Support NeoGAF

[Brawndo Addict]

I agree. I think the LGBT movement had an advantage in that non-heterosexuality can emerge in any group - even rural America has gay children. So there's more chance that your friend, your cousin, your role model reveals themselves as gay when they were already in a position of trust. You can't come out as black. It's going to be much, much harder to do the same for minorities. At least in the short-run, though, we might not need to do that. In the short-run, we can win back those who are apathetic about racism back into our coalition by offering them economic stuff they want, even if we can't persuade them to care about racism. It's a stop-gap, but what other choice is there?

I think there's two underlying issues here that are sort of getting overlapped.

Issue 1: How do we win the next election?
Issue 2: How do we get people to change their minds about something?

These are very different objectives which require very different methodologies.

I think there's a strong argument to be made that Issue 1 could be resolved entirely on the campaign side. The margins in key states were so incredibly low such that even things like marginally increased staffing, GOTV efforts, tailored advertising/messaging, or even just more campaign stops could have made a material difference.

I also think that resolving Issue 2 is not necessary to solve Issue 1, and in fact, trying to resolve Issue 2 is a fool's errand. Changing deeply embedded psychological belief structures on a faster timescale of years as opposed to decades is the opposite of easy or efficient and it is fundamentally dependent on being able to leverage deeply personal individual connections. Liberals and minorities simply don't live in the places where this work and relationships would have to happen and I'm not convinced that nationwide canvassing efforts are going to be a realistic, effective, or scale-able solution or alternative.

I also think the social/cultural impacts of the internet are a complete wild-card that makes it very difficult to make predictions based on our assumptions about how society used to work. I am deeply cynical about our culture's trajectory in this Wild West technological future and fear that corporations will ultimately become the gatekeepers or 'designers' who determine how society will develop (either deliberately or as an accidental by-product).

Facebook's/Twitter's algorithms and policies will play a bigger role in determining how fast people change their minds about something (if at all) than civic engagement will. This is the grim Black Mirror future we are living in.

 

[VendettaRed07]

My friend just sent me a CNN tweet (@PrestonCNN) that Mitt is meeting w/ Trump this weekend to talk about governing and a possible cabinet position.

edit: here... https://twitter.com/deirdrewalshcnn/status/799317192747745280

Yes please Mittens. Give him SOMETHING

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

This is what Glenn Beck looks like now

Someone on twitter said "When did Glenn Beck move to brooklyn" lolll

Vape nation Glenn

 

[VendettaRed07]

This is what Glenn Beck looks like now

Someone on twitter said "When did Glenn Beck move to brooklyn" lolll

His transformation is complete

 

[plagiarize]

But they aren't all racists. That's the point. They supported somebody who was, and are responsible for any racism that occurs under his watch. That I agree with 100%.

That still doesn't make calling them all racists correct.

For people doing racist things, saying racist things, etc I'm still going to call them racists.

There's this dumb narrative I've heard from the left about how we made people vote for Donald Trump by unfairly calling them racists... and perhaps there are some people who are that fucking crazy, but the people who went for Trump in the rust belt didn't do it because he was racist, or because they were called racist by us.

We know why they went for him, because they wanted to believe he could bring back their jobs. Race didn't come into it in the rust belt.

Unless we class 'voting for Donald Trump' as a racist act, people like that aren't racist.

But I'm not going to use kid gloves on anyone who idly stands by should he start enacting racist policy. I'm not going to shut my mouth when people like those officials in Clay say blatantly racist things.

What shocked me the most about what went on in Clay, was that they were both genuinely shocked when people called out the comment as racist. 'Oh, I didn't mean it in a racist way' when there was literally no other way to read it unless you've been so isolated from people labelling things as racist that you didn't know calling a black person an ape was racist.

So I figure it's really important to use people like that to redraw the line in the sand that Trump kicked sand over.

Maybe we won't convince them to vote Democratic, but hey, if that means Michelle Obama and people of color don't have to read shit like that posted about them online, maybe that's still a win.

Not all Trump voters are racists. But a lot of them are, and Trump himself is. I'm not going to waste time trying to convince Trump not to be racist, and I'm not going to self censor about it.

A lot of people don't really believe the racist rhetoric and yes, you have to be willfully ignorant to come up with that position, but when you like other things he's saying you kind of want it to be true. Wanting something to be true fucks our logic circuits up extremely well.

But if they don't stand shoulder to shoulder with us when he goes to enact even the slightly heinous shit, then yeah, into the basket of deplorables they go.

Because if we don't do that, we let people like Trump continue to normalize racism again.

And fuck that.

 

[Totakeke]

Glenn Beck's aesthetic transformation makes me doubt much more that he had a real political transformation.

 

[Fragamemnon]

Just let mittens run the government.

 

[jmdajr]

George Carlin said in 1992. “That’s the way the ruling class operates in any society. They try to divide the rest of the people. They keep the lower and middle classes fighting with each other so that they, the rich, can run off with all the fucking money. Fairly simple thing, happens to work.”

 

[studyguy]

This is what Glenn Beck looks like now

Someone on twitter said "When did Glenn Beck move to brooklyn" lolll

Just let 2016 end already.

 

[Plinko]

For people doing racist things, saying racist things, etc I'm still going to call them racists.

There's this dumb narrative I've heard from the left about how we made people vote for Donald Trump by unfairly calling them racists... and perhaps there are some people who are that fucking crazy, but the people who went for Trump in the rust belt didn't do it because he was racist, or because they were called racist by us.

We know why they went for him, because they wanted to believe he could bring back their jobs. Race didn't come into it in the rust belt.

Unless we class 'voting for Donald Trump' as a racist act, people like that aren't racist.

But I'm not going to use kid gloves on anyone who idly stands by should he start enacting racist policy. I'm not going to shut my mouth when people like those officials in Clay say blatantly racist things.

What shocked me the most about what went on in Clay, was that they were both genuinely shocked when people called out the comment as racist. 'Oh, I didn't mean it in a racist way' when there was literally no other way to read it unless you've been so isolated from people labelling things as racist that you didn't know calling a black person an ape was racist.

So I figure it's really important to use people like that to redraw the line in the sand that Trump kicked sand over.

Maybe we won't convince them to vote Democratic, but hey, if that means Michelle Obama and people of color don't have to read shit like that posted about them online, maybe that's still a win.

Not all Trump voters are racists. But a lot of them are, and Trump himself is. I'm not going to waste time trying to convince Trump not to be racist, and I'm not going to self censor about it.

A lot of people don't really believe the racist rhetoric and yes, you have to be willfully ignorant to come up with that position, but when you like other things he's saying you kind of want it to be true. Wanting something to be true fucks our logic circuits up extremely well.

But if they don't stand shoulder to shoulder with us when he goes to enact even the slightly heinous shit, then yeah, into the basket of deplorables they go.

Because if we don't do that, we let people like Trump continue to normalize racism again.

And fuck that.

That's fine. I'll still call people who do and say racist things "racist," too. That won't change. Normalizing racism is wrong. I just think it is idiotic for people on the left to say, "Well, I'm just not going to try to reach anybody in that group because I assume they're all racists." I think it's wrong to call all Trump supporters or all WWC people racist because, as you said, they aren't. That's what Stewart's point was, and I was just saying I agree with him.

 

[Odrion]

minorities shouldn't have to try to coddle those that see them as sub human but what about white guys?

 

[Crocodile]

If you're going to convince yourselves that everyone (note: everyone as in the entire set*) who voted for Trump is irredeemably evil beyond reason, then you've lost, for at least the immediate future (whites aren't going to cease to be a plurality in America any time soon).

If those people aren't irredeemably racist or sexist but are willing to tolerate it for whatever reason you need peole to convince them otherwise. And yes that does require minorities to exercise some degree of understanding too, its pretty damn hard to convince people you don't hate them when you're saying they are irredeemably evil no exceptions. That doesn't require you to make nice with people who are being racist or sexist towards you but it does require the acceptance of the possibility that not all Trump voters are irredeemable.

*Because there's a trend of deliberately confusing this claim with the idea that none of Trumps supporters are racist /sexistm

But they aren't all racists. That's the point. They supported somebody who was, and are responsible for any racism that occurs under his watch. That I agree with 100%.

That still doesn't make calling them all racists correct.

To me as a Black man with Muslim relatives, there isn't a meaningful difference in terms of impact for someone who is racist and someone who votes for an unrepentant, unabashed racist. That being said, I think there is a bit of a strawmen being constructed. In the past, and in the future, when I've interacted with those who would likely be under Trump's sway, I don't go around shouting "YOU'RE A RACIST" at the top of my lungs or in all caps. Barely anyone does that. I do, have and will in the future try to have a conversation. Sometimes these conversations actually go well. Often times those conversations end up being useless or make me want to hurl myself out the nearest window by the end of it. If they are saying blatantly racist things to me or making arguments seeped in racism, I'm going to call that out. If the person who I'm speaking to proves so intractable, I may have to peace out and mic drop "that's/you're racist" at the end for the sake of my sanity. Either way "YOU'RE RACIST" isn't going to be my opening volley but that doesn't mean it can be retired (though not in all caps LOL). Literally nothing in human history has ever gotten better by handling it with "kid gloves" or just not "talking about it". That doesn't mean when I'm describing people in the abstract or having a more broad, general conversation I'm going to hold back or that I should hold back. Judging people for intrinsic aspects of their being is wrong. Judging them for the actions they choose to make of their own free will is not.

I'll also add that I concur with Brawndo Addict that "wining the next election(s)" and "destroying racism (or other _isms)" aren't the same thing and you don't need to do the latter to do the former.

 

[Dominican Power]

https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/799271570900328449

need more of this

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I think there's two underlying issues here that are sort of getting overlapped.

Issue 1: How do we win the next election?
Issue 2: How do we get people to change their minds about something?

These are very different objectives which require very different methodologies.

Agreed.

I think there's a strong argument to be made that Issue 1 could be resolved entirely on the campaign side. The margins in key states were so incredibly low such that even things like marginally increased staffing, GOTV efforts, tailored advertising/messaging, or even just more campaign stops could have made a material difference.

Less sure I agree, but potentially.

I also think that resolving Issue 2 is not necessary to solve Issue 1, and in fact, trying to resolve Issue 2 is a fool's errand. Changing deeply embedded psychological belief structures on a faster timescale of years as opposed to decades is the opposite of easy or efficient and it is fundamentally dependent on being able to leverage deeply personal individual connections. Liberals and minorities simply don't live in the places where this work and relationships would have to happen and I'm not convinced that nationwide canvassing efforts are going to be a realistic, effective, or scale-able solution or alternative.

Agreed. Thankfully, I don't think we have to change their minds about racism, per se; just the economic case. They can continue to be apathetic about racism, but if they're voting D because it will bring the jobs back, they're also voting for a House member or Senator or President who can at least ameliorate the situation for minorities. That in itself is a win. In the long-run we probably want to both, but you're right it is a project of decades not years.

 

[Fox318]

This is what Glenn Beck looks like now

Someone on twitter said "When did Glenn Beck move to brooklyn" lolll

"I only use Organic chalk"

 

[bangbang i'm a timpani]

This is what Glenn Beck looks like now

Someone on twitter said "When did Glenn Beck move to brooklyn" lolll

WHAT THE EFFFF

 

[ampere]

Bernie Sanders: If Trump has the 'guts' to take on corporate America, he's got an ally with me http://cnn.it/2g2nSks

Bernie sucks, straight up.

 

[Blader]

I like that jacket, actually.

 

[mo60]

Bernie sucks, straight up.

Sadly trump won't take on corporate america.

 

[davepoobond]

Bernie sucks, straight up.

he's returning the favor since Trump said Sanders' name in his stump speeches all of the time

 

[BiggNife]

Bernie sucks, straight up.

Eh, he's purposefully saying something that he knows will never happen.

 

[Joeytj]

Bernie sucks, straight up.

Why? I mean, both we and Bernie know that Trump isn't going to be doing anything to actually "drain the swamp", so him and others are preparing to call his bluff.

Honestly, I don't think Democrats have much of a choice but to at least say they will work with Trump where they can't, while at the same time condemning everything else he's done or threatens to do.

It's not an easy thing, none of this is. Democrats, and neither of us, still know what to do now. Schumer, Warren and Sanders seem to be aiming to drive a wedge between Trump and the GOP in order to sow some chaos, but that's a very tricky thing to do, while at the same time not trying to normalize Trump's rhetoric and extreme policies.

And after Clinton's loss, honestly, no Democrat is left with the confidence to absolutely know what the right path forward is. Sanders, Warren, Ellison and maybe Obama are probably the only people with some semblance of clarity on this issue.

 

[StopMakingSense]

This is what Glenn Beck looks like now

Someone on twitter said "When did Glenn Beck move to brooklyn" lolll

Best I saw on this was "Every member of U2 at once"

 

[B-Dubs]

Best I saw on this was "Every member of U2 at once"

I'd say "Chevy Chase dressed up as every member of U2 at once."

Swear to god, it's like he went to a U2 concert and said "Yes, yes that is how liberals all dress. I will do the same."

 

[Maledict]

Why? I mean, both we and Bernie know that Trump isn't going to be doing anything to actually "drain the swamp", so him and others are preparing to call his bluff.

Honestly, I don't think Democrats have much of a choice but to at least say they will work with Trump where they can't, while at the same time condemning everything else he's done or threatens to do.

It's not an easy thing, none of this is. Democrats, and neither of us, still know what to do now. Schumer, Warren and Sanders seem to be aiming to drive a wedge between Trump and the GOP in order to sow some chaos, but that's a very tricky thing to do, while at the same time not trying to normalize Trump's rhetoric and extreme policies.

And after Clinton's loss, honestly, no Democrat is left with the confidence to absolutely know what the right path forward is. Sanders, Warren, Ellison and maybe Obama are probably the only people with some semblance of clarity on this issue.

You don't fucking normalise a white supremacist.

Jesus Christ, the republicans blocked everything Obama attempted to do because he was black and a democrat even if they agreed with it. But Bernie is happy saying he'd work with a racist, bigotted monster if he picks up his pet issue?

 

[The Lamonster]

https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/799271570900328449

need more of this

Yes we do.

 

[BiggNife]

You don't fucking normalise a white supremacist.

Jesus Christ, the republicans blocked everything Obama attempted to do because he was black and a democrat even if they agreed with it. But Bernie is happy saying he'd work with a racist, bigotted monster if he picks up his pet issue?

I don't think he's actually saying that. He's just calling trump's bluff because he knows how tied Trump is to corporate America.

He might as well said "I'll work with Steve Bannon as soon as he stops being racist."

 

[Good Job Bob]

You don't fucking normalise a white supremacist.

Jesus Christ, the republicans blocked everything Obama attempted to do because he was black and a democrat even if they agreed with it. But Bernie is happy saying he'd work with a racist, bigotted monster if he picks up his pet issue?

This is the strategy of the Senate Dems in general, not just Bernie.

 

[tedrotheredro]

Bernie willing to overlook xenophobic and racist policies. Had he dropped out earlier, he might not have to make deals with the devil. But thanks, Bernie, for helping to poison the well.

People still can't get off his dick because he makes up fairy tales and acts like he's Robin Hood. The DNC should have torpedoed the fuck out of this guy during the primary. I'm tired of us leaving the gloves on.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

You don't fucking normalise a white supremacist.

Jesus Christ, the republicans blocked everything Obama attempted to do because he was black and a democrat even if they agreed with it. But Bernie is happy saying he'd work with a racist, bigotted monster if he picks up his pet issue?

If he does something racist then Bernie (and the democrats) will do everything they can to stop him. If he does something that is actually beneficial for the country then they will work with him. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Barzul]

Petraeus being considered for SoS. The irony OMG.

 

[PBY]

If he does something racist then Bernie (and the democrats) will do everything they can to stop him. If he does something that is actually beneficial for the country then they will work with him. There is nothing wrong with that.

THIS.

I mean, what's the other option? Really think that in Trump's America, Dems neeeeeed to find common ground.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The Democrats have no real veto power. Even if they refused to cooperate with Trump on anything whatsoever, he could still do it. So the question is: if, on the rare occasion he comes up with a good idea, do we let him get all the credit or do we try and snatch it? Because if the Democrats just mindlessly block it, and it happens anyway (which it would), and it is good, that's not going to play out well in the polling booth.

I mean, I can't imagine Trump will come up with many if any good ideas that don't hurt or penalize some group in some way, so this probably won't happen. But if it does, the above is true.

 

[Fragamemnon]

The worst outcome of Trump' term is that congressional republicans emasculate him and we get the very worst of his appointees' behavior and the very worst of Ryan's agenda.

It's clear that's the outcome Ryan and leading Congressional Republicans want, hence Senate Dems being open to work with him on policies that are clearly off the things the establishment Republican party wants to deal with .

Also keep in mind they may want to bog Trump's first two years into a legislative lucy-and-the-football quagmire like we saw with the ACA and Obama, but that's probably way too clever for Senate Dems.

 

[War Peaceman]

Bernie knows full well that Trump will not take on Corporate America.

 

[chadskin]

My friend just sent me a CNN tweet (@PrestonCNN) that Mitt is meeting w/ Trump this weekend to talk about governing and a possible cabinet position.

edit: here... https://twitter.com/deirdrewalshcnn/status/799317192747745280

@BraddJaffy:
NBC News: Source close to Trump with direct knowledge of his thinking confirms Sunday's meeting with Romney is to discuss Secretary of State

wooowwww

 

[johnny956]

Sadly trump won't take on corporate america.

Trump will take on corporate america by hiring all of them to cabinet positions. He's "taking them on"

 

[Barzul]

@BraddJaffy:
NBC News: Source close to Trump with direct knowledge of his thinking confirms Sunday's meeting with Romney is to discuss Secretary of State

wooowwww

Appointing Romney to the position? It's by far better than anyone who has been mentioned.

 

[dramatis]

THIS.

I mean, what's the other option? Really think that in Trump's America, Dems neeeeeed to find common ground.

What if Sanders had to choose between the good thing and being against the racist thing?

What if they implement an infrastructure jobs bill with language that excludes benefits and payments to Latino laborers?

What if they propose a universal healthcare bill that also prevents funding for abortions, contraceptives, and implements religious standards for every hospital regarding women's healthcare?

It's laughable that on the issue of civil rights that Sanders thinks we should find common ground with the Republicans, but on campaign finance and economic issues he couldn't even meet the Democrats halfway.

 

[Blader]

Fucking everyone seems to be in the running for SoS.

 

[Fragamemnon]

Mittens getting SecState would be some serious vindication for being right about Russia in 2012 given the way that relationship has hit the ditch in the last 12 months.

 

[IggyChooChoo]

Appointing Romney to the position? It's by far better than anyone who has been mentioned.

This is genuinely reassuring.

 

[PBY]

ROMNEY PLS

BAD BUT NOT APOCALPYTIC

AND MAYBE EVEN GOOD?

 

[kirblar]

Mittens getting SecState would be some serious vindication for being right about Russia in 2012 given the way that relationship has hit the ditch in the last 12 months.

Trump backstabbing Putin immediately would be hilarious.

 

[whyamihere]

@jaketapper
Dem @RepTimRyan announces he's challenging @NancyPelosi for House Democratic Leader

Here we go!

 

[Deleted member 231381]

What if Sanders had to choose between the good thing and being against the racist thing?

What if they implement an infrastructure jobs bill with language that excludes benefits and payments to Latino laborers?

Then he'd vote against it.

What if they propose a universal healthcare bill that also prevents funding for abortions, contraceptives, and implements religious standards for every hospital regarding women's healthcare?

Then he'd vote against it. His history is pretty clear on both of these issues. He co-sponsored the Freedom of Choice Act!

It's laughable that on the issue of civil rights that Sanders thinks we should find common ground with the Republicans, but on campaign finance and economic issues he couldn't even meet the Democrats halfway.

I don't think you quite understand what he's saying we should do.

 

[Blader]

Here we go!

Hmm. Not sure how I feel about this.

 

[Wilsongt]

Mccrory alledging voter fraud in NC. I guess too many colored people got past those voter ID laws to prevent fraud.

 

[PBY]

I don't think you quite understand what he's saying we should do.

Yup. What exactly is the alternative? I mean, Ds have near-zero leverage hear.

 

[kirblar]

Here we go!

I think ditching Pelosi is a necessity, simply based on image b/c of the BUT BUT BUT THE ESTABLISHMENT crap. It's unfortunate.