• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT6| Delete your accounts

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

User 463088

Banned
Macho Madness said:
https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/738828233014136836



CkDYTVgWYAAgkGd.jpg:large


Jesus h
Click to expand...
How many generations do we have to go back to be pure enough for Dumbass Don?
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
Black Mamba said:
The media now has the opportunity to really drive this shit home.

This shit is so fucking vile.
Click to expand...

Considering Fox let Megyn Kelly go off about this for like ten minutes yesterday, I really think the Right's defense of Trump is going to be pretty tepid this election. They'll give him just enough to make his supporters vote for them downticket, but nobody's going to go to bat for the REALLY ridiculous, racist drivel he spews because, quite frankly, it's not just racist, but incoherently racist.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
TheLaughingStock said:
They're planting the seeds of ideas and potentially a better life, but unfortunately for them Mr. Trump arrived taking most of the attention. Hopefully, they get some consolation down the road because they deserve it after being down and out.
Click to expand...

"down and out"

There's a good chance a majority of those "not working" are college students, to be fair. and then of course retired people.

"Not working" has never been a useful category. It's why Romney's 47% comment was so dumb. So many of those are students who have no taxes among others.

Hazmat said:
"I'm going to do very well with hispanics, but all people with Mexican heritage hate me so much they can't give an unbiased opinion on me."
Click to expand...

This is the only humorous aspect of what Trump is saying. He can't stop contradicting himself. He's going to win the latino vote but proclaims he can't get a fair trial from a latino because of his positions...WAT
 
B

Boke1879

Member
If it was anyone else other than Donald Trump I'd almost believe this was a conspiracy to lose the election. But it's Donald Trump.

His own ego gets the best of him every time. He's said a lot of vile shit, but he keeps doubling down on this. Does he REALLY think he'll have any significant Hispanic support after this?
 
D

Doc Holliday

SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Wow I just saw clips from Trump's interview after Clinton's speech. Holy shit does double down on his statements about the "Mexican" judge. Unbelievable :O

I was one of those who early on, thought Trump was just saying all this vile shit just to get past the primary early one. Holy shit was I wrong.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Boke1879 said:
If it was anyone else other than Donald Trump I'd almost believe this was a conspiracy to lose the election. But it's Donald Trump.

His own ego gets the best of him every time. He's said a lot of vile shit, but he keeps doubling down on this. Does he REALLY think he'll have any significant Hispanic support after this?
Click to expand...

Yes, yes he does. He's someone who lived in an ivory tower his whole life. He doesn't know much about anything that daddy didn't teach him. He's been surrounded by Yes Men his whole life who stroked his ego. He married and dated models he'd almost certainly have no shot at without his fortune.

Dude is a fucking know-nothing clown. He most certainly thinks everything he says is correct.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
hawk2025 said:
The evidence against an institutionally different economic system keeps piling up, and some people somehow keep ignoring it.
Click to expand...

Only tankies actually hate social democracy. The rest of us just don't see it as being the "ultimate system". I would be out of my mind to say I don't prefer social democracy to unregulated capitalism or that social democracy hasn't been a good thing (in a relative perspective) for the people living within its boundaries. Socialists also sometimes fall into the trap of opposing anything and everything capitalist on the basis of it being capitalist without taking a historical materialist approach to the situation, which - as Marx himself made quite obvious - indicates that it is incredibly difficult if not impossible for socialism to be built up without the productive forces having already been built up by capitalism.

But the fact that capitalism has advanced the world in comparison to what has come before it doesn't mean that capitalism is not, at its core, itself immoral or does not need to be replaced, including social democracy, which is still a band aid solution (and still exploitative and prone to the same other problems that capitalism has). I think in some societies and some situations revolution is necessary and just but I'm also not stupid and realize that in most places, like the US, that just isn't going to happen and couldn't happen because we'd all be wiped out by an American Freikorps very easily, and it would have a horrible blowback effect on the people who socialists care the most about - the exploited and the oppressed.

I think if there had been at some point any socialist movement that adopted a gradualist stance that hadn't been subverted into a capitalist party which had managed to transition a country to one where the workers held the means of production you'd see a lot of people drop their hardcore stances and be more willing to work within the system. But then again we've also yet to see a socialist movement based on revolutionary tactics that successfully managed to transition a country to one where the workers held the means of production either. That doesn't mean that criticisms of an incrementalist approach aren't valid, just that everything needs to be critically analyzed.

I'll be interested to see how this develops as automation continues to increase its influence.
 
Vigilant Walrus

Vigilant Walrus

Member
I came across this to day- From 08 a debate between Hillary and Obama. My god, is Obama powerful. He totally takes control. Notice how he Wolf phases him out with "his time is up" and how he turns the whole thing around; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb3JHexXljk

It's clear that neither Hillary or Sanders has this level of linguistic brilliance.


If you compare it to Trump, nerdwriter1 had an excellent small video on trumps rhetoric; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aFo_BV-UzI

Notice the reaffirmations. Notice the clever use of anekdotes. Trump speaks unintelligently but there is something about the way he phrases himself that makes people biased. "these people are not coming from sweden". Immediate post establishing that he wants to find out the problem. Nobody is going to argue that these people are not coming from sweden, nobody is going to say that there is anything wrong with find a problem. In the span of less than 5 seconds, he is already hooking people in with bait.



Trump is not the only one. The brutal honesty of world leaders admitting to war crimes is shocking. It's almost like that their irrational confidence deflects the sensible responses and media and everyone else become so awestruck by Modis only regret during the involvement of the massacre between Hindus and Muslims on his watch was that he didn't handle the media better, or the latest escpades of Trump of the East, or Netanyahus flip-flop on a two-state solution immediately following the day after his re-election, or Ergodans egomaniac crackdowns. Their bluntness, and not going unpunished for it. It's so bizarre that we are all sitting here just listening to this shit, commenting on it like we're sports commentators.


Trump does what all great liars do. He mixes truth with lives and inconsistent messages, making people passive. You truly don't know which statement holds bigger, and so your opinion of him, will probably be dictated about which of his statements you like the most.
There are more than a few Trump supporters who insist he is not racist but merely plays to that crowd. There are many Trump supporters who don't believe he means all those things but that Silly Trump just has a silly mouth.
John Oliver brought up an excellent point in that "either you're a racist, or you are pretending to be. At some point there is no difference there". And I think that is true. But Trump muddies the water.
 
D

dramatis

Member
HylianTom said:
As soon as he became presumed nominee, he didn't start camping out in swing states.. he started fucking around in California. I'd love to know what he's thinking, because "gee, these violent liberal protesters" isn't going to be a winning election message.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if someone finally showed him an electoral college map and he thought "California has the biggest number, I should be getting THAT state" and of course didn't want to mess around in all these small states when he could fish for the biggest.
 
T

TheLostBigBoss

Banned
So why is Trump in California right now?

Has anyone actually explained what he's doing there instead of being in places like

Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida...
 
J

johnsmith

remember me
HylianTom said:
As soon as he became presumed nominee, he didn't start camping out in swing states.. he started fucking around in California. I'd love to know what he's thinking, because "gee, these violent liberal protesters" isn't going to be a winning election message.
Click to expand...

Since the primary ended he's also spent more time attacking

  • a federal judge
  • Paul Ryan
  • Elizabeth Warren
  • Susana Martinez
  • Bill Kristol
  • the press

than Hillary Clinton. Until November he should have focused on 2 people, Clinton and Obama. That is it. Instead he's blasting everybody else that he feels has slighted him in the least.
 
E

Emarv

Member
TheLostBigBoss said:
So why is Trump in California right now?

Has anyone actually explained what he's doing there instead of being in places like

Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida...
Click to expand...
He bought all of his primary flight tickets months ago and doesn't want to lose money to his travel agent for nothing
 
C

Crocodile

Member
The worst part about the Trump comments is as disgusting as they are, they aren't significantly worse than stuff he has already said. Republican primary voters, by and large, straight up didn't care :(

sphagnum said:
This is why I said that "many people on PoliGAF will not have a problem with that" because many people on PoliGAF are capitalists and don't believe that socialism is necessary or good.

So...that's kind of just providing an example of what I said.

Most leftists are, as I said, already believers in intersectionality. They just believe that socialism is as necessary to intersectionality as anti-racism or feminism and hence they are not fans of a party focusing on one element but not what they see as another important element. I, for one, have tried to learn a lot from the failure of the Sanders campaign and its narrow minded focus on economics-above-all-else approach; griping about "identity politics" isn't something that I like to do because I see it as counter-productive and bad for building coalitions when what we need to be doing is listening to exploited and oppressed communities and trying to figure out a strategy for bringing about a socialism that addresses their concerns and that they can believe in. I'm not going to pretend that I can speak for all other socialists in that regard or know what interpretations they're taking from this election. But I've spoken with plenty of socialists, including non-white and non-male socialists, who have the same issue with a focus on identity politics that is void of socialism, so in the end this comes down to an ideological dispute. And yeah that's anecdotal but I just mean that I know, at least by experience, that not everyone holds that position because they're disgruntled white men.
Click to expand...

I can only vouch for my life experiences as well, what I've seen and the people I've interacted with, but I'm skeptical that most white liberals understand or accept intersectionality and I emphatically reject that most liberals (white or non-white) want socialism. I think there have been too many examples of failed socialist states for the American public at large to straight up want socialism as opposed to wanting to work within capitalism and try to fix the very real flaws you have, I understand and respect that you feel differently but I've seen no real data to you aren't in the minority on this subject.

The big issue is also that too many of the economic woes that underprivileged groups suffer are in place first and foremost because of their race/gender/identity/etc.There is too much evidence that even in economically prosperous times that those groups still suffer and that people will be opposed to social safety programs, even if it would help them as well or even more, if it would help underprivileged groups as well. There's basically two things at play here - the baseline (how "well" everyone is doing) and the differential (how well "privileged" groups are doing compared to "underprivileged" groups. An economics first approach will do well to attack the baseline and the differential that exists and is increasing between the "1%" and the middle class. It will do little to anything to address the differential between groups on the axis of race, gender, etc. To those groups, that differential tends to matter as much if not more than the baseline. To "bro-soclaiists" and many liberals, the differential doesn't matter at all. This difference in priorities is where the conflict on the Left often pops up.

TheLostBigBoss said:
So why is Trump in California right now?

Has anyone actually explained what he's doing there instead of being in places like

Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida...
Click to expand...

He wants to win BIG in California but forgot that everybody is already out of the race on the Republican side and is too dumb to transition to GE campaigning?
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
Trump has to be the least-qualified potential head of state since the days of hereditary monarchy.

Edit: The average liberal does not know what intersectionality is, let alone support it, even unconsciously. It's a comparatively new concept, and, frankly, one that could end up being a flash in the pan.
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
I think there's still a tiny but non-zero chance the party just fucking jettisons him before the convention. Maybe even if the only option is Hillary running practically unopposed against a write-in campaign.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
Crocodile said:
I can only vouch for my life experiences as well, what I've seen and the people I've interacted with, but I'm skeptical that most white liberals understand or accept intersectionality and I emphatically reject that most liberals (white or non-white) want socialism. I think there have been too many examples of failed socialist states for the American public at large to straight up want socialism as opposed to wanting to work within capitalism and try to fix the very real flaws you have, I understand and respect that you feel differently but I've seen no real data to you aren't in the minority on this subject.
Click to expand...

I agree. I was only speaking about socialists though, not liberals, since socialists tend to be involved with theory and radical politics. I was kind of conflating "leftist" with "socialist" because in my mind liberals are not leftists - whenever I see the word liberal I think "classical liberal" over the American usage of the word.

The big issue is also that too many of the economic woes that underprivileged groups suffer are in place first and foremost because of their race/gender/identity/etc.There is too much evidence that even in economically prosperous times that those groups still suffer and that people will be opposed to social safety programs, even if it would help them as well or even more, if it would help underprivileged groups as well. There's basically two things at play here - the baseline (how "well" everyone is doing) and the differential (how well "privileged" groups are doing compared to "underprivileged" groups. An economics first approach will do well to attack the baseline and the differential that exists and is increasing between the "1%" and the middle class. It will do little to anything to address the differential between groups on the axis of race, gender, etc. To those groups, that differential tends to matter as much if not more than the baseline. To "bro-soclaiists" and many liberals, the differential doesn't matter at all. This difference in priorities is where the conflict on the Left often pops up.
Click to expand...

And I agree with everything here too, which is why I try not to take an economics-before-anything-else-first approach anymore.
 
T

Teggy

Member
Benjy Sarlin ‏@BenjySarlin 2h2 hours ago
So here's something new: Trump fundraising emails to small donors. This is the second one.
Click to expand...

Will be interesting to see if people will be opening their wallets for him.

Trump supporter comments on tweets about Trump's judge statements keep saying that the press is being "intellectually dishonest" in the way that they are reporting it, and that he is clearly talking about illegal aliens. I have no idea what they are even talking about.
 
T

TheLostBigBoss

Banned
This is what Trump looks like when he is going to be the nominee

He looks like Trump trying to be the nominee

I want to see the look on Ryan's face when he sees what he just said on CNN less than 24 hours after openly saying he would vote for him (which I guess isn't really an endorsement)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom