Support NeoGAF

[Freezie KO]

You're right, we're not sexists who believe everything they here.

And here we have the flip side of "Every Trump supporter is a racist." It's "Every Hillary criticism is sexist."

You can also see how this subtle change not only slams the opposition, but also shuts down dissent within one's own general political leaning. The right is honestly jealous of how efficient the left has become at shutting down opposing opinions.

Of course, you don't have to socialize with people you consider to hold abhorrent views. But the rapid dismissal and categorization of opposing views will lose you the moderates and the middle. Changing the rhetoric may not convince a diehard Trump supporter, but there was once a chance to convince those on the sidelines. Most forum-goers are lurkers.

Or you can continue with "Everyone who disagrees with me is a _____-ist" and continue to chase moderates into the loving arms of demagogues. It worked in the UK.

 

[atr0cious]

Lol!

So, you can be a racist piece of human garbage and as long as you're up front about it, that person has your respect over someone you "have an intuition" might be a dirtbag in private?

Sexism is a hell of a drug.

 

[Sciz]

Are we not allowed to share opinions based off facts?

You generally have to provide the facts.

 

[Armaros]

The implication that Bernie was going after Hillary as hard as anyone possibly could is hilarious to me. He had kid gloves on basically the whole campaign (and so did she towards him).


The Hillary speeches thing can be summarized into a few questions:
1. do you think any politician might be swayed by being paid millions of dollars by corporations they are supposed to regulate?
2. if yes, do you think that Hillary is uniquely qualified to avoid this sway?

#1 feels like a given, and #2 seems a remarkable leap of faith to me.


Both questions seem moot when Trump is the "alternative", though.

Uh, did you black out the last couple months of the campagin?

Bernie almost totally abandoned policy in favor of attacking Hillary?

Bernie kid gloves? You mean Hillary kid gloves were she didn't bring out the treasure trove of opposition research like his being beholden to Vermont Dairy and the millions of subsidies he got for them in Congress for campagin donations.

You won't find anything similar with Hillary.

 

[Trojita]

Also I'm going to take a guess that this guy's family didn't need to scrape by.

His father was The Political Editor of U.S. News & World Report.

 

[Who]

Poster says Trump is more genuine based on what he has said compared to what poster assumes Hillary thinks.

I mean, this thread is all about Trump fans upset about being called words, but what do you call this?

Buddy it must be hard when you live in such a binary world to understand my non-binary language.

I said I understand why people would vote for him and that he appears more genuine. Not that I'm gonna vote for him and i think he's a genuine guy.

 

[rjinaz]

Yup.

Always the same people defending him too, but they are not voting for him no sir. Heck they don't even think he is a good person. But you know, don't talk bad about him, k?

 

[atr0cious]

And here we have the flip side of "Every Trump supporter is a racist." It's "Every Hillary criticism is sexist."

You can also see how this subtle change not only slams the opposition, but also shuts down dissent within one's own general political leaning. The right is honestly jealous of how efficient the left has become at shutting down opposing opinions.

Of course, you don't have to socialize with people you consider to hold abhorrent views. But the rapid dismissal and categorization of opposing views will lose you the moderates and the middle. Changing the rhetoric may not convince a diehard Trump supporter, but there was once a chance to convince those on the sidelines. Most forum-goers are lurkers.

Or you can continue with "Everyone who disagrees with me is a _____-ist" and continue to chase moderates into the loving arms of demagogues. It worked in the UK.

When you're proof is, "I feel it" you're a sexist, sorry not sorry. Don't get mad people don't want to coddle your dumb opinions.It's 2016, time to own your shittiness.

 

[PopeReal]

And here we have the flip side of "Every Trump supporter is a racist." It's "Every Hillary criticism is sexist."

You can also see how this subtle change not only slams the opposition, but also shuts down dissent within one's own general political leaning. The right is honestly jealous of how efficient the left has become at shutting down opposing opinions.

Of course, you don't have to socialize with people you consider to hold abhorrent views. But the rapid dismissal and categorization of opposing views will lose you the moderates and the middle. Changing the rhetoric may not convince a diehard Trump supporter, but there was once a chance to convince those on the sidelines. Most forum-goers are lurkers.

Or you can continue with "Everyone who disagrees with me is a _____-ist" and continue to chase moderates into the loving arms of demagogues. It worked in the UK.

Sorry, but Trump has based his entire campaign and support around a racist agenda.

He doesn't even hide it. But posts like yours are flat out denial bullshit. Trump would not approve. Tell it like it is, son.

 

[Elfforkusu]

Uh, did you black out the last couple months of the campagin?

Bernie almost totally abandoned policy in favor of attacking Hillary?

Bernie kid gloves? You mean Hillary kid gloves were she didn't bring out the treasure trove of opposition research like his being beholden to Vermont Dairy and the millions of subsidies he got for them in Congress for campagin donations.

They both had kid gloves on. The most unflattering thing Bernie did to Hillary was incorporate her into his message about 1%ers.

You and I are not going to agree on this, though, so we should probably agree to disagree?

 

[TestOfTide]

I assume as much based off what I know about her. I've seen her lie, bold-faced, dozens of times without flinching. She's gross and corrupt. I don't like her one bit, and yes, am sure she has disgusting views based off that.

Are we not allowed to share opinions based off facts?
I can't prove that she has vile beliefs but I can prove that she's a liar and corrupt. God I'm just saying the same shit over and over.

Why do people feel the need to defend such a person?

Even if we were to hypothetically agree on the liar part, you still haven't explained to me how that means that Hillary has opinions that are worse than what Trump has openly said.

There are many flaws a person can have, but liar =/= racist. Trump is both. Hillary is at most only a liar.

 

[DietRob]

Eh I said my piece. If you look at her actions and listen to her words and don't see a disgusting and vile human, we just have 2 vastly different perspectives and/or standards.

No, you didn't say your piece. You shitted out some words that we are just supposed to take your word for because you didn't provide any receipts for your accusations/opinions.

Are we not allowed to share opinions based off facts?
I can't prove that she has vile beliefs but I can prove that she's a liar and corrupt. God I'm just saying the same shit over and over.

Those facts that can't be proved are the trickiest kind huh..
fucking lol

 

[FrenchMovieTheme]

And here we have the flip side of "Every Trump supporter is a racist." It's "Every Hillary criticism is sexist."

You can also see how this subtle change not only slams the opposition, but also shuts down dissent within one's own general political leaning. The right is honestly jealous of how efficient the left has become at shutting down opposing opinions.

Of course, you don't have to socialize with people you consider to hold abhorrent views. But the rapid dismissal and categorization of opposing views will lose you the moderates and the middle. Changing the rhetoric may not convince a diehard Trump supporter, but there was once a chance to convince those on the sidelines. Most forum-goers are lurkers.

Or you can continue with "Everyone who disagrees with me is a _____-ist" and continue to chase moderates into the loving arms of demagogues. It worked in the UK.

I have an intuition that a lot of Hillary hate is because she is a female. People are uncomfortable to admit it, because people don't like being called racist/sexist, but if you truly believe that a good deal of the shit she has goiter the past 25 years isn't sex related you are very naive

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Buddy it must be hard when you live in such a binary world to understand my non-binary language.

I said I understand why people would vote for him and that he appears more genuine. Not that I'm gonna vote for him and i think he's a genuine guy.

Binary thinking has nothing to do with it. You said you trust someone more because you assume the other person is probably worse in private.

 

[rjinaz]

They both had kid gloves on. The most unflattering thing Bernie did to Hillary was incorporate her into his message about 1%ers.

You and I are not going to agree on this, though, so we should probably agree to disagree?

You mean not counting him taking every opportunity to say she was establishment, belittle her and the party, and saying things like "she isn't qualified to be president" oh oops, didn't mean that my bad.

 

[formasymphonic]

So why then would rational, affluent, informed citizens consider voting for The Donald? Short of not voting at all — still an option some of us are considering — he’s the only one who appears to want to preserve the American way of life as we know it. For the new silent majority, the alternative to Trump is bleak: a wealthy, entitled progressive with a national security scandal in her hip pocket. In our view, the thought of four to eight more years of a progressive agenda polluting the American Dream is even more dangerous to the survival of this country than Trump is.

Disgusting on all levels. From the ironies in what's actually said, to the numerous undertones and dog whistles, to the foul holier than thou stench that pervades throughout the article.

"I pretend to dislike Donald Trump, but I'm a closet bigot and he might get my vote"

.

 

[Aaronology]

The implication that Bernie was going after Hillary as hard as anyone possibly could is hilarious to me. He had kid gloves on basically the whole campaign (and so did she towards him).

I have to admit, this is a new one. Bernie hasn't even conceded yet and y'all already fast at work rewriting history in regards to his defeat. Sanders spent the last dying breaths of his campaign smearing Hillary Clinton, the DNC and those who supported her as frauds, crooked, bought out, corrupt, shills of the establishment~! This man even went as far to accuse the Clinton campaign of criminal behavior. How did he have on kid gloves, Elfforkusu? What smoking gun do you think Bernie Sanders is graciously holding on to that he didn't use during the course of the primary?

 

[rjinaz]

Even if we were to hypothetically agree on the liar part, you still haven't explained to me how that means that Hillary has opinions that are worse than what Trump has openly said.

There are many flaws a person can have, but liar =/= racist. Trump is both. Hillary is at most only a liar.

Like I'm curious what opinions could be worse than what Trump says openly? Like she isn't just racist she is uber racist? Is she trying to bring back slavery? Like what could it be?

 

[Who]

Even if we were to hypothetically agree on the liar part, you still haven't explained to me how that means that Hillary has opinions that are worse than what Trump has openly said.

There are many flaws a person can have, but liar =/= racist. Trump is both. Hillary is at most only a liar.

...

Please tell me you get why I find it fascinating that's the point you ended your post with.

What do liars do? Who do they portray? Their true selves?

 

[EatinOlives]

I think he comes across more genuine than Hilary. I don't think he's a genuine human nor do I like or respect him.

Fair enough.

 

[Who]

Binary thinking has nothing to do with it. You said you trust someone more because you assume the other person is probably worse in private.

I didn't actually.

 

[danm999]

I don't get the "Trump is authentic even if its horrific" line either.

The dude has been on almost every side of every major issue in the past 12 months, from Syrian refugees, to punishing women on abortion, to the Iraq War and Libyan intervention, to Rubio being in the pocket of Mark Zuckerberg, to how he'd reform healthcare. Like there's no internal consistency.

There are instances where he's been straight up called on a contradiction from a few days ago and has responded by saying the media is making shit up.

Even the border wall, his centre piece policy, may not be set in stone.

Then you have the stuff where he straight up invents shit, like stories about Pershing shooting Muslims with pigs blood and mythical 9/11 New Jersey celebration videos and you wonder what is going through the heads of the "he tells it like it is" crowd.

Just because he's saying horrific shit doesn't mean you get to turn your bullshit detector and critical thinking skills off.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Where's that little girl eating crackers picture?

 

[Toxi]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969
Clinton was paid 222000 dollars to give a speech to goldman sachs (one of the big banks that were bailed out). that is really fucking corrupt. but it's par for the course for most politicians.

Giving paid speeches is a sign of corruption? Really?

If Hillary Clinton is actually corrupt, you should be using her record in office as proof. What decisions did she support or oppose in Congress or the cabinet in favor of her special interests? Can you show that said decisions had special interests as a factor?

 

[TestOfTide]

...

Please tell me you get why I find it fascinating that's the point you ended your post with.

What do liars do? What do they portray? Their true selves?

Guess what? MOST POLITICIANS LIE. Even Obama has blatantly lied. Even Bernie has lied. They all lie because that's the only way to survive in politics.

But Hillary's lies don't lend to the idea that she therefor must have the absolute worst opinions imaginable. I know many liars that aren't bigots and I know many bigots that aren't liars.

 

[disastermouse]

Spot on. They think it's about something else, but this global connection and progress is scaring them on some level, and they're reacting.

It's not progress scaring a lot of them. Trump hits a nerve when he talks about trade because it addresses an actual complaint. Neoliberalism addresses the complaint by arguing that they'll help the working class by lifting (some) individuals out of the working class on a merit-based formula that belies the fact that millennials have followed this formula to little success. The unspoken view of the neoliberal meritocratic solution, however, is that if you can't rise out of the working class, you don't deserve a share of the American Dream. It's self-justifying too. Obama can say to himself, "If I rose out of bad circumstances then anyone can" except that, logistically, not everyone can.

Trump and other right-wingers address the problem but fail to accurately diagnose the cause - although they do at least acknowledge that it has something to do with trade. Demonizing minorities and immigrants, whether strategically intended or not, is simply capitalizing on the divisions already in place and enforced (with token exceptions) by the capitalist class to divide the working class and prevent a strong, unified resistance to the forces of capital.

I think there's a facile tendency amongst the center left to think that if they can just defeat Trump, then "Whew! Crisis averted!" There will be others after Trump, and they will be scarier. Meanwhile, neoliberal capitalism is quite literally unable, ideologically, to address the concerns of working class people.

 

[Orayn]

I'm not voting for neither one. They're both horrible choices. We got an ultra liberal and a racist conservative. Ugh I wish we had a candidate that was neutral and everyone loved. One that would stand for the American values.

In what universe is Clinton "ultra-liberal?" She's a neocon and the other option is an actual fascist.

 

[Phantast2k]

where every kid (and adult, too) gets a trophy just for showing up.

Lmao, this is literally America. Like part of the grade at uni being given for attendance.

Imbecile.

 

[Psychoward]

College safe spaces have absolutely fuck all to do with Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. This guy is a fucking imbecile.

Obama even advised against them, fucking idiot (the writer, not Obama)

 

[Who]

Guess what? MOST POLITICIANS LIE. Even Obama has blatantly lied. Even Bernie has lied. They all lie because that's the only way to survive in politics.

But Hillary's lies don't lend to the idea that she therefor must have the absolute worst opinions imaginable. I know many liars that aren't bigots and I know many bigots that aren't liars.

So when the world is full of liars, what can you trust? I said it was my personal intuition, I wasn't decreeing it as fact.

When I watch her lie, unapologetically, time and time again, I get a sense of what kind of person she is. And it's one that I will never support, defend, or vote for.

That's based off my intuition, sorry I don't have any links?

 

[Slurpy2k20]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969
Clinton was paid 222000 dollars to give a speech to goldman sachs (one of the big banks that were bailed out). that is really fucking corrupt. but it's par for the course for most politicians.

So, who the fuck would turn that down for a speech? You wouldn't, I wouldn't, and no sane person would. I have no problem with her "that's what they offered" response. I understand the anger and jealousy of people who will never be offered even 1% of that for a speech, and that's where most of their issue comes from. I don't see how that is inherently "corrupt" as every politician gets offered money for speeches.

 

[stonesak]

In what universe is Hillary "ultra-liberal?"

Your choice is between a neocon and a fascist.

Which one laughs when discussing the killing of a foreign leader?

 

[Toxi]

So when the world is full of liars, what can you trust?

Probably not the one who's endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan.

 

[Who]

"Hilary isn't corrupt! Prove it!"

*Shows proof*

"Well so what?!? Everyone is!!"

Ok.. Cool. sorry for not jumping on board in defending your shit candidate. I guess I just have higher standards than that.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Probably not the one who's endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan.

That is a pretty strong tiebreaker.

 

[A Black Falcon]

So when the world is full of liars, what can you trust? I said it was my personal intuition, I wasn't decreeing it as fact.

When I watch her lie, unapologetically, time and time again, I get a sense of what kind of person she is. And it's one that I will never support, defend, or vote for.

That's based off my intuition, sorry I don't have any links?

The idea that Hillary is a liar more so than other people in politics is, in fact, a lie that originally comes from a sexist, fact-free op-ed from Republican columnist William Safire from 1996. It's incredibly sad that 20 years of repeating that lie have managed to con even some non-conservatives that it is true.

More: http://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...g-defense-of-Hillary-Clinton-I-have-ever-seen

In reality, Hillary is one of the most truthful people running for president this cycle.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I didn't actually.

.

I can understand people voting for Trump.

You have no idea what Clinton stands for and only serves special interests. She's completely un-human.

Atleast Trump comes across as a genuine human being, flawed and bigoted as he is.

I'm not voting for either as I find them both appalling but I will guarantee the things Hilary says behind closed doors is just as vile, if not more, than what Trump atleast has the decency to say publicly.

 

[Conan-san]

ScotGAF here: What's the likelyhood of Trump getting in on the "Fuck the lot of you" vote like a soild chunk of Brexit did?

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

"Hilary isn't corrupt! Prove it!"

*Shows proof*

"Well so what?!? Everyone is!!"

Ok.. Cool. sorry for not jumping on board in defending your shit candidate. I guess I just have higher standards than that.

You have shown a void of proof. You haven't provided a citation to anything, and you explicitly say you back your opinions up with trust in your own intuition.

 

[Who]

Probably not the one who's endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan.

Man I bet that sounded clever in your head but it totally missed the mark on what I was trying to say.

I'm not defending Trump in the least bit. If this were a conservative-leaning forum with tons of Trump supporters you bet my ass I'd be doing my best in expressing to them just how disgusting I find him to be.

 

[Baki]

I agree with him on college "safe spaces," but nothing else. A European social democracy sounds lovely, thanks.

That said, I'm terrified how many progressives, liberals, etc. both on and off this forum are simply willing to brush off anyone who might vote for Trump as an immediate bigot or racist.

Even if you think those voters are, the political strategy of "let's call our opponents racists and dismiss any legitimate anxieties" worked out disastrously for the Brexit campaign. While Trump may have the electoral map against him, don't underestimate an election with two unlikable candidates. Turnout may be at unprecedented lows.

And that's the thing. Hillary is an exceptionally weak candidate. Don't let GAF fool you. She would be the only candidate in the history of polling where the majority of Americans actually disliked her... if it weren't for Trump himself giving her company as another majority-unfavorable candidate.

This is different from Brexit. Trump has openly racist policies as the front and centre for his campaign.

So in my opinion, if you vote for Trump you are either racist or almost just as bad (because you don't care about how his racist policies will impact minorities.)

 

[kcp12304]

"Hilary isn't corrupt! Prove it!"

*Shows proof*

"Well so what?!? Everyone is!!"

Ok.. Cool. sorry for not jumping on board in defending your shit candidate. I guess I just have higher standards than that.

Uh...you just said "sorry I don't have any links?". Did I miss a post with your proof?

 

[DietRob]

"Hilary isn't corrupt! Prove it!"

*Shows proof*

"Well so what?!? Everyone is!!"

Ok.. Cool. sorry for not jumping on board in defending your shit candidate. I guess I just have higher standards than that.

What? Where is this proof? Did I miss you posting a CT scan of your gut?

 

[A Link to the Past]

...

Please tell me you get why I find it fascinating that's the point you ended your post with.

What do liars do? Who do they portray? Their true selves?

If Hillary is indeed a liar, her lies are in service to a lot of good things, like the promotion of LGBT and racial equality. The only thing I can trust about Donald Trump is that he is going to do harm to these causes.

 

[Toxi]

ScotGAF here: What's the likelyhood of Trump getting in on the "Fuck the lot of you" vote like a soild chunk of Brexit did?

Very low, barring some freak thing like an economic collapse or a major terrorist attack on American soil (hell, with Orlando's massacre doing nothing to raise Trump's ratings, even that might not be enough).

 

[Who]

.

Re-read it as many times as you need to, man it's okay, you'll figure it out.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Re-read it as many times as you need to, man it's okay, you'll figure it out.

I'm actually very confident I won't.

 

[Fracas]

So when the world is full of liars, what can you trust? I said it was my personal intuition, I wasn't decreeing it as fact.

When I watch her lie, unapologetically, time and time again, I get a sense of what kind of person she is. And it's one that I will never support, defend, or vote for.

That's based off my intuition, sorry I don't have any links?

Set aside your personal (and subjective) opinions of Clinton. Do you identify with her platform? The legislation she is pushing for?

Because you aren't voting for the person, not at all. I don't care what Clinton does behind closed doors. She could be the most awful villain in US politics, and I don't give a shit. I'm voting for what she stands for. For the positive policy that she's involved herself with. There's a clear distinction.

 

[Voysa Reezun]

Or you can continue with "Everyone who disagrees with me is a _____-ist" and continue to chase moderates into the loving arms of demagogues. It worked in the UK.

I love how racists and sexists always blame other people for their own racism and sexism. If your response to being critiqued on your choices of who you support is to run toward racists so that you can prop them up, that just means that you are a shitbird of a person and you were never that moderate to begin with.

 

[TestOfTide]

So when the world is full of liars, what can you trust? I said it was my personal intuition, I wasn't decreeing it as fact.

When I watch her lie, unapologetically, time and time again, I get a sense of what kind of person she is. And it's one that I will never support, defend, or vote for.

That's based off my intuition, sorry I don't have any links?

It's quite simple really. Actions speak louder than words. You want to know who a president/senator/governor/etc. is and what you can trust about them? Look at what they do politically. At the legislation that they sign and the actions they sign off on. Trump biggest weakness and biggest strength is that he has next to no political action to judge him on, meaning you are FORCED to judge him on his words mostly.