Donald Trump

[Bigga]

@Damocles, just what is your 'mission' when it comes to Trump?

I don't think anyone understands the school kid standing up for the bully concept. Is it that he's not your bully, but it's okay for him to fook other people around?

Is it that when everyone, including the victims, rounds on the bully, he's then the victim...?

Is it 'cool' to go 'against the grain' for the f*%k of it cos trolling is 'awesome'?

I don't think anyone knows what happened to the former bright kid of the forum!

 

[Damocles]

@Damocles, just what is your 'mission' when it comes to Trump?

I don't think anyone understands the school kid standing up for the bully concept. Is it that he's not your bully, but it's okay for him to fook other people around?

Is it that when everyone, including the victims, rounds on the bully, he's then the victim...?

Is it 'cool' to go 'against the grain' for the f*%k of it cos trolling is 'awesome'?

I don't think anyone knows what happened to the former bright kid of the forum!

This is the fourth time I've been insulted or accused of trolling. Everybody's your mate until you disagree.

This isn't the first time I've wrote this on the forum, but I've noticed over my life that there's things that "everybody knows". When you find a thing that "everybody knows" and the evidence for it is that everybody knows it, then when you challenge this then people are incredulous, that thing is usually bullshit. Or at least overblown.

When your main argument in any political discussion is that the other guy is morally or intellectually inferior to you, then you're probably not having a political discussion and are instead gang bollocking someone

 

[Bigga]

This is the fourth time I've been insulted or accused of trolling. Everybody's your mate until you disagree.

This isn't the first time I've wrote this on the forum, but I've noticed over my life that there's things that "everybody knows". When you find a thing that "everybody knows" and the evidence for it is that everybody knows it, then when you challenge this then people are incredulous, that thing is usually bullshit. Or at least overblown.

When your main argument in any political discussion is that the other guy is morally or intellectually inferior to you, then you're probably not having a political discussion and are instead gang bollocking someone

Did I 'insult' you? I asked you some fairly innocuous questions so I could 'understand' what your position is, which in your non answer, you haven't explained anything, really.

So, I've put you down for... "Is it that when everyone, including the victims, rounds on the bully, he's then the victim...?" and half of "Is it 'cool' to go 'against the grain' for the f*%k of it cos trolling is 'awesome'?".

Cool.

 

[SWP's back]

Guess we're back on the "all Trump supporters were intellectually or morally inferior" bandwagon.

What a pleasingly simple world some people must live in.

So you don’t believe it’s easier to blame a bogeyman and you don’t believe that mountains of fake news was shared for that very purpose?

You also disagree that Trump used such emotive subjects to mobilise people to vote for him?

And yes, Trump voters were one of two sets of people (on the whole), rich people that would benefit from tax cuts or “intellectually inferior” to use your phrase. Look at the states that are red and see how they correlate with states that believe the creation myth. And Trump did far better in areas with less well educated voters.

As for them being racists, they are certainly from rural areas where they don’t come into as much contact with ethnic minorities, whether that makes them racists who knows. They don’t seem to like immigrants.

So yes, there are always going to be generalisations but they are based on reality.

 

[SWP's back]

When your main argument in any political discussion is that the other guy is morally or intellectually inferior to you, then you're probably not having a political discussion and are instead gang bollocking someone

Or you’re basing it on study and polling data from the election.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Been banned from attending John McCain's funeral apparently. Bush and Obama are doing the Eulogys.

It shows what a horrible low life piece of shit he is to be told to stay away from a funeral, one which will have both sides of the house attending.

He did nothing but insult the guy when he was alive; utterly disrespectful. McCain was a decorated Vietnam veteran, and whatever your opinion on that war, he put his life on the line for his country. Trump wouldn't even sacrifice a golf day for the good of his country.

 

[Damocles]

Did I 'insult' you? I asked you some fairly innocuous questions so I could 'understand' what your position is, which in your non answer, you haven't explained anything, really.

So, I've put you down for... "Is it that when everyone, including the victims, rounds on the bully, he's then the victim...?" and half of "Is it 'cool' to go 'against the grain' for the f*%k of it cos trolling is 'awesome'?".

Cool.

Oh give over. You weren't trying to understand anything and you're still not now. This type of intellectual dishonesty is tedious.

 

[Damocles]

So you don’t believe it’s easier to blame a bogeyman and you don’t believe that mountains of fake news was shared for that very purpose?

You also disagree that Trump used such emotive subjects to mobilise people to vote for him?

And yes, Trump voters were one of two sets of people (on the whole), rich people that would benefit from tax cuts or “intellectually inferior” to use your phrase. Look at the states that are red and see how they correlate with states that believe the creation myth. And Trump did far better in areas with less well educated voters.

As for them being racists, they are certainly from rural areas where they don’t come into as much contact with ethnic minorities, whether that makes them racists who knows. They don’t seem to like immigrants.

So yes, there are always going to be generalisations but they are based on reality.

But you're quoting goes against your narrative.

Couple of points of order. Firstly, you're equating education with intelligence and that's fallacious, especially in a country with an educational system in the US. Let's use the same logic but move the target. Black Americans have around half the educational attainment of White Americans at degree level. Does this mean they're also stupider? Or maybe are there larger factors at play? Why does a Trump vote from a lower educated person mean stupid but a black person with a lower education than a white person doesn't? That seems to be an example of conclusion before hypothesis. If you're linking attainment with intelligence then you've got to be consistent with that.

Second, doesn't your same charts show that the higher the median income of somebody then the more likely to vote for Clinton? I'm sure up to a point where it will swing back of course. So isn't it just as valid to suggest that Clinton's voters were metropolitan rich to middle class liberals, if we were to focus on them as the deviation from the norm?

Also I'm not sure that the "rural = probably racist" idea is really that solid a base. I know you made some caveats there but it IS one of the foundations of your point about being data driven. It's just a stereotype on top of a stereotype.

Lastly, the final graph isn't very illuminating. Trump voters want to deport people who have broken the law, believe that plunging themselves into a hundred grands debt is a gamble, and have a conservative view on culture. I mean, these are all pretty standardised right leaning policies across the whole world so to see that the right wing candidate attracted right wing voters just seems a truism to me. Conservatives are conservatives.

 

[roj]

On a lighter note...

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

On a lighter note...

It's a thing when you get to his age apparently. He probably needs a prostrate examination. I'm sure there is a long line of people queuing up to give him a proper fisting. Bone dry; no lube of course.