Support NeoGAF

[andthebeatgoeson]

Remember that Student Organizer from Sanders' campaign that Clinton hired? The Sandernistas found her Facebook page:



Now, I'm not alone in noticing that they tend to go after women much more harshly than men, right?

Who the fuck let's anyone comment on their Facebook page? Settings are there for a reason.

 

[NeoXChaos]

What's KickAss?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1250777/

 

[Suikoguy]

What's KickAss?

Like one of 3 decent Nicholas Cage movies.

 

[Teggy]

What's KickAss?

She was in Let Me In (the American version of Let The Right One In).

 

[jonjonaug]

She was in Let Me In (the American version of Let The Right One In).

I fucking hate that movie.

 

[Teggy]

Who the fuck let's anyone comment on their Facebook page? Settings are there for a reason.

Those are probably her Bernie "friends".

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Like one of 3 decent Nicholas Cage movies.

Kick ass, the rock and what else?

 

[Teggy]

Kick ass, the rock and what else?

Peggy Sue Got Married, Leaving Las Vegas, Raising Arizona and Moonstruck.

Edit: oh and Face/Off and Adaptation and Wild at Heart and Matchstick Men.

 

[Mecha]

Has political discourse gotten worse on GAF in the past month or am I just imagining it?

 

[eBay Huckster]

if by the past month you mean the past 8 months, then yes

 

[Teggy]

Has political discourse gotten worse on GAF in the past month or am I just imagining it?

We're having a perfectly civil conversation about Chloe Grace Moretz and Nicolas Cage.

 

[Valhelm]

Peggy Sue Got Married, Leaving Las Vegas, Raising Arizona and Moonstruck.

Edit: oh and Face/Off and Adaptation and Wild at Heart and Matchstick Men.

bruh

national treasure

 

[Suikoguy]

Has political discourse gotten worse on GAF in the past month or am I just imagining it?

It's going to get worse until November.
I'd like to get the forum's position on conspiracy theories. Are they going to be allowed to be brought up every political thread or are we going to regulate them to their own thread like 9/11 bullshit?

 

[Mecha]

if by the past month you mean the past 8 months, then yes

I might be imagining things then, it feels like once Bernie supporters realized he wouldn't get the nomination it got a bit worse.

We're having a perfectly civil conversation about Chloe Grace Moretz and Nicolas Cage.

Haha, I wasn't talking about that.

 

[shem935]

I might be imagining things then, it feels like once Bernie supporters realized he wouldn't get the nomination it got a bit worse.



Haha, I wasn't talking about that.

Nah I remember people being on edge a year ago. Nature of the primary.

 

[User 463088]

I might be imagining things then, it feels like once Bernie supporters realized he wouldn't get the nomination it got a bit worse.



Haha, I wasn't talking about that.

I don't mean this in a dismissive way, but for a lot of Bernie supporters this is their first time at the rodeo. Maybe it's because they're young. Maybe it's because they've never paid attention before. There has to be a grieving process, even for bitter old bitches like me when our candidate doesn't win. Since they've wrapped themselves in FRAUD! the ntire year, it makes it harder for that reality to set in. Because, again, the whole reason he lost was because it was rigged and all that jazz.

It hurts and sucks when your candidate doesn't win. It's hard to see the other side so happy that theirs did. It'll take time, but everyone will be on the same page eventually.

 

[Mecha]

It's going to get worse until November.
I'd like to get the forum's position on conspiracy theories. Are they going to be allowed to be brought up every political thread or are we going to regulate them to their own thread like 9/11 bullshit?

The conspiracy stuff creeps me out, it creates real hatred for someone because of something they didn't do.

 

[eBay Huckster]

It's going to get worse until November.
I'd like to get the forum's position on conspiracy theories. Are they going to be allowed to be brought up every political thread or are we going to regulate them to their own thread like 9/11 bullshit?

i am pro-relegation of conspiracy theories to their own thread that i can promptly hide forever

 

[User 463088]

The conspiracy stuff creeps me out, it creates real hatred for someone because of something they didn't do.

It's a coping mechanism, fueled, in part, because Bernie's main theme is that it's all rigged. The economy is rigged. The election system is rigged. The ESTABLISHMENT is in control of everything. It seems like a perfectly fertile breeding ground for conspiracy theories. Any port in a storm, confirmation bias, etc.

Edit: I'm not blaming him, exactly. Just saying that when there are some instances of "rigging" and you buy into that, it's easier to believe a lot of things are rigged when you don't get your way.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

The singer of Pantera transitioning from "horrible person and obvious racist" to "open NeoNazi" really doesn't surprise me.

Still feel so conflicted about Inquisition though.

 

[Mecha]

Sad when people rage against the GAF community instead of contemplating on how they handle themselves in conversations and debates and why people respond to them the way they do. There's certainly a liberal leaning on NeoGAF, but you can have unpopular views and get by fine.

 

[Slayven]

Has political discourse gotten worse on GAF in the past month or am I just imagining it?

The concern trolling over normal political back and forth is weird as fuck

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Do y'all think that voting for Trump is in the best interests of low-income whites? If not, why is that so many persist in intending to vote Trump? Are they mistaken about what their interests are, or mistaken about the means to achieving their interests?

 

[shinra-bansho]

Trump's tax plans and healthcare plans would probably actively harm low-income white people.

But he wants to build a wall to keep out the browns.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Trump's tax plans and healthcare plans would probably actively harm low-income white people.

But he wants to build a wall to keep out the browns.

What should we do about the fact so many demographics are aligning behind a candidate who arguably doesn't represent their best interests? How do we persuade them otherwise? Alternatively, is there perhaps something we have missed? Are we inviting undesirable levels of paternalism?

 

[Mrs. Manky]

Do y'all think that voting for Trump is in the best interests of low-income whites? If not, why is that so many persist in intending to vote Trump? Are they mistaken about what their interests are, or mistaken about the means to achieving their interests?

What you and I consider to be their best interests is not important. Every person, every group has their own set of priorities. And many of these people think that Donald Trump will help them achieve those priorities.

 

[Slayven]

Trump's tax plans and healthcare plans would probably actively harm low-income white people.

But he wants to build a wall to keep out the browns.

The GOP lead Kansas has done big things

 

[fauxtrot]

Do y'all think that voting for Trump is in the best interests of low-income whites? If not, why is that so many persist in intending to vote Trump? Are they mistaken about what their interests are, or mistaken about the means to achieving their interests?

This has never stopped GOP candidates from getting their votes before... also, Mrs. Manky explained it better than I could have above regarding "mistaking" what their interests are.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

What you and I consider to be their best interests is not important. Every person, every group has their own set of priorities. And many of these people think that Donald Trump will help them achieve those priorities.

Of course, but there are two issues here. Firstly, do we think that we ought to accept the priorities of everyone regardless of content? What about, for example, voters who are primarily motivated by racism? Can we genuinely say that because they prioritize this is issue, it is necessarily in their interest? Isn't that a rather shallow understanding of welfare? People often desire things that are not good for them. And even if we *do* accept that people's priorities are necessarily to be respected at face value, surely people can be wrong about which policies offer the most effective method of achieving those priorities? If your priority is maintaining employment, you might still vote for trickle-down policies despite contrary evidence because you are unaware of said evidence or don't give credence to the sources of said evidence. Why is that people might be mistaken in this way, and what can we do about this?

 

[Voysa Reezun]

Do y'all think that voting for Trump is in the best interests of low-income whites? If not, why is that so many persist in intending to vote Trump? Are they mistaken about what their interests are, or mistaken about the means to achieving their interests?

I believe that the Trump voters in this category believe that it's in their best interests. Build the wall and end free trade, and they'll have manufacturing jobs with pensions and decent wages fill their towns, just like it was back in the 1950s. Bonus: They can hurt non-white people with these policies, who they see as upsetting the social order.

So yes, whenever a voter votes, I think that they mostly do it because they believe that it's in their best interests. That's separate from if voting Trump actually is in their best interests, which of course it isn't.

 

[Mecha]

What should we do about the fact so many demographics are aligning behind a candidate who arguably doesn't represent their best interests? How do we persuade them otherwise? Alternatively, is there perhaps something we have missed? Are we inviting undesirable levels of paternalism?

Are there any polls out there to see if minorities that support Donald Trump are traditionally republican or democrat? I have a feeling a good chunk of them support him due to party loyalty, I also see a lot of "well he's talking about THOSE kinds of Latinos, not me" or "THOSE kinds of women, but he isn't talking about me".

 

[shinra-bansho]

Thomas Edsall actually writes columns on this stuff all the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/o...-clinton-edsall-psychology-anti-pc-vote.html?

The refusal of Democrats and the American left to hear — or to grant some legitimacy to — the grievances of white America as it loses power and stature to ascendant minorities and to waves of immigrants from across the globe undergirds the Trump movement. In the zero sum world of immigration politics, it has proved impossible so far to convincingly affirm the validity of the claims of both sides.

The quest by American liberals and progressives for support, or at least tolerance, of diversity, inclusiveness and multiculturalism is likely to prevail — particularly if the compulsory dimension of compliance is curtailed.

Jonathan Haidt, a professor at N.Y.U., suggested to me that one way to better understand the intensity of Trump’s appeal is by looking at something called “psychological reactance.” Haidt describes reactance as

the feeling you get when people try to stop you from doing something you’ve been doing, and you perceive that they have no right or justification for stopping you. So you redouble your efforts and do it even more, just to show that you don’t accept their domination. Men in particular are concerned to show that they do not accept domination.

 

[Dominican Power]

Peggy Sue Got Married, Leaving Las Vegas, Raising Arizona and Moonstruck.

Edit: oh and Face/Off and Adaptation and Wild at Heart and Matchstick Men.

Gone in 60 seconds.

 

[Plinko]

bruh

national treasure

And Knowing.

 

[royalan]

What should we do about the fact so many demographics are aligning behind a candidate who arguably doesn't represent their best interests? How do we persuade them otherwise? Alternatively, is there perhaps something we have missed? Are we inviting undesirable levels of paternalism?

Uhhhh...welcome to the Republican Party and their constituency for the last 40 some-odd years?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Thomas Edsall actually writes columns on this stuff all the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/o...-clinton-edsall-psychology-anti-pc-vote.html?

If this is analysis is true, why has the Democratic campaign been so poor? Trump did best compared to the other Republican candidates amongst those with no college degree and households earning less than $50,000 a year. These are historically Democratic demographics. More importantly, they are demographics with legitimate grievances. They've seen wages and unemployment rise compared to middle- and high-income classes. They've seen a decline in political representation, with fewer Senators from low-income backgrounds than at any point in the last 50 years. This should be fertile ground for the Democrats: they're the party that should be offering a better economy by taking on entrenched big business; they're the party that should be offering genuine political representation with officials from a wide variety of backgrounds. Why have they failed to do so?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Uhhhh...welcome to the Republican Party and their constituency for the last 40 some-odd years?

That post wasn't necessarily about Trump or the Republican Party.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

If this is analysis is true, why has the Democratic campaign been so poor? Trump did best compared to the other Republican candidates amongst those with no college degree and households earning less than $50,000 a year. These are historically Democratic demographics. More importantly, they are demographics with legitimate grievances. They've seen wages and unemployment rise compared to middle- and high-income classes. They've seen a decline in political representation, with fewer Senators from low-income backgrounds than at any point in the last 50 years. This should be fertile ground for the Democrats: they're the party that should be offering a better economy by taking on entrenched big business; they're the party that should be offering genuine political representation with officials from a wide variety of backgrounds. Why have they failed to do so?

Uhh, a huge portion of American white people care more about hating people of color than some of their income.

 

[dramatis]

I'd argue that the electorate is wiser than we think.

The voters on both sides picked exactly candidates that represent their best interests. The difference is what the voters believe is their best interest.

Looking down on the Dem electorate is exactly why Sanders lost.

 

[Oblivion]

And Knowing.

Don't forget Ghostrider.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Uhh, a huge portion of American white people care more about hating people of color than some of their income.

Why is this? It's not an innate feature of being white; other comparable Western countries are less racist than America, if not perfectly so. How do we change this?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I'd argue that the electorate is wiser than we think.

The voters on both sides picked exactly candidates that represent their best interests. The difference is what the voters believe is their best interest.

Looking down on the Dem electorate is exactly why Sanders lost.

You think Trump is genuinely in the best interests of low-income, white America?

 

[B-Dubs]

Why is this? It's not an innate feature of being white; other comparable Western countries are less racist than America, if not perfectly so. How do we change this?

They're not, as evidenced by Roma threads and recent events, it's just a constant issue in the US instead of a sometimes issue overseas.

 

[plagiarize]

Peggy Sue Got Married, Leaving Las Vegas, Raising Arizona and Moonstruck.

Edit: oh and Face/Off and Adaptation and Wild at Heart and Matchstick Men.

And Vampire's Kiss.

And Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans.

 

[Diablos]

She was in Let Me In (the American version of Let The Right One In).

OH. I never saw the American version but the original one sure was strange.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I think you have to bear in mind that Trump won certain demographic subgroups e.g income within already self-sorted GOP voters.

And it's not an innate feature of being white or being straight or being a man. So much as it's a product of having some form of power or privilege granted by these elements, and seeing that eroded over time I imagine.

More opportunity for others means less opportunity for them. It's very easy to scapegoat whatever situation you're in externally.

 

[Oblivion]

And Vampire's Kiss.

And Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans.

Sounds like we finally found our third party candidate.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Why is this? It's not an innate feature of being white; other comparable Western countries are less racist than America, if not perfectly so. How do we change this?

... No they aren't?

Trump is best serving the interests of low income white people that hate black people a great deal. Hopefully research can point the way to reducing racism.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

They're not, as evidenced by Roma threads and recent events, it's just a constant issue in the US instead of a sometimes issue overseas.

I'm fairly sure this is empirically untrue. The World Values Survey records consistent differences in attitudes towards race and racism across different countries; there's no standard level of racism every society adheres to.

EDIT: Both you and ItWasMeantToBe have read my post (incorrectly) as saying other countries are *not* racist. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that at least some countries are *less* racist; indicating there is a capacity for societies to improve on how racist they are.

 

[WaffleTaco]

Low-in come Americans like Trump because they think he offers real change and tells it like it is. They know their fucked and that only the lazy and minorities get helped by the democrats.

From talking to a few of them in my workplace and my area, that's what I have gathered why they like Trump...or they hate Hillary because she is a crook and a liar and you can't trust her.