Knights of Glory and Beer

Serving the online community since 1997

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 19 of 113 1 2 17 18 19 20 21 112 113
#138915 - 11/10/16 01:19 AM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Derid Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
Derid  Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court

****

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Originally Posted By: Sini
Originally Posted By: Derid
factor being SJWs


I want to believe this, because I am very opposed to these censorious self-righteous fucks, and would find solace in Trumps win if this is the end of them, but is it want-make-belief or factual?

Seeing as we are not lately into trolling each other, I'd warn you to not subscribe to what you want to be the truth to what is actually is.


You don't think that anti-PC mentality had anything to do with galvanizing Trump support? In the end, it's hard to quantify everything, but I certainly think it a major factor in myriad ways. Not necessarily as an immediate cause-effect relationship, as in people didn't necessarily vote Trump in response to an immediate SJW action (other than Hillary) - but consider the following:

MSM widely came together to condemn everyone not supporting Hillary as sexist/racist. I think many people resented this, and it stoked motivation.

Underprivileged whites being told how privileged they are, due to skin color. Despite their lives and background certainly not feeling it.

Gloating bandying about in MSM of demographic trends, and how whites were becoming irrelevant, and would soon be a minority. And how it would be a good thing.

Hillary and DNC unabashed identity politics, and their allies that ran with it over the SJW cliff.

Even the Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...linton-liberals notes:

"How did the journalistsí crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach?


Put this question in slightly more general terms and you are confronting the single great mystery of 2016. The American white-collar class just spent the year rallying around a super-competent professional (who really wasnít all that competent) and either insulting or silencing everyone who didnít accept their assessment. And then they lost. Maybe itís time to consider whether thereís something about shrill self-righteousness, shouted from a position of high social status, that turns people away."

I certainly do think there is something about shrill self-righteousness that turns people away.

I also think that the general environment has led many white people to begin thinking in racial terms. Though I have anecdotal evidence of such, I think the most compelling proof is in the pudding. Non-coastal enclave whites voted for Trump as assiduously as any minority ethnic group voted for Democrats. That so many of them had previously supported Obama seems to contradict the media narrative that they are racists. (though sure, racists do exist among them)

So, without factoring in blowback from identity politics and SJW hectoring and threats, how do you explain it?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but something sure scared and agitated white people - including white women - into dropping previous voting and polling patterns, and voting as an ethnic bloc. The person they voted for also happens to be the most non-apologetic anti-PC figure in politics. Coincidence? I doubt it. Are there other factors? Sure, absolutely.

One should keep in mind that, at least in the Midwest, identity politicians and SJWs are mostly seen as tools of elitist, pampered, coastal nobility.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
#138916 - 11/10/16 02:48 AM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Derid Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
Derid  Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court

****

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Addendum:

Between being half asleep, and the whole issue containing many layers to unpack, I don't' think I was clear enough previously.

If we are going to be technically precise, I would say that it is the SJW-like tendency of the MSM and coastal elites, including the Hillary campaign, to agglomerate, objectify, and dehumanize others, so as to pontificate on the perceived moral deficiencies of said "other" in favor of their own hollow self-righteousness, and projection of assigned blame for things over which said people have little, or no, control over, is the issue.

Not the presence of the annoying twits that infest social media, university campuses, and gaming blogs. Though I do think the institutional shift in regards to SJWs in media and education has not gone unnoticed by the larger public, and also has an effect.

Think Hillary, and her calling half the country a "basket of deplorables" as one example.

In the brave new SJW world, people don't have disagreements, differing views, cultures, or competing ideas - or at least not that ones that include typical Euro-centric culture derivatives as legitimate. Nor that Euro-centric people have legit grievances. And I do guarantee you, that the scions of northern Europe have in fact noticed this. It's not that other people have different ideas, or different opinions - it is that their whole culture and existence is seen as being delegitimized entirely.


Another example would be the fight over Obamacare, and the govt shut downs, or threatened shut downs. Instead of framing the issue as:

GOP: Being willing to threaten to shut down govt to defund Obamacare, or other issue

Dems: Being willing to threaten to, or shut down govt to keep ACA, and other issues


Almost the entire media apparatus simply framed the issue as the GOP/Tea Party/righties being willing to shut down the govt or do any reckless action to get their way. Nevermind that the Dems were also willing to commit precisely the same actions for the sake of implementing their agenda, and never mind that a majority of public opinion was actually against ACA at the time, the pro-ACA narrative was ubiquitous.

That wasn't a discussion, or an argument, or an instance of competing ideas - at least not in the MSM narrative. it was a total delgitimization of those who went against the prejudices of the Establishment. Why? Because the people who didn't like ACA, or Obamas agenda were mostly all non-coastal whites.

People started noticing this. People really aren't too dumb to discern that both sides had exactly equal, if opposite, stances. Nor too dumb to see that there is a pattern (of which this is one example) to delegitimizing their concerns or desires for govt.

The same can be said of trade, and immigration. Just how were the MSM, and Establishment, treating opponents in this arena? Not to mention bailouts for banks. Not just with disagreement, but with delegitimization and scorn.

Bernie got this, I think. Especially in regards to trade and Wall St. Which forced the issues to become "legit" again, as Hillary put on a public face of pivoting that, as Michigan results show, was not wholly believed.

But I digress from the initial point, somewhat. Other than the fact that Bernie legitimized some of those issues again, which is partly why I think he would have easily trounced Trump.


Last edited by Derid; 11/10/16 03:19 AM.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
#138917 - 11/10/16 04:18 AM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Derid Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
Derid  Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court

****

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/09/trump-won-because-leftist-political-corr

I'm not alone in my conclusions, apparently. Also, Kudos to the author for pointing out the boy-that-cried-wolf aspect, which is something I wrote about extensively a couple weeks back, but not here.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
#138918 - 11/10/16 05:16 AM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,185
Sini Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,185
Quote:
So, without factoring in blowback from identity politics and SJW hectoring and threats, how do you explain it?

Economic pain from no-jobs recovery after 2009 further compounded by days-before-election Obamacare rate hikes. Anecdotally, I heard from someone turning up to vote for Trump because they just got a 400% rate hike.

SJW on the left are equivalent to fundamental evangelicals. I personally wouldn't vote for a candidate even if they campaigned wearing colander, I'd certainly approve of that, but not enough to impact my decision-making in a major way.


#138919 - 11/10/16 05:26 AM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,185
Sini Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,185
Also, I always wondered but never asked, because it doesn't really matter, but why is he frequently orange?


#138920 - 11/10/16 06:46 AM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Derid Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
Derid  Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court

****

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Originally Posted By: Sini
Quote:
So, without factoring in blowback from identity politics and SJW hectoring and threats, how do you explain it?

Economic pain from no-jobs recovery after 2009 further compounded by days-before-election Obamacare rate hikes. Anecdotally, I heard from someone turning up to vote for Trump because they just got a 400% rate hike.

SJW on the left are equivalent to fundamental evangelicals. I personally wouldn't vote for a candidate even if they campaigned wearing colander, I'd certainly approve of that, but not enough to impact my decision-making in a major way.


And like the right-wing fundies, large parts of the left wing caters and kowtows to the SJW crowd, much as the right wing did towards their own religious zealots.

Just as people largely saw the image of Pat Robertson and Rick Santorum behind every GOPer, so do people see Gloria Steinem and Anita Sarkeesian behind many Dems, or at least Hillary. (even if they don't actually know their names) Hillary's tone and allied media didn't help that perception either.

-

I think your statement regarding economy and Obamacare is part of it, but I also saw data indicating that the vast bulk of Trump supporters were doing OK. Plus, it's not like he had any real cogent policies that he consistently articulated to address jobs. The fact is, there was a large confluence of many factors, and quantifying their relative impact will take time.

Also, recall the humiliating manner in which opposition to said Obamacare was not just fought by the Dems and MSM, but completely delegitimized. (outside of Faux News anyhow, which is its own barrel of snakes)

Don't underestimate the degree to which middle America feels insulted, disrespected, and despised by the DC/NYC Establishment and their left coast compatriots. The feeling is that those forces are genuinely "out to get them", and objectively speaking, there is even some truth to it. Of course they also believe a lot of silly things, but it is what it is.

Part of the reason this is all so hard to quantify, is because it stems from a general sense of malaise, that I think few people are able to articulate clearly.

The fact is, one could lay blame on any great number of factors, and there would probably be at least some truth to any of them. What I worry about, is the Democrats continuing down the path of simply demonizing everyone who disagrees with them as racist, or sexist. That doesn't seem to be a winning strategy, and having either party control executive plus legislative is something I find pretty scary.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
#138929 - 11/10/16 11:32 PM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 290
Banshee Offline
KGB Knight
Banshee  Offline
KGB Knight
*****

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 290
Nice post.

#138933 - 11/11/16 07:31 PM Re: Trump card [Re: Sini]  
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,141
Wolfgang Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
Wolfgang  Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
***

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,141
Oklahoma
Originally Posted By: Sini
Originally Posted By: Wolfgang
Because we really need to get the economy going.


We do, so lets hope he didn't mean any of what he said on trade, because tearing up treaties will throw US into deep recession without bringing any of the jobs back.

The appropriate way to fight outsourcing is to heavily tax it. This removes financial incentive. You do this by keeping tax rate high but giving lots of tax credits to anyone who is not outsourcing.

I'm sure he's going to do as he says and renegotiate the trade deals. I'm not sure how that's going to hurt the economy when we are looking for a deal that's more fair for us. Right now the deals favor other countries. What's unfair is for us to lose out on a trade deal all the while giving them Government aid as well. That's a plus plus for those countries. There's nothing wrong with making things fair. I thought that being fair was the left's creed.

Last edited by Wolfgang; 11/11/16 07:32 PM.
#138936 - 11/12/16 04:46 AM Re: Trump card [Re: Wolfgang]  
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,141
Wolfgang Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
Wolfgang  Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
***

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,141
Oklahoma
I think this says a lot...

#138939 - 11/12/16 05:37 PM Re: Trump card [Re: Wolfgang]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,185
Sini Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,185
Originally Posted By: Wolfgang
I'm not sure how that's going to hurt the economy when we are looking for a deal that's more fair for us.


First, you are assuming that you are going to get a better deal. Considering how unpopular Trump in Mexico with his build a wall, there is very likely political capital to tell him in a very public way to go fuck himself. So no deal with Mexico is worse than present deal.

Second, you are assuming that deal is unfair. With US, Canada, and Mexico economies benefiting from NAFTA such view just isn't supported by facts. NAFTA is absolutely generating more trade and wealth for everyone involved. The question you should be focusing on is how this wealth is distributed internally. This is what unfair - but then Trump's promised tax cuts would only make it less fair.

TL;DR Wrong question, wrong solution. It is like going to dentist to have your tooth removed and ending up with a prostate surgery.


Page 19 of 113 1 2 17 18 19 20 21 112 113

Moderated by  Derid 

Page Time: 0.061s Queries: 16 (0.029s) Memory: 3.1539 MB (Peak: 3.2642 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2018-08-18 04:28:20 UTC