of the problem in the social justice arena is that, despite what was just said about not wanting to be seen next to Nazis even if you agree with them on one topic, liberals in general seem to have little sensibility of distancing themselves from unsavory elements that 'agree' with them on some topic. The general vibe in the social justice community is that all social justice people are in the same boat and fighting for the same thing. But they are not! Not even close. The united front carries with it some power, even though to generate this seeming power the wholesomeness of these causes (like standing vigilant against fascism) seem to disappear. Instead those 'fighting fascism' often come across to me as bullies. Go figure.

So D.W., my issue isn't exactly with 'the other' (although that is always an issue), but with trying to help explain why people would flock to Trump and why they won't dump him when it's proven he is a problem. jasonr (whose username has now been changed?) suggested it's because they are actually under attack, and there is no bastion for them except Trump. Even though Trump never really made an overt appeal to them, he is the default place for them (i.e. people afraid of liberal invective and political correctness) to go, and there is no other option.


D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #165 on: August 28, 2018, 01:38:07 PM »
Listen, the man can make a mean potato salad, and for that he will always be welcome at my BBQ's.  However, I cannot abide his desire for a well done steak.  If he will not turn from this abominable stance he can damn well grill his own meat!

On his own grill, with his own equipment, and meat.
Good luck getting any of that potato salad "friend".

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #166 on: August 28, 2018, 02:15:33 PM »
My most alarming thing is the drawing up of sides. The average American seems less likely to concede even a minor point than in the past. You get Trump supporters wearing t-shirts applauding his "grab 'em" comments from Access Hollywood. This is something that I can't really fathom, and it strikes me as fanatical. On the other end, you get people who want to physically beat people down because they're wearing a hat. I'm not drawing equivalence between those actions, its not a study. It is merely a quick illustration of the picking of teams that is getting progressively worse.

And what is clear about the Always Trumpers, is that they will not only tolerate but vigorously defend every single thing he does. To me, that is fanaticism, just like on the other side when every single move Trump makes is denounced by the Never Trumpers to a maniacal degree. Waiting to pounce on whatever comes next. This happened to a lesser degree with Clinton, GWB, and Obama. But Trump's own absolutism, lack of political polish, and fearless hyperbole simply pushes the needle way over - he's like the poltical equivalent of an anger amplifier.

When the common ground falls away, by mutual agreement, this invites dehumanization of your opponents. That leads to violence, started by one side, retaliated against by the other until everything becomes so blurry that both sides believe the other side started it and must be stopped.


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #168 on: August 28, 2018, 02:38:10 PM »
Because teens have never taken hats from each other before Trump.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #169 on: August 28, 2018, 02:43:03 PM »
This was not just "some teen" taking somebody's hat.  This was a political statement that ended up in violence.

Quote
“That’s a racist and hateful symbol,” Butler said.

Quote
“Maybe just wake people up in some type of way, because it’s not cool the environment our classroom is in,” Butler said.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #170 on: August 28, 2018, 03:02:41 PM »
So that's:

A. A random event that involved a couple of kids that this time happened to involve politics that will receive appropriate discipline and legal repercussions.

or

B. A terrifying example of how far those liberals are willing to go.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #171 on: August 28, 2018, 03:08:36 PM »
A.  lack of self control, results in reprimand.  A more succinct lesson in social studies one couldn't ask for.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #172 on: August 28, 2018, 03:15:41 PM »
Quote
It's facile to the extreme to denounce something already ridiculous to the vast majority of people and think you're being real or edgy or something.
The war to distort perception goes both ways.  A lot of people on the left are reeling.  It’s not that anyone believed that we didn’t have serious problems with racism still but we at least believed that the days of open hate speech had gone the way of the dinosaurs or at least relegated to, “*censored* grandpa says when not out in public.” Then we saw a lack of willingness to govern while Obama was in office that was hard to chalk up to JUST party politics.  Then the Republican party’s response to his presidency?  Donald J. Trump.  A man who seems to take sick glee in fomenting racial tension.  So we ask ourselves, “is it really THIS bad still?”  Probably not, but if you read, watch, listen to the news or social media, it sure looks like a HUGE backslide in open racism and bigotry.
No, you shouldn’t have to denounce something “we” (a group believed to cross party lines and be an overwhelming majority until recently) believed to be ridiculous.  Yet here we are.  The *bleeping* president seems to promote it.  YOU don’t’ feel that way… do you? 
Quote
But the reason I think it really is edgy is because the circle of what counts as fascist or racist has been steadily widening
As it will continue to do so, and frankly, it should until we either out breed the ”problem” and everyone is enough of a melting pot it’s pointless to categorize, or just we get over it and actual equality is achieved.  I’m hoping for option that doesn’t take many generations to achieve…
Quote
such that you can see it widely said (not by a majority of people, mind you) that all white people are either racists or abet racism; or are privileged and can't speak about such things; or that those in power (men, white people, etc) are oppressors; or that "if you don't think you're a racist then you're part of the problem." The list goes on and I've seen all of the above repeatedly. Most of it can be roughly categorized as either a virtue-signalling clarion call or else as a dumpster-sized Kafkatrap. Which isn't to say that literally none of what these people say makes sense; some of it does. But the general tenor of it scares even me, and I'm not on the team they're most often railing against.
Spot on here.  I’ve always written off the vast majority of these statements as the voice of well meaning but strategically incompetent kids.  Emphasis on the “kids” part.  They want to make a difference and force change, and they believe that an “us vs. them” strategy is the only option.  Wait… that sounds familiar.  Could it be that there are forces on both sides of the aisle that benefit from creating strife?  That “firing up one’s base” is, gasp, a bipartisan tactic?
The general tenor of it shouldn’t scare you.  If you don’t agree with their (stated) goals, then breathe a sigh of relief.  These people are least likely to initiate change.  If you do agree with their (stated) goals, then weep, for the same reason.  Those who seek out more and more enemies of greater and greater power will eventually get the fight they want.  And then lose it.  This is also why the right is constantly checked with, “They aren’t with you… are they?” because we don’t want a larger more powerful enemy.  We want this human garbage to scatter when the lights come on, and starve to death due to lack of attention.
Quote
We had one specific thread about the branding of causes and how some causes have been branded in such a way as to make them seem very unsavory whereas they should in reality have broad appeal. Part of the problem in the social justice arena is that, despite what was just said about not wanting to be seen next to Nazis even if you agree with them on one topic, liberals in general seem to have little sensibility of distancing themselves from unsavory elements that 'agree' with them on some topic.
On the contrary, I tend not to distance myself from “unsavory elements” because I’ve never once encountered them.  Sure I read stories about a group of antifa looking for a fight finding one in the form of white supremacists who were… out looking for a fight.  IMO it’s falling for a trap, and I shed no tears when they… well get tear gassed or arrested or whatever. 
I’ve never met someone who put on a mask and went out to “fight fascists” in the literal sense.  I’m not saying they don’t exist, but you can’t distance yourself from people who are so rare as to never be seen accept as a sometimes response to active trolling by groups we all know are wrong and shouldn’t have to state the obvious and denounce But… I’m not a 20 something uni student adrenalin junky spoiling for a fight to prove I have the will to change things!  … or something.  That’s the thing.  Unless my perception of the dreaded Antifa is wrong, they are ALWAYS counter protestors.  Sure they may be collaborators in a scheduled street fight and should be scorned as such, but there is no moral equivalence here.  There may be (and is in practice) a legal equivalency though.
Quote
The general vibe in the social justice community is that all social justice people are in the same boat and fighting for the same thing. But they are not! Not even close.
It really is though.  Treat everyone as equals.  The End.  It’s only the tactics of how that might be achieved that differentiates the various factions.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #173 on: August 28, 2018, 03:27:21 PM »
It would be interesting to pose that scenario (of the hat) before many people and see their reaction to it. While reasonable people would likely grimace at slapping the teacher, I wonder how many would say something negative about the incident and then throw in a comment like the father did, to the effect that "well she shouldn't have hit anyone, but maybe that message needed to be made." It's not an apology for the assault, and yet a more or less complete solidarity with the sentiment behind the assault. Well, gee, what a surprise, that a feeling like slapping 'those people' will result in someone immature actually doing so.

As Drake pointed out, we don't want to ascribe this silly incident to 'the left'. But at the same time the dad's comment...does not bode well. He should have roundly apologized for her with no qualification.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #174 on: August 28, 2018, 03:40:17 PM »
As Drake pointed out, we don't want to ascribe this silly incident to 'the left'. But at the same time the dad's comment...does not bode well. He should have roundly apologized for her with no qualification.

I agree. And conversely, I'm willing to bet somewhere at some time, a kid got picked on and assaulted for being Mexican and the parent made a half-justification for that too. That also would reflect on a far wider audience.

There's a general trend of finding the worst examples possible of immigrants, Muslims, free speech advocates, liberals, anti-globalists, <append>. Then saying "see, that's what They are."

So you get people characterizing support for Medicare for All as the leading edge of a path that will inevitably lead to a police state that Stalin would envy. And another group looking at people who question racial quota systems as the leading edge of a path that will inevitably result in the return of segregation and slavery.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #175 on: August 28, 2018, 04:17:15 PM »
Do you think this type of agressive action is just random?   Leftist politicians and Media personalities such as Maxine Waters and Chris Cuomo as well as the Neo-marxist humanities faculty at our universities have been justifying if not encouraging this type of behavior for some time now.

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/401699-cnns-cuomo-defends-antifa-those-who-oppose-hate-are-on-the-side-of-right

Quote
But when someone comes to call out bigots and it gets hot, even physical, are they equally wrong as the bigot they’re fighting? I argue no. ... Fighting matters, too, there’s no question about that. But drawing a moral equivalency between those espousing hate and those fighting it, because they both resort to violence emboldens hate, legitimizes hateful belief and elevates what should be stamped out.

And when they say bigots they mean anybody who doesn't completely support their agenda.


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #176 on: August 28, 2018, 04:28:27 PM »
The full context of the article you cited:

Quote
"In the eyes of the law, yes. But in the eyes of good and evil, here’s the argument: If you’re a punk who comes to start trouble in a mask and hurt people, you’re not about any virtuous cause," he continued. "You’re just somebody that’s going to be held to the standard of doing something wrong."

"But when someone comes to call out bigots and it gets hot, even physical, are they equally wrong as the bigot they’re fighting? I argue no. ... Fighting matters, too, there’s no question about that. But drawing a moral equivalency between those espousing hate and those fighting it, because they both resort to violence emboldens hate, legitimizes hateful belief and elevates what should be stamped out."

"Antifa or whomever ... or malcontent or misguided, they are also wrong to hit, but fighting hate is right," Cuomo said later. "And in a clash between hate and those who oppose it, those who oppose it are on the side of right.”

That's a far stretch from condoning, encouraging, or excusing in any fair reading, especially in the first paragraph.

What he is saying is that there are levels of violence, and it certainly isn't limited to the left to draw such distinctions. Trump has talked before about how people on the left making statements deserve physical violence. The guy he'd like to punch in the face. The offer to pay the legal bills for someone who chooses to do so.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #177 on: August 28, 2018, 04:33:39 PM »
The full context of the article you cited:

Quote
"In the eyes of the law, yes. But in the eyes of good and evil, here’s the argument: If you’re a punk who comes to start trouble in a mask and hurt people, you’re not about any virtuous cause," he continued. "You’re just somebody that’s going to be held to the standard of doing something wrong."

"But when someone comes to call out bigots and it gets hot, even physical, are they equally wrong as the bigot they’re fighting? I argue no. ... Fighting matters, too, there’s no question about that. But drawing a moral equivalency between those espousing hate and those fighting it, because they both resort to violence emboldens hate, legitimizes hateful belief and elevates what should be stamped out."

"Antifa or whomever ... or malcontent or misguided, they are also wrong to hit, but fighting hate is right," Cuomo said later. "And in a clash between hate and those who oppose it, those who oppose it are on the side of right.”

That's a far stretch from condoning, encouraging, or excusing in any fair reading, especially in the first paragraph.

What he is saying is that there are levels of violence, and it certainly isn't limited to the left to draw such distinctions. Trump has talked before about how people on the left making statements deserve physical violence. The guy he'd like to punch in the face. The offer to pay the legal bills for someone who chooses to do so.

In a peaceful conversation or event or demonstration.  The first one to swing loses all moral authority. 

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #178 on: August 28, 2018, 04:37:34 PM »
Tale a look this list of recent acts of violence or harassment of Trump supporters and then explain to me how this is not a problem.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/07/05/rap-sheet-acts-of-media-approved-violence-and-harassment-against-trump-supporters/

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #179 on: August 28, 2018, 04:41:40 PM »
Well done, Lloyd, you managed to successfully ignore the 20 or so times that Cuomo said that the violence was not justified.  Oh, wait... you actually didn't quite ignore all instances, as you actually included one in the very quote that you presented:
Quote
Fighting matters, too, there’s no question about that.
Seriously, every third sentence in that editorial was about the antifa actions being illegal and/or not acceptable... while also making the point that they are not as morally repugnant as the white supremacists they are demonstrating against, while being no less legally responsible for laws broken.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #180 on: August 28, 2018, 04:47:31 PM »
Quote
In a peaceful conversation or event or demonstration.  The first one to swing loses all moral authority.
Ahh, but that was not your original claim.  You said that Cuomo
Quote
[has] been justifying if not encouraging this type of behavior for some time now.
Which is patently untrue in the article/opinion piece to which you made reference.

Or is your point simply that any argument that does not at least put white supremacists on an even moral footing with antifa is implicitly an encouragement to illegal activity?

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #181 on: August 28, 2018, 05:06:45 PM »
Ok, let's break it down.

Quote
"In the eyes of the law, yes. But in the eyes of good and evil, here’s the argument: If you’re a punk who comes to start trouble in a mask and hurt people, you’re not about any virtuous cause," he continued. "You’re just somebody that’s going to be held to the standard of doing something wrong."
Here he says if your just here to start trouble you're in the wrong.  I agree.

Quote
"But when someone comes to call out bigots and it gets hot, even physical, are they equally wrong as the bigot they’re fighting? I argue no."
But here, he says that as long as you are here to call out the bigots then sure, if they make you mad mess them up, they deserve it.

Quote
Fighting matters, too, there’s no question about that. But drawing a moral equivalency between those espousing hate and those fighting it, because they both resort to violence emboldens hate, legitimizes hateful belief and elevates what should be stamped out.
Now he waffles a bit, maybe its not totally ok to fight but don't worry, our cause is just

Quote
Antifa or whomever ... or malcontent or misguided, they are also wrong to hit, but fighting hate is right, And in a clash between hate and those who oppose it, those who oppose it are on the side of right.”
More talking out of both sides of his mouth.  Its wrong to commit violence.  but not so much if its against these bad people.

"And in a clash between hate and those who oppose it, those who oppose it are on the side of right.”

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #182 on: August 28, 2018, 05:22:40 PM »
So we're back to scorched earth. If he shows any empathy or understanding of what those people are doing and why, if he acknowledges that their methods can be separated from their cause, then it doesn't matter what his actual words say.

Let's say I heard someone use a slur toward a gay man, then saw somebody punch him in the mouth, I'm going to say that is wrong. But I'm not going to equate it to a guy who tracks someone down for being gay and punches him in the mouth.

If I were on either jury, I'm gonna vote to convict. If I have an input on sentencing, I'd render an unequal penalty.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #183 on: August 28, 2018, 06:17:27 PM »
So we're back to scorched earth. If he shows any empathy or understanding of what those people are doing and why, if he acknowledges that their methods can be separated from their cause, then it doesn't matter what his actual words say.

Let's say I heard someone use a slur toward a gay man, then saw somebody punch him in the mouth, I'm going to say that is wrong. But I'm not going to equate it to a guy who tracks someone down for being gay and punches him in the mouth.

If I were on either jury, I'm gonna vote to convict. If I have an input on sentencing, I'd render an unequal penalty.
This is a big distinction.  You can be morally right, but legally wrong, and wrong in terms of polite society.  Being on the correct side of a moral issue is not a license to mistreat or attack those on the morally incorrect side.  Doing so doesn't magically transmute a moral good into a moral evil though.

Just as being attacked first doesn't necessarily make it morally justifiable to respond with deadly force, though it may be legally justifiable to do so. 

Our president makes/made a lot of business decisions that are not morally "good" but they are (mostly?) legal.  Being "in the right" requires one to differentiate morals with law.  They are not the same.

Quote
The first one to swing loses all moral authority.
I disagree.  Moral authority can be judged entirely separate from the violence.  In fact, violence like this is often sparked by moral outrage...  That doesn't make the violence justified. 

Perfect restraint is not, and has never been, a requirement of the moral high ground.  My morality is not subject to the actions of my neighbor.  Is yours?*

*General question, not directed at TheDrake or Lloyd even though those quote prompted this rambling response.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #184 on: August 28, 2018, 07:11:04 PM »
Quote
We already had this debate, and as i recall you didn't comprehend the true causes of the financial collapse

As I recall, Alan Greenspan and the entirety of free market economic theorists cannot explain the actual events of the economic collapse of 2008 into their models, as he confessed in Congressional testimony 10/23/2008 ("I have found a flaw [referring to his economic philosophy]... I don't know how significant or permanent it is. But I have been very distressed by that fact... I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms" https://www.c-span.org/video/?c3342718/waxman-greenspan-testimony). I missed the part where you came up with a alternative economic model that addressed Greenspan's error (and I missed your subsequent Nobel Prize as well).

Yes you did.  The actual reality was laid out in about a half dozen links in our discussion.  Your appeal to authority notwithstanding, nothing about that is really on point.  The models were fine, they just couldn't anticipate a non-historic event (i.e., a significant increase in the sub-prime default rate on a national rather than regional scale).

Quote
As for the macho American thing bragging about how many hours you work, I can go toe-to-toe before addressing this issue - I have done 80-hour work-weeks, and I lead a group that often has some people working that long and hard (they get extra compensation for large numbers of extra hours, but I don't at my level).

There was nothing "macho" there, just a correction of your misrepresentation that people don't work that long.  Even the hourly workers I know work more than five days a week.

Quote
But that reinforces the point that when union power was more of a counter-point to corporate power, that drove the vast majority of American workers to a 5-day schedule.

Sort of.  Though you're really citing to a correlation rather than to the causation, there were lots of other correlated factors that also swung in favor of the middle class in the same window.  In any event happy to concede that private unions played an important part in changing us from the era of Robber barons to the era of a working middle class.  Of course, they and their public counterparts, continued to play an important part in changing us from an era of a working middle class to an era of unsustainable debts and no middle class, but I'm guessing your less willing to acknowledge that. 

Quote
Your assertion that "Obama was a disaster economically" is blaming him for the economic collapse.

Really?  Can you provide the quote where I did so.  Seriously, this seems like a completely nonsensical assertion.

Obama is responsible for the horrible response to the collapse, to the underwhelming recovery, and to "using the crisis" to dump a vast array of regulations that had little to do with economic recovery and everything to do with maximizing state control.  He literally was an autocrat that didn't believe in free markets.

Quote
Republicans get this amnesia about what it was like when the economy was losing 25,000 private sector jobs every day until Obama came into office.

Lol.  Yes, the government was directly responsible for the crash that lost those jobs, and the "solutions" they implemented were directly responsible for keeping them from recovering better than they did.

Quote
Your assertion is completely inconsistent with the facts that the US economy (with Obama's stimulus) grew faster than every other developed economy in the world. Sure, Fed policy helped a great deal, but at that point the financial system and the automotive industry were falling over a cliff. Your retelling of history is convenient, but not accurate.

Wow.  Obama beat anemic Europe.  That's what you are citing to?  So has every other President.  Every other President has beat Australia too.  How is doing something every other President has done (and usually by a bigger margin) something that we should praise Obama for?

I mean talk about making a fake argument.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #185 on: August 28, 2018, 07:13:20 PM »
We should not demonize all unions, or all corporations.

Agreed, we should only demonize public unions.  They literally negotiate against the public's interest.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #186 on: August 28, 2018, 07:32:21 PM »
As I've said before, this demonstrates that the Right has no morals.  They look to the Left to define them for them.

That's really not what the quote showed.  It showed that in our scorched earth politics Republicans will follow the Democrats to each new low.  Not sure, how you turned that around to be a critique of the Republicans.

Quote
Before the Right believes something, they first need a Democrat to show them the way.  They wait for a Democrat to do something, then wholeheartedly embrace it, make it their own, and expand it, doing it 100x as much.  And if asked to justify their behavior, they point to the Democrat.

Whereas the Democrats, start doing bad acts, lie about them, cover them up, and then accuse the Republicans of doing them (when they know they aren't), until they finally get a Republican that does the act and then they all claim that "both sides" are doing it and we can't hold them to blame for it.

Aren't partisan characterizations fun.

Quote
You know something, Crunch?  Just because someone else does something wrong doesn't mean it's now right.  :P

True.  But claiming Republicans are hypocrites for doing what the Democrats are already willing to do is almost the definition of hypocrite.

Quote
But that's what the Right believes.  Bill Clinton was a horn-dog.  That means the Right can elect a President who is a p**sy-grabber, serial-adulterer, serial-husband who believes the vows of marriage are for idiots.  After all, even if he is worse than Bill Clinton, he's still our man.

I find the p-grabber story fascinating.  Trump said celebrities can get away with it, given what we know from the #metoo movement that was literally true, and yet, in the delusion mind view you've moved past a statement that celebrities can do it, to it being a personal admission and a fact.  Do you have anyone credible that's come forward on that "fact"? 

In any event a serial adulterer is not worse than a rapist.  Is that some kind of bizarre "he's our man" equivalence that you're running?  Or was calling Bill Clinton a "horn-dog" rather than a rapist and serial sexual assaulter and sexual harasser just your way of "normalizing" him?

Quote
I would suggest any person with any morals to denounce the Republican party ASAP.

I don't see many people taking moral advice from the other side. 

Quote
Because the next time any Republican talks about being the party of morality and intelligence, I will point to the 2016 election and ask, "If you truly believe that, when why did you elect a man who routinely sh*ts on everything you hold dear?" :)

Well, cause there was no moral choice in 2016.  And the other choice would have been even worse for everything this guy holds dear.  Not to mention, most of what you're complaining about would - at best - be relevant for an extreme religious conservative not for a Republican in general (and even in that case, they'd still be inclined to choose the lesser of 2 evils in a 2 party system).

I mean honestly, you got to read Clinton campaign emails that revealed they were total scum and that they held even their own voters in contempt.  Didn't you still vote for them after that?

Quote
Congratulations.  I guess you guys never really were against adultery and such.  You were just jealous that it wasn't your guy doing it.  And now you've gotten your wish.  :P

Should I congratulate you on never being against autocracy and governmental fraud?  Or in favor of misuse of the Justice department?

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #187 on: August 28, 2018, 07:56:30 PM »
Alternatively, assertions that both sides are similarly engaging in inappropriate behavior ("Perception is now king, for both sides") might be a false premise asserted by the right because it justifies actions that are otherwise undefendable.

Unfortunately the claim of "both sides" is almost always made by the left, though I agree with your conclusion that those on the left make it to justify the undefendable.

Quote
As a group, we don't have concensus regarding the following three hypothesis:
  • the left has committed significantly more bad actions
  • both sides are the same
  • the right has committed significantly more bad actions

I am looking for common ground in the form of tests of logic and fact that we could agree were valid.

There are no such measures.  We don't have a pool of all actions, good or bad, to test against.  The left has significant control of media resources and media reports, the left has significant control of academic resources and academic research, and now the left has significant control of (and is starting to exercise that control over) social media.  While there is still enough material out there to feed any confirmation bias that one may have, there's no way to get a neutral set of facts to run tests on.


Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #188 on: August 28, 2018, 08:03:42 PM »
Listen, I'm all for the "We should fight back against fascists" message, but we are talking about a group with an agenda who, people seem to characterize as ready and willing to commit violence against their political enemies.  Or at least antagonize them and instigate conflict every bit as much as the "alt-right".  They are held up as a counter point to the bad actors on the far right.

I actually think that's a misrepresentation.  Can you point me to the violent "alt-right" demonstration or attack on a leftist rally that predates Antifa?  I suspect not without going back pretty far in history.  The idea that Anti-fa is reacting to a real problem is pretty much just a lie.  The claim that the alt-right (which is a made up concept to lump in people with extreme but reasonable views, with repugnant people) was promoting violence or even a threat to cause violence is an unsupportable claim.

Heck, even the actual racists have been marching for years without committing violence.

Quote
So you've seen "AntiFa", and they are being "trained" in universities?  Do you need to be on campus as a student or teacher to see them?  I live and work in big college towns and I've not noticed them.  They aren't talked about in my circles.  But universities are just in my town and I though I work mere feet from campus I don't work "on campus".

Antifa doesn't have offices, or student center meetings. They organize online and anonymously.  They wear masks so you can't identify them.  They're literal domestic terrorists. 

Quote
They are more than just a bogyman to the right leaning news consumer who need a counter point to the ugliness in their own party?  An example that, "it's not just us!"?

Well, no.  "It's not just us" is not what anyone on the right should say.  They should say, "It's not us at all, it's only the left."  Or do you have some actual facts that say otherwise?

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #189 on: August 28, 2018, 08:28:46 PM »
Quote
So it is hardly "one guy on the left" spouting off with these things. It's a whole slew of them

There were 63 millions American citizens who voted for the Democratic nominee for President. How many people do you consider a "slew"? Have you seen 1,000 people make such comments, otherwise known as 0.0016% of the people who voted for Clinton? And that does not count for the proven activity of the Russian military in creating false internet personalities to promote divisive positions.

You just keep echoing your unsubstantiated assertion of false equivalence. In contrast, I can point to a very large data sample that refutes your point: during the 2016 election campaign after Trump had wrapped up the nomination, polling indicated that 59% of Trump supporters believed that President Obama was a Muslim https://www.rollcall.com/politics/poll-two-thirds-trump-supporters-think-obama-muslim - if that's even roughly 59% of the 60 million that eventually voted for him, that's 35 million people.

More than half of Democrats think Bush lied about Iraq, notwithstanding that he followed the recommendation of everyone of his intelligence agencies, notwithstanding that his Director of the CiA was a Clinton appointees. 

Everytime I've looked into your surveys on the "Obama is a Muslim" question they've proven out to have been misleading constructed, and not to actually say what you claim the say.  By the way, take a look at the actual survey cited in that link.  It's pretty laughable.

Quote
Not equivalent.

Or you know, completely equivalent if you look at the right fake beliefs.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #190 on: August 28, 2018, 09:00:17 PM »
Quote
But here, he says that as long as you are here to call out the bigots then sure, if they make you mad mess them up, they deserve it.
No.  You need to read what he wrote, not what you imagine.  He said very explicitly that they are simply less wrong than their combatants who are fighting in support of racism.  Less wrong <> right. It's hard, but you really need to check your bias.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #191 on: August 28, 2018, 10:02:13 PM »
Quote
I actually think that's a misrepresentation.  Can you point me to the violent "alt-right" demonstration or attack on a leftist rally that predates Antifa? 
Huh?  I don't know if I could.  As you say, probably, with sufficient homework, but that wasn't the case I was trying to make.  I was describing, parroting really how I've heard Antifa described.  I wasn't trying to say this was like a violent alt-right demonstration or an attack by a right leaning group.  I suppose I can see where you got there from my quote, but “ready and willing to commit violence” is not the same thing.  I believe that is an accurate portrayal of many fringe groups hoping that others will strike the first blow.  Instigation is different than an attack.  So is my misrepresentation that Antifa are willing to strike the first blow instead of provoking others to do so?  That would be a lot closer to the point I thought I was conveying...

Quote
he idea that Anti-fa is reacting to a real problem is pretty much just a lie.
  Opinion not fact.  We COULD debate it, but seems less than productive.
Quote
The claim that the alt-right (which is a made up concept to lump in people with extreme but reasonable views, with repugnant people) was promoting violence or even a threat to cause violence is an unsupportable claim.
First point, I thought it was a rebranding of white supremacists by white supremacists in order to make themselves somewhat more accessible and gain supporters?  And again, while even those rogue elements may have rogue elements dumb enough to strike first, in the name of the Alt-Right, I believe they are instigators willing to provoke violence.  The more inteligent of them wouldn't even be that willing to fight back prefering to play the victim, but many (my guess) would probably fall into the “spoiling for a fight” category.  As this is perception, a group without membership cards and an official charter, and motive speculation by myself and a lot of other people based upon observed behavior, I don't know if I can meet your criteria of a “supportable claim.”

Quote
Antifa doesn't have offices, or student center meetings. They organize online and anonymously.  They wear masks so you can't identify them.  They're literal domestic terrorists.   
So that's a no?  I would have accepted observed “in the wild” fully adorned with identity masking plumage.  I get the point you are making, but this very thing makes them a boogyman and leads people to give them far more weight than they are due.  A counter protest group who takes the bait when nazi's protest is a civil matter for the police to deal with, not a troubling sign that the left has turned violent and lashing out at anyone who voted for the wrong team.

Quote
Well, no.  "It's not just us" is not what anyone on the right should say.  They should say, "It's not us at all, it's only the left."  Or do you have some actual facts that say otherwise?
Too true.  This was meant to be an internal dialogue / rationalization, not a hypothetical or actual quote someone on the right would say.  :(
« Last Edit: August 28, 2018, 10:06:54 PM by D.W. »

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #192 on: August 29, 2018, 12:18:47 AM »
Hey, welcome back Seriati. Forgive me if I don't go through that long list of belated responses right now, but let's start with just one and see if you can muster a counter-argument with any validity:

Quote
.  The actual reality was laid out in about a half dozen links in our discussion.  Your appeal to authority notwithstanding, nothing about that is really on point.  The models were fine, they just couldn't anticipate a non-historic event (i.e., a significant increase in the sub-prime default rate on a national rather than regional scale).

If the models were "fine", how did they result in a catastrophic failure. How would you define the word "fine" as an expression of the quality of the model, if you hold that it extends to situations where the model says that a certain adverse outcome could not occur and literally trillions of dollars are invested under that false premise?  How bad would the model have to be for it not to be "fine"?

And what exactly do you mean by a "non-historic event"? Since the event occurred, it's pretty historic. Are you saying that the model should be forgiven its flaws because the exact same failure conditions had not occurred previously?  Not only would that premise be arguable (irrational speculation in the value of assets followed by a collapse has occurred many times in history), but even if it were true that this was unprecedented, the conservative economic model never came with a warning that it provided no protection against new dangers. Instead, it was posited to apply to all economic situations, and deregulation was broadly pushed because of a universal belief in the benefit and safety of the free market.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #193 on: August 29, 2018, 11:47:29 AM »
Hey, welcome back Seriati. Forgive me if I don't go through that long list of belated responses right now, but let's start with just one and see if you can muster a counter-argument with any validity:

Quote
.  The actual reality was laid out in about a half dozen links in our discussion.  Your appeal to authority notwithstanding, nothing about that is really on point.  The models were fine, they just couldn't anticipate a non-historic event (i.e., a significant increase in the sub-prime default rate on a national rather than regional scale).

First of all, Greg, all these questions were answered on the prior thread.  If you've forgotten the answers I would suggest you re-read it.

Quote
If the models were "fine", how did they result in a catastrophic failure.

They didn't, they failed to express what would happen in a non-historic event.  Much like I've never seen a "standard" climate model that throws in a random catastrophic meteor strike (and there we know they happen so it's not even non-historic), the financial models did not include a consideration of a national scale increase in default rate.  If you look at the historical record, stability is the only word to describe it, prior to the crisis.

Quote
How would you define the word "fine" as an expression of the quality of the model, if you hold that it extends to situations where the model says that a certain adverse outcome could not occur and literally trillions of dollars are invested under that false premise?

The model is still fine.  It still predicts exactly what it claims to predict.  The premises aren't false now, nor were they false then, they were incomplete.  It's literally a caveat to every computer model (which is part of why I routinely criticize over-reliance on modeled results), that they can only include historic events.

Quote
How bad would the model have to be for it not to be "fine"?

You understand the models still work right?

Quote
And what exactly do you mean by a "non-historic event"? Since the event occurred, it's pretty historic.

I'm not sure I find this a serious question.  Do you literally not understand that a non-historic event would be an event that has no historical reference in any data at the time a model is created?  I gave you links to the historic mortgage default rates, did you look at them?

Quote
Are you saying that the model should be forgiven its flaws because the exact same failure conditions had not occurred previously?

I'm saying the model can't predict a result that there is no historic data to support.  Should we throw out Newtonian Physics on Earth because they can't predict stellar mechanics?  Or can we acknowledge that incomplete processes still can add useful information.

But more significantly, a model is a tool not an agent with moral culpability.  There is no forgiveness to be provided or needed.

Quote
Not only would that premise be arguable (irrational speculation in the value of assets followed by a collapse has occurred many times in history), but even if it were true that this was unprecedented, the conservative economic model never came with a warning that it provided no protection against new dangers.

Once again, you're flat wrong that this was irrational speculation.  It was completely, 100% rational, it was just wrong under these circumstances.  It could not account for the large number of non-economic factors that had put pressure on the history of the underlying data (which is exactly why the real fault here is the government's as they were the ones that created and forced those pressures).

And, why do you think it "came with no warning"?  I've seen the models on the collateralized mortgage products they came with pages of warnings, but then and now, and on EVERY SINGLE ONE was a disclaimer that historical results should not be relied on as a prediction of future returns.  The warning was LITERALLY stamped onto the paper work, the projections and the underlying models.

People chose to make rational judgements about how much credence to give the warnings because they UNDERSTOOD the underlying data, and not, as you imply, because they didn't understand it.

Quote
Instead, it was posited to apply to all economic situations, and deregulation was broadly pushed because of a universal belief in the benefit and safety of the free market.

Which is a nonsequitor.  Where you slip side ways into your world view as if that was somehow getting support from your not understanding the prior issue.  If the free market had been left alone, we'd never have had this crisis, the regional mortgage lender would still be the primary holder of mortgages, and we'd have some neighborhoods were no bank is willing to lend and that are under-served.  Changing that "present" to what we have now was a specific decision of our politicians.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #194 on: August 29, 2018, 12:07:33 PM »
Quote
I actually think that's a misrepresentation.  Can you point me to the violent "alt-right" demonstration or attack on a leftist rally that predates Antifa? 
Huh?  I don't know if I could.  As you say, probably, with sufficient homework, but that wasn't the case I was trying to make.  I was describing, parroting really how I've heard Antifa described.

Antifa's claim is that they are reacting to violence.  They are not, they are provoking violence and even initiating it.  Ideologically, the views of racists are wrong.  Ideologically, protecting their right to express them is right.  Ideologically, initiating violence over opinions is wrong.  Ideologically, protecting yourself from violence is right.

Antifa is in the wrong everywhere it initiates violence.  Period.

Racists are always wrong about their opinions.  They are not wrong to defend themselves from violence.

Quote
I wasn't trying to say this was like a violent alt-right demonstration or an attack by a right leaning group.  I suppose I can see where you got there from my quote, but “ready and willing to commit violence” is not the same thing.  I believe that is an accurate portrayal of many fringe groups hoping that others will strike the first blow.

I don't think that's an accurate portrayal of the original "Alt-Right" collection of repugnants.  I say "original" because even though the label was created by racists to rebrand themselves the media and the left have at times used it to "label" nearly half the country.  The way it's used today is not descriptive but rather designed to tar and feather anyone that doesn't agree with the left.  Take a look at the Wiki on it, the list of things that have described as Alt Right is vague and ever expansive.  And in true Motte and Bailey fashion, the attack is on the "racist" beliefs that represent a tiny fraction of the country.

As to the original racists that coined the term.  Their history is of seeking to be offensive with massive police protection.  I've never noted that they try to get hit, it's been decades since they "fought back" in response to violence.  Pretty much, they respond to violence at their rallies by relying on government protection.  They aren't "itching" for a fight.

Quote
Instigation is different than an attack.  So is my misrepresentation that Antifa are willing to strike the first blow instead of provoking others to do so?  That would be a lot closer to the point I thought I was conveying...

As far as I can tell, Anti-fa is the only group that's really itching for any kind of physical confrontation.  They justify it morally (to themselves) by redefining words as violence, therefore someone saying words with which they disagree is committing violence upon them and they are morally justified in applying physical violence back.

That's why meally mouthed condemnations that put the "blame" back on the victim of violence because their words are "always in the wrong" is actually repugnant.  Anti-fa are terrorsists.  The fact that they claim to terrorize only repugnant people doesn't change or justify that.  Particularly not when their definitions of repugnant are constantly open to expansion.

It reminds me of how Americans, pre-9/11, used to think it was okay to fund the IRA's terrorism.  It's not okay to support initiating of violence against anyone.

Quote
Quote
he idea that Anti-fa is reacting to a real problem is pretty much just a lie.
  Opinion not fact.  We COULD debate it, but seems less than productive.

It is worth it.  Protesting racists is an objective good.  Punching them is not.  Pretending and covering for groups that claim they are morally justified in punching them is objectively bad. 

If the racists are committing violence arrest them.  There is no reasonable basis to support vigilantes enforcing "rules" that are actually violations of our civil rights.

Quote
First point, I thought it was a rebranding of white supremacists by white supremacists in order to make themselves somewhat more accessible and gain supporters?

Yes, originally.  But again I point you to the wiki, that isn't where it's stayed.  If all we're talking about is Klansmen, we don't really need to use the term, there aren't enough of them to matter.  Instead, it gets used so much to try and tar anyone on the right as "the same as a racist" and it's utility other than as propaganda is effectively zero.

Quote
Quote
Antifa doesn't have offices, or student center meetings. They organize online and anonymously.  They wear masks so you can't identify them.  They're literal domestic terrorists.   
So that's a no?  I would have accepted observed “in the wild” fully adorned with identity masking plumage.  I get the point you are making, but this very thing makes them a boogyman and leads people to give them far more weight than they are due.  A counter protest group who takes the bait when nazi's protest is a civil matter for the police to deal with, not a troubling sign that the left has turned violent and lashing out at anyone who voted for the wrong team.

I almost said, if you want to see them, go where they are active.  Join their websites and go to where they protest. 

The most troubling thing about them is the idea that seems to have general acceptance that they have any moral right on their side.  They do not have any moral right when they are using violence to shut down the legal speech rights of others.  Period.  End of story.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #195 on: August 29, 2018, 12:36:46 PM »
Quote
The general vibe in the social justice community is that all social justice people are in the same boat and fighting for the same thing. But they are not! Not even close.
It really is though.  Treat everyone as equals.  The End.  It’s only the tactics of how that might be achieved that differentiates the various factions.

Except it isn't, because the most vocal parts of the Social Justice Movement don't wan't everybody to be treated equally. Otherwise they'd be pushing for Justice, not Social Justice.

Their entire premise is that the system is unfair and unequal as it is, so "simple equality" doesn't work. Which is where Social Justice comes into play so they can rig the game in favor of those they decide need special assistance.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #196 on: August 29, 2018, 12:42:45 PM »
I'm saying the model can't predict a result that there is no historic data to support.  Should we throw out Newtonian Physics on Earth because they can't predict stellar mechanics?  Or can we acknowledge that incomplete processes still can add useful information.

It sounds like you are saying that the people who created these models don't really understand economics very much at all. Although it would be no mean feat to even accurately model what's already happened, the underlying processes are at the heart of any science, and if the mechanics involved aren't understood then...you don't understand them. Now if a random phenomenon had bamf'ed into existence then we might well go "whoa, that was random". But when creating a system that has known mechanisms and operations, if the effects of this cannot be determined until the system plays itself out then there is no model to speak of that means anything. In physics, while it's true that one can have a decent theory even though it's incomplete, the theory should always allow you to take known elements (like payments, interest, etc) and reconfigure them and calculate the expected result. You should be able to use Newtonian mechanics to take any arbitrarily massive body and determine its momentum and so forth based on starting conditions. In the case of economics, however, it seems that only already completed cycles can be the basis of future expectation. Can you imagine how lame physics would be if all they could do is observe a planet already in orbit and say "well, now we can say how we expect its orbit to go!" If there is no predictive power involving a planetoid, trajectory, and what sort of orbit (if any) it would achieve, then the science is either immature or bad.

The very idea of a "non-historic" event in economics is laughable. The whole point of a theory is to explain how things will change. If nothing changed then you wouldn't need much of a theory. Incidentally, I would have more sympathy for this idea of a 'non-historic' event if it was literally an act perpetrated by one single person, like a Lex Luthor, out of the clear blue sky. "Luthor did a trick in the stock market that no one understood, and the next morning it crashed." But when it comes about as a result of ordinary people making ordinary transactions for years on end, and that's what we're calling "unknowable"? Hah. What that means is that there is no general theory of economics whatsoever.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #197 on: August 29, 2018, 12:55:00 PM »
'I don't care if Trump paid off a porn star' https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45274175

The cognitive dissonance is amazing.

Its going to be interesting what will matter to Trump followers once his term is over.

Where do you see actual cognitive dissonance there?  Are you just supposing that everyone that commented is some kind of religious hardliner?

This goes back to something I find troubling, you seem to be evaluating Trump supporters against some stereotype in your head rather than reality.  Pretty much all those people said was that the economy and his actual policies are more important than what the media wants you to focus on.  They (and really none of us) have not seen any actual evidence of illegality on behalf of Trump, and at this point they don't really expect too, meanwhile they've watched actual illegality get ignored (the point about the treatment of Manafort's tax issues in comparison to Sharpton's was very direct).


Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #198 on: August 29, 2018, 01:08:33 PM »
Quote
The right tribe doesn't just disagree with, but despises certain vocal elements within the "left" tribe, which they see as ascendant, to the point where they see those voices as an existential threat to their way of life. As Fenring noted, these groups (eg: Antifa) are numerically small, but disproportionately influential. They are absolutely a major cause of the fear driving Trump's supporters into his arms, as surely as Nazi and white supremacist supporters of Trump drive people away from him, into the arms of whoever is leading the charge against him.

Can you consider the hypothesis that those on the right seek out and publicize (and even fictionalize)  the most extreme or divisive voices on the left with the explicit intention of motivating their supporters?

Easy to hypothesize, the media does it in every election season where they find a Republican running for a minor state office somewhere that says something offensive and report it on a national basis as if it were a plank of the Republican party.  Are you now concluding this is unfair?  Or is it only unfair, where a majority view of the party you support is held against them?

It's also easy to reject "extremist voices," but I've not actually seen you reject specific philosophies as extreme.   Which views exactly do think are extremist or divisive on the left and that we're only hearing because the right is trying to apply them too broadly?

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: What could Trump do to cause his supporters to vote against him?
« Reply #199 on: August 29, 2018, 01:23:43 PM »
Quote
I won't even go into my opinion on categorizing everyone at that protest under the moniker "white supremacist" or "fascist", which evidence on the scene didn't bear out in my opinion; but that's a separate matter really from what I'm discussing.

If you are at an event, and you look over and see even a couple of Nazis at your event, I would suggest you reconsider your attendance.

I guarantee that you have supported a cause that a Nazi supported. There's no such thing as guilt by non-consensual association.  For every binary decision there will be millions of undesirable people on each side.

I also guarantee you've supported a cause that wife beater supported, that a child molester supported, that a serial killer supported.  In fact, I'd be willing to bet that every cause you support is also supported by a repugnant person.

Are you going to live up to your charge and renounce your worldly views?