I dislike the outcome of the election as much as anyone else -- but saying this kind of shit, acting like the universe is broken or that certain voters are necessarily inherently evil people... that's not the path back to the WH for the left.
Figuring out why so many people are willing to vote against their own best interests is the path -- or at least part of it. And that requires reaching out and trying to understand.
I won't say "all racism is economic" -- but people whose lives are satisfactory and who have goals to strive for are going to spend a lot less heat and energy hating on "out-groups" and trying to whitewash US politics.
What matters is not whether the rural blue-collar voter blames Muslims or Hispanics -- or Jews -- for their bleak economic outlook. What matters is the bleak economics of rural cities and counties. Fix it, and ignore the shit that comes out of their mouths, and enough of them will flip back over to put some lead back in the progressive pencil.
I'm results-oriented. I disagree entirely with your statement here.
What an individual "needs" isn't mine or yours to determine.
A huge component in rural working-class voters' issues with the democratic party and the liberal left in the US is the sense of elitism we give off and they pick up on. "Your circumstances and lived experiences do not matter. Your opinion is wrong and you are a bad person for believing what you believe."
It might work if we were talking about puppies or children -- they are flexible in whom they adopt as moral teachers. Adults, on the other hand, who already disagree with you on race, economics, immigration, etc. are not going to become the kind of people you want them to be. All they will do is resent you even more.
We have to grapple with the revealed truth: Whether we think they're right or wrong for believing what they believe, they do in fact believe these things and feel every bit as justified in their beliefs as we do in ours. There is no objective appeal we can make by which any person can compare their views and come to a natural conclusion "Oh, fuck. My opinions make me a shithead. I had better get over my own ego and adopt what these enlightened city-dwelling lefties are telling me to think."
I'll say it as squarely as possible: If you believe that trying to shame, belittle or insult people who disagree with you is a good idea, then fuck you. You're making it worse, not better.
I'll say it as squarely as possible: If you believe that trying to shame, belittle or insult people who disagree with you is a good idea, then fuck you. You're making it worse, not better.
Knowing /u/RecallRethuglicans, I imagine he was being totally serious and not mocking you for writing this:
Figuring out why so many people are willing to vote against their own best interests is the path -- or at least part of it. And that requires reaching out and trying to understand.
Whats hilarious is that your post is so wrong and retarded that I first assumed it was sarcasm, but instead you actually mean it. I hope they listen to this line of logic out in leftyville because that means a super majority in 2018 for the senate republicans.
I currently live in california and was born in california and the real bubble is people who think they are not part of any retarded self-aggrandizing bubble.
That's my immediate reaction to /u/elisionist's comment, as well.
"God is dead, and we have killed him." While metaphorical, he was of course completely serious. We've outstripped the need for gods, but have not yet repaired the social damage that this has caused.
You're mocking one of the most significant contributors to philosophy and modern thinking of the last 200 years mostly because you're too stupid to understand what he's saying even though the guy you're responding to explained it outright.
He was a gigantic weirdo, though. Thing is, most important people are if you investigate deeply enough. Which leads me to believe that most people are, honestly.
What matters is not whether the rural blue-collar voter blames Muslims or Hispanics -- or Jews -- for their bleak economic outlook.
When it comes to blaming other races and groups for their "outlooks" few are more virulent than leftists; everything is white people's/the rich's fault.
Thanks for sharing. It doesn't relate to whether or not it's OK to alienate rural blue-collar voters by treating them as if they are defective, but your comment had words in it and didn't cause any fires to break out.
I dislike the outcome of the election as much as anyone else
I loved this outcome, it surpassed my wildest political wet dreams. Lets not be lumping everyone into your worldview now.
Figuring out why so many people are willing to vote against their own best interests is the path -- or at least part of it. And that requires reaching out and trying to understand.
Or maybe they voted exactly for their best interest and the countries best interest and you just don't know what their interest is. You just assume your way was right and you need to convince them. Goes both ways there.
What matters is not whether the rural blue-collar voter blames Muslims or Hispanics -- or Jews -- for their bleak economic outlook. What matters is the bleak economics of rural cities and counties. Fix it, and ignore the shit that comes out of their mouths, and enough of them will flip back over to put some lead back in the progressive pencil.
Or maybe, just maybe, the progressives can stick that pencil somewhere. Did it ever occur to you that the issue for most who flipped had nothing to do with blacks or Hispanics, but the failed policy the progressive globalists were offering them? These guys voted Obama in 2008, because they believed the hype, I living in Chicago, knew it was all bullshit but eh, I can forgive mistakes like that.
These idiots turned the Republicans into the party of the working class. I want you to think about that. The problem isn't that they didn't get your message, the problem is your message was basically "Fuck you, we know whats best for you."
I didn't say "everyone else". "Anyone else" -- means that among the people who didn't like it, I dislike it as much as the most dislikey of them. It was not my intent to ignore that there are people who liked it.
That's, actually, the point of my post. There are people who have good reasons for believing something different from what we (we we, not you we) believe. Acting as though those people are defective is part of what got us into this situation. (we us, not you us).
We'll disagree on what is what in whose best interests, naturally, but I accept and respect that you disagree with this point.
I think you're trying to read too much into what I said. I'm addressing people who have a knee-jerk reaction against trump voters because of alleged implicit racism in such a vote. I don't agree (kinda the point of my comment) that it's that simple, and acting as though it is ("you all are a bunch of racists for voting for this guy") is counter productive.
Yeah, progressives need some new material. The "hey lets support the corporate plutocracy" failed this country miserably. Thing is, though, every single president since (maybe) Carter and aside from him, probably Teddy Roosevelt has been deeply in the pocket of the plutocracy. People seem to believe that Trump is the c-c-c-c-c-combo-breaker, but personally I don't see it. He's not in the pocket of the plutocrat, he is the plutocrat.
I agree that the rural working poor identifies with the GOP. My whole point here is "we won't win them back by insulting them". So I'm not sure what your purpose here is.
He's not in the pocket of the plutocrat, he is the plutocrat.
the "trump won't be effective because of who trump is" arguments are fairly dumb and miss the obvious fact that the most dedicated and effective reformers of the American political system during the twentieth century were a) a blue-blooded aristocrat (FDR) and b) a crass narcissist who needed everyone to love him (LBJ)
I had really hoped that one positive outcome of this election would be the final death of the identitards but it's looking like we'll have no such luck
I didn't say he won't be effective. I said that looking to a plutocrat as the one to end the government's catering to plutocracy doesn't make sense. He might do it. If he does, Mazel Tov!
but saying the kind of shit Madonna is on about here, acting like the universe is broken or that certain voters are necessarily inherently evil people... that's not the path back to the WH for the left.
Figuring out why so many people are willing to vote against their own best interests is the path -- or at least part of it.
I'm sure you know better. You're enlightened. So smart. Tell me more about my best interests.
Dumbass. This smug elitism is just as toxic to your preferred candidates 2020 run. Prepare for eight years of Trump and at least 4 of Republican control of both houses.
I didn't think it would need this much explaining, TBH. It should be uncontroversial:
Insulting Trump supporters and acting like they're defective or morons or morally broken is not something that is going to improve the Left's chances in 2020.
Understanding why people voted the way they did -- from rejecting Hilary to rejecting the Left's urban elitism to whatever else there is to find is what needs to happen. It's as simple as "we can't grow the tent by pretending that everyone outside the tent is defective".
Mostly what I mean is like "I believe that we can do more for them than the other guys can. Our job is going to involve figuring out how to deliver, and convincing them that we can deliver."
It's pretty simple, help American citizens. American citizens doesn't mean white people, it doesn't mean males, it just means citizens. Citizens are the only real special interest group that should matter. Gays don't need special rights, they just need the same rights as everyone else. Blacks don't need special rights, they just need the same rights as everyone else. Prioritize American citizens over people crossing the border illegally and American citizens will vote for you. Prioritize American citizens over foreign workers receiving outsourced jobs and American citizens will vote for you.
Trump ended the TPP and is going to try to renogotiate NAFTA--the TPP that Obama cozied up to the bankers to pass, and NAFTA, which cost Democrats congress (and they never really got it back for long afterwards). NAFTA devastated lower income white communities and marked the beginning of the end of the Democratic party as a labor party.
Democrats don't get to make that argument, not after the Obama years, which represent the single greatest transfer of wealth upward in all of American history.
Free trade isn't the problem. If Chinese and Mexicans don't take your jobs, robots will.
The point is that nobody is going to pay uneducated white boys $60,000/year to drill holes in sheet metal or whatever the fuck overpaid blue collar manufacturing job your fevered mind imagines Trump will conjure back.
sure, but robots are not yet more than just another form of capital and open up support jobs (robot maintenance, security for automated factories...) in a way that offshoring doesn't
also if people get really mad they can break the robots, which incentivizes slightly better treatment of those people on the part of the capital owners, in a way that using foreign scab labor doesn't
madonna built her career and name off of pandering to the image of silly materialistic women that live for male attention and now the same women who rail against such an image are using her as a talking head. They are mocking themselves at this point.
Starting the speech off by insulting trump's skin color. I'm so confused how they preach tolerance but then make comments like this....Madonna preaching peace and love, then segments into bombing the white house? This is getting a bit ridiculous honestly.
Part of me really wishes Trump were the evil fascist neo-Hitler the left says he is, just so I could watch well-dressed jackbooted thugs put their knees to the back of these celebrities' and protester's necks.
I could have waited for an r/videos thread, but I figured a world-renowned celebrity contemplating the destruction of a national monument, due to an undesirable electoral outcome was dramatic enough. Just let me agendapost in peace pls
Long story short, Hillary's presidency was seen as inevitable by a large portion of the public for the better part of the last two years, particularly her supporters. When Trump was nominated as her opponent, this inevitability was only magnified, because he was viewed as a loose cannon and the least electable Republican in the field.
It's hard for people who have been supporting her for the past couple of years to cope with the fact that she was defeated by the person they largely viewed as the easiest opponent she could possibly face.
No, he wants to get rid of your special privileges.
I am not well off, but the ACA cranked up my insurance premiums to give you, as a woman, all manner of free healthcare. That's just fucking wrong. And now you brats are throwing a fit about it, because we had an election and you lost.
It's kind of complicated but Hillary's campaign (to some extent) and the media (to a ridiculous extent) spent the last year or so painting Trump and his political allies as fascist bigots who hate gays, muslims, immigrants, Mexicans, and women, and will be the worst thing to happen to this country and destroy all the Progress™ the progressive liberals have made over the last eight years.
That isn't to say Trump doesn't have his flaws, I didn't vote for him. But I didn't vote for Hillary either.
If Hillary had won the election, this wouldn't be an issue, but now anyone who literally believed the narrative (that is still being pushed: see Salon.com et al) is afraid what a bigoted, fascist President of the United States of America will do.
It's kind of the opposite of the extreme right-wing's panic when Obama took office, except in this case the major news media are on their side instead of making fun of them.
The ACA gave a lot of free healthcare to women, basically. It didn't give anyone else access to yearly checkups or preventative care, but it gave a ton of free shit to women. Trump is going to get rid of it, because while most (60%) of Democratic voters are female, 60% of Republican voters are male, and men didn't get jack shit from the ACA but a premium increase.
The ACA gave a lot of free healthcare to women, basically. It didn't give anyone else access to yearly checkups or preventative care, but it gave a ton of free shit to women
The fuck are you even on? Before the ACA, basically everyone got denied because of pre-existing conditions. You're just saying that you might as well fuck everyone over as long as women get fucked over more? Women carry children, dipshit. Children's health correlates with the mother's health enormously.
If you think the guy is terrible because of his previous speeches and appointments and whatever, then the idea is that he probably will do something terrible regardless of whether or not he's been able to in his first day. It's not exactly unreasonable.
...but I know that this won't change anything. We cannot fall into despair. As the poet, W.H. Auden once wrote on the eve of World War II: We must love one another or die.
I choose love. Are you with me? Say this with me: We choose love. We choose love. We choose love.
Really? It's fucking psychotic to think about blowing up any building. Are you not aware that that's an extremely weird thing to say? Do you have aspergers?
To say you're thinking about blowing up the white house? Yeah, actually. If it wasn't Madonna that said it, the person that did would probably be locked up right now. Utterances of violent threats against the president of the US is a felony and according to several news websites she's being investigated by the Secret Service.
My shocked reaction is from your level of stupidity. I heard the full quote and I read what you wrote above. What you're not getting is the second part of that quote doesn't negate the first. You can't say that you thought about committing an act of terrorism but then decided not to. It's illegal to say "I've thought a lot about blowing up the white house." It's a threat against the President's life, which is why she is now being investigated by the secret service.
Alright, good luck explaining your little theory to a judge in court. Really? Context doesn't matter? "I am going to kill the president. In this videogame." Whoops, guess I'll be prosecuted for felony now!
You idiot. Free speech matters but only when I agree. /s
She. Is. Currently. Being. Investigated. By. The. Secret. Service.
Literally. She is currently and literally being investigated by the secret service. Free speech doesn't cover threats of violence or calls to violent action, dummy. You are so profoundly stupid it kind of bums me out.
No... People are accused AFTER they've been investigated. That's what the secret service is doing. They're investigating her statements, and they'll come up with nothing, after which she will not be prosecuted for committing a felony. Nothing will happen. End of.
That's how these things work. When someone makes a statement, an investigation is started, which either turns up with something or nothing. The law isn't a end all authoritarian force. Imagine if she could be arrested for saying something! That wouldn't be very American, would it?
God damn. You accuse someone of a crime and then they are investigated to see if there is any validity to those accusations.
The law isn't a end all authoritarian force. Imagine if she could be arrested for saying something! So much for land of the free.
Why is she being investigated if she didn't say anything wrong, dipshit? Threats against the president and threats in general are illegal and NOT protected speech.
You seem to be misunderstanding me. The secret service is investigating if her statement is LIABLE for PROSECUTION. She isn't charged with any criminal act, they're investigating to see if they should. Spoiler alert: they won't. Because at the end of the day, sensible people can place words into context, without having to cherry pick evidence to fit their narrative. What Madonna did will have no consequences, no matter how outraged you are.
I find it hilariously ironic that her speech got posted in this sub, a sub that supposedly laughs about drama. Yet, I've never seen a group of people with their panties in a bunch as much as I've seen in this thread. Also, did the sidebar get hacked? kek
You seem to be misunderstanding me. The secret service is investigating if her statement is LIABLE for PROSECUTION. She isn't charged with any criminal act, they're investigating to see if they should. Spoiler alert: they won't.
Never said they would. Never said she was charged with anything.
Because at the end of the day, sensible people can place words into context, without having to cherry pick evidence to fit their narrative. What Madonna did will have no consequences, no matter how outraged you are.
It is illegal to utter threats against the president and the secret service isn't going to take those threats, real or imagined, lightly. She is going to be investigated to see if there's any validity to her words and if they do see any evidence that she actually entertained this idea (if they treat her like any other person, they're going to go through all her shit including computers and phone records) she has a very real chance of being prosecuted since, as I've said a million times before this, threats of violence against the president are fucking illegal.
I find it hilariously ironic that her speech got posted in this sub, a sub that supposedly laughs about drama. Yet, I've never seen a group of people with their panties in a bunch as much as I've seen in this thread. Also, did the sidebar get hacked? kek
"LOL! So funny that people are freaking out about a washed up old 'musician' like Madonna saying she has been thinking about blowing up the white house! Come on, guys. That's like, a totally normal thing for a person to say on national television."
(if they treat her like any other person, they're going to go through all her shit including computers and phone records)
lol
"LOL! So funny that people are freaking out about a washed up old 'musician' like Madonna saying she has been thinking about blowing up the white house! Come on, guys. That's like, a totally normal thing for a person to say on national television."
I don't see anyone freaking out but you. Then again, if you're used to a bit of common sense, you'd know Madonna wouldn't actually blow up a government building, and her comment was very obviously hyperbole. But oh, who am I fooling, she's a liberal, which means anything she says is bad.
You don't think if some random person said "I've been thinking a lot about blowing up the white house but instead I've chose love or death" on Facebook or something that the secret service or some other government agency wouldn't come knocking on their door, asking them questions, and seizing their property? You're delusional if you don't believe that.
I don't see anyone freaking out but you.
You literally just said: "I find it hilariously ironic that her speech got posted in this sub, a sub that supposedly laughs about drama. Yet, I've never seen a group of people with their panties in a bunch as much as I've seen in this thread."
Then again, if you're used to a bit of common sense, you'd know Madonna wouldn't actually blow up a government building, and her comment was very obviously hyperbole.
Yes, obviously. But you're not the secret service and they don't take threats, especially those made on national television, lightly. Even if she laughed and said "naw. just kidding" after, she'd probably still get some questions.
But oh, who am I fooling, she's a liberal, which means anything she says is bad, bad, bad.
Only if it's fucking stupid, like saying she's been thinking about blowing up the white house. I think it's pretty disgusting that you're making excuses for her. If this was some right wing nut talking about blowing up the white house while Obama was there, you'd be flipping your pink and purple wig.
You don't think if some random person said "I've been thinking a lot about blowing up the white house but instead I've chose love or death" on Facebook or something that the secret service or some other government agency wouldn't come knocking on their door, asking them questions, and seizing their property? You're delusional if you don't believe that.
Context matters so, so much here but you seem to forget that. A random facebook status vs a public emotionally driven speech.
Only if it's fucking stupid, like saying she's been thinking about blowing up the white house. I think it's pretty disgusting that you're making excuses for her. If this was some right wing nut talking about blowing up the white house while Obama was there, you'd be flipping your pink and purple wig.
I've had my fair share of videos of right-wing gun nutters threatening the government, and never have I given a shit. (PLEASE note that these are actual threats instead of hyperbolic expressions)
Yes, obviously. But you're not the secret service and they don't take threats, especially those made on national television, lightly. Even if she laughed and said "naw. just kidding" after, she'd probably still get some questions.
It wasn't a threat, and yes she will, and no nothing will come of it. Are we done here?
Context matters so, so much here but you seem to forget that. A random facebook status vs a public emotionally driven speech.
They... are... investigating... her... you keep forgetting the fact that they are currently investigating her for a crime. It doesn't matter what you think the context means or how much it matters. They are currently investigating her. They do not give a FUCK about the context.
I've had my fair share of videos of right-wing gun nutters threatening the government, and never have I given a shit. (PLEASE note that these are actual threats instead of hyperbolic expressions)
Then you're an idiot if you think threats of violence are no big deal and also kind of a piece of shit.
It wasn't a threat, and yes she will, and no nothing will come of it. Are we done here?
Once again, never said anything will come from it. Anyway, yeah, we're done. You're dismissed.
I mean she yanked an underage girl's breasts out live on stage a few years ago why would anyone want her to speak anywhere? She seems horrible tbh and I'm not surprised she'd say something like this I hope she gets in trouble for it.
The female candidate, who lead a party that is 60% female, lost. That's all this is.
I don't get it. If 500k people they didn't agree with marched to retain special privileges and special funding that other groups don't get, would these feminists care? I doubt it.
132 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-01-21
Error in fetchQuote() line 4 character 0: 400 AUTHENTICATION_ERROR - could not connect to server
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a Fartkin 2017-01-21
Yes please continue espousing radical terrorist violence, especially if you live in a mansion.
-people who want trump again in 2020
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I dislike the outcome of the election as much as anyone else -- but saying this kind of shit, acting like the universe is broken or that certain voters are necessarily inherently evil people... that's not the path back to the WH for the left.
Figuring out why so many people are willing to vote against their own best interests is the path -- or at least part of it. And that requires reaching out and trying to understand.
I won't say "all racism is economic" -- but people whose lives are satisfactory and who have goals to strive for are going to spend a lot less heat and energy hating on "out-groups" and trying to whitewash US politics.
What matters is not whether the rural blue-collar voter blames Muslims or Hispanics -- or Jews -- for their bleak economic outlook. What matters is the bleak economics of rural cities and counties. Fix it, and ignore the shit that comes out of their mouths, and enough of them will flip back over to put some lead back in the progressive pencil.
n/a RecallRethuglicans 2017-01-21
That's the key: people need to be told they are ignorant if they vote for Republicans. They can't wallow in ignorance for four years.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I'm results-oriented. I disagree entirely with your statement here.
What an individual "needs" isn't mine or yours to determine.
A huge component in rural working-class voters' issues with the democratic party and the liberal left in the US is the sense of elitism we give off and they pick up on. "Your circumstances and lived experiences do not matter. Your opinion is wrong and you are a bad person for believing what you believe."
It might work if we were talking about puppies or children -- they are flexible in whom they adopt as moral teachers. Adults, on the other hand, who already disagree with you on race, economics, immigration, etc. are not going to become the kind of people you want them to be. All they will do is resent you even more.
We have to grapple with the revealed truth: Whether we think they're right or wrong for believing what they believe, they do in fact believe these things and feel every bit as justified in their beliefs as we do in ours. There is no objective appeal we can make by which any person can compare their views and come to a natural conclusion "Oh, fuck. My opinions make me a shithead. I had better get over my own ego and adopt what these enlightened city-dwelling lefties are telling me to think."
I'll say it as squarely as possible: If you believe that trying to shame, belittle or insult people who disagree with you is a good idea, then fuck you. You're making it worse, not better.
n/a subpoutine 2017-01-21
Knowing /u/RecallRethuglicans, I imagine he was being totally serious and not mocking you for writing this:
n/a Chicup 2017-01-21
Whats hilarious is that your post is so wrong and retarded that I first assumed it was sarcasm, but instead you actually mean it. I hope they listen to this line of logic out in leftyville because that means a super majority in 2018 for the senate republicans.
God damn you people are stupid.
n/a Awayfone 2017-01-21
Wait , it is not sarcasm?
Damn you poe
n/a Soulwound 2017-01-21
This is the only vox.com article I ever link, please read it.
n/a RecallRethuglicans 2017-01-21
Read this instead.
n/a Fartkin 2017-01-21
I currently live in california and was born in california and the real bubble is people who think they are not part of any retarded self-aggrandizing bubble.
n/a Fartkin 2017-01-21
you're the reason trump won etc etc
n/a Elisionist 2017-01-21
this election cycle has been the first time I've heard "god is dead" in a non-joking manner.
n/a Ylajali_2002 2017-01-21
I don't think Nietzsche was joking the first time around.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
That's my immediate reaction to /u/elisionist's comment, as well.
"God is dead, and we have killed him." While metaphorical, he was of course completely serious. We've outstripped the need for gods, but have not yet repaired the social damage that this has caused.
n/a xjapxn 2017-01-21
blah blah fedora blah blah euphoric blah blah blah magic sky fairy
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
Mostly, although I'm not sure about the gravy at Tim Horton's. It might be made from a powder.
n/a FuckURedditor 2017-01-21
You're mocking one of the most significant contributors to philosophy and modern thinking of the last 200 years mostly because you're too stupid to understand what he's saying even though the guy you're responding to explained it outright.
He was a gigantic weirdo, though. Thing is, most important people are if you investigate deeply enough. Which leads me to believe that most people are, honestly.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-01-21
I always thought Nietzsche was a walrus from the Königsberg zoo.
It blew my mind when i found out a year ago that he was actually a real person.
n/a theronspire 2017-01-21
I think you're overstating Nietzsche a little.
n/a xjapxn 2017-01-21
You think I care? Taterbizkits post sounds like a condensed /r/atheism copypasta and I will treat it as such.
n/a 75962410687 2017-01-21
What is that ridiculous flag?
n/a anotheraccount323 2017-01-21
Actually he put that line in the mouth of a crazy character.
n/a LemonScore 2017-01-21
When it comes to blaming other races and groups for their "outlooks" few are more virulent than leftists; everything is white people's/the rich's fault.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
Thanks for sharing. It doesn't relate to whether or not it's OK to alienate rural blue-collar voters by treating them as if they are defective, but your comment had words in it and didn't cause any fires to break out.
n/a Spectre_06 2017-01-21
Just to be safe, I started a small fire.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
Making backfires is probably a good idea under the circumstances.
n/a Spectre_06 2017-01-21
Burned down the neighborhood. I started it, then my autosm kicked in alongside my short attention span and I chased a squirrel. RIP neighborhood.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-21
I am glad the bitch-idiot left hates rurals and labor.
n/a Chicup 2017-01-21
I loved this outcome, it surpassed my wildest political wet dreams. Lets not be lumping everyone into your worldview now.
Or maybe they voted exactly for their best interest and the countries best interest and you just don't know what their interest is. You just assume your way was right and you need to convince them. Goes both ways there.
Or maybe, just maybe, the progressives can stick that pencil somewhere. Did it ever occur to you that the issue for most who flipped had nothing to do with blacks or Hispanics, but the failed policy the progressive globalists were offering them? These guys voted Obama in 2008, because they believed the hype, I living in Chicago, knew it was all bullshit but eh, I can forgive mistakes like that.
These idiots turned the Republicans into the party of the working class. I want you to think about that. The problem isn't that they didn't get your message, the problem is your message was basically "Fuck you, we know whats best for you."
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I didn't say "everyone else". "Anyone else" -- means that among the people who didn't like it, I dislike it as much as the most dislikey of them. It was not my intent to ignore that there are people who liked it.
That's, actually, the point of my post. There are people who have good reasons for believing something different from what we (we we, not you we) believe. Acting as though those people are defective is part of what got us into this situation. (we us, not you us).
We'll disagree on what is what in whose best interests, naturally, but I accept and respect that you disagree with this point.
I think you're trying to read too much into what I said. I'm addressing people who have a knee-jerk reaction against trump voters because of alleged implicit racism in such a vote. I don't agree (kinda the point of my comment) that it's that simple, and acting as though it is ("you all are a bunch of racists for voting for this guy") is counter productive.
Yeah, progressives need some new material. The "hey lets support the corporate plutocracy" failed this country miserably. Thing is, though, every single president since (maybe) Carter and aside from him, probably Teddy Roosevelt has been deeply in the pocket of the plutocracy. People seem to believe that Trump is the c-c-c-c-c-combo-breaker, but personally I don't see it. He's not in the pocket of the plutocrat, he is the plutocrat.
I agree that the rural working poor identifies with the GOP. My whole point here is "we won't win them back by insulting them". So I'm not sure what your purpose here is.
n/a Herbert-West 2017-01-21
All this high effort posting on r/drama. Both you and /u/chicup should consider buying a 6 pack of bleach and downing it.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I have done and am about to. Though I define bleach rather broadly. Y'know. To include beer and things without so much chlorine in them.
n/a Fucking_That_Chicken 2017-01-21
the "trump won't be effective because of who trump is" arguments are fairly dumb and miss the obvious fact that the most dedicated and effective reformers of the American political system during the twentieth century were a) a blue-blooded aristocrat (FDR) and b) a crass narcissist who needed everyone to love him (LBJ)
I had really hoped that one positive outcome of this election would be the final death of the identitards but it's looking like we'll have no such luck
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I didn't say he won't be effective. I said that looking to a plutocrat as the one to end the government's catering to plutocracy doesn't make sense. He might do it. If he does, Mazel Tov!
n/a wwyzzerdd 2017-01-21
I bet LBJ grabbed many a pussy.
n/a ting_bu_dong 2017-01-21
Oh.
You're one of those.
n/a WyrmSaint 2017-01-21
I'm sure you know better. You're enlightened. So smart. Tell me more about my best interests.
Dumbass. This smug elitism is just as toxic to your preferred candidates 2020 run. Prepare for eight years of Trump and at least 4 of Republican control of both houses.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I wasn't talking about you.
n/a WyrmSaint 2017-01-21
So who are you talking about?
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I didn't think it would need this much explaining, TBH. It should be uncontroversial:
Insulting Trump supporters and acting like they're defective or morons or morally broken is not something that is going to improve the Left's chances in 2020.
Understanding why people voted the way they did -- from rejecting Hilary to rejecting the Left's urban elitism to whatever else there is to find is what needs to happen. It's as simple as "we can't grow the tent by pretending that everyone outside the tent is defective".
That's it. Honestly.
n/a WyrmSaint 2017-01-21
You're bad at that.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I'll own that.
Mostly what I mean is like "I believe that we can do more for them than the other guys can. Our job is going to involve figuring out how to deliver, and convincing them that we can deliver."
n/a WyrmSaint 2017-01-21
It's pretty simple, help American citizens. American citizens doesn't mean white people, it doesn't mean males, it just means citizens. Citizens are the only real special interest group that should matter. Gays don't need special rights, they just need the same rights as everyone else. Blacks don't need special rights, they just need the same rights as everyone else. Prioritize American citizens over people crossing the border illegally and American citizens will vote for you. Prioritize American citizens over foreign workers receiving outsourced jobs and American citizens will vote for you.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
I'm not getting into any of that.
My point is the left needs to stop insulting the people they depend on for votes. The rest is a completely different subject.
n/a FuckURedditor 2017-01-21
Is it against our interests, though?
Trump ended the TPP and is going to try to renogotiate NAFTA--the TPP that Obama cozied up to the bankers to pass, and NAFTA, which cost Democrats congress (and they never really got it back for long afterwards). NAFTA devastated lower income white communities and marked the beginning of the end of the Democratic party as a labor party.
Democrats don't get to make that argument, not after the Obama years, which represent the single greatest transfer of wealth upward in all of American history.
n/a anotheraccount323 2017-01-21
Free trade isn't the problem. If Chinese and Mexicans don't take your jobs, robots will.
The point is that nobody is going to pay uneducated white boys $60,000/year to drill holes in sheet metal or whatever the fuck overpaid blue collar manufacturing job your fevered mind imagines Trump will conjure back.
n/a nanonan 2017-01-21
This isn't the eighties, the robots are here. Trump knows how to attract investment, that's not a fevered imagining.
n/a anotheraccount323 2017-01-21
Yeah, no businesses would ever want to invest in the world's richest market with Trump "attracting" them.
The point is that business investment doesn't necessarily translate into lots of jobs. Modern, high tech manufacturing is extremely automated.
n/a Fucking_That_Chicken 2017-01-21
sure, but robots are not yet more than just another form of capital and open up support jobs (robot maintenance, security for automated factories...) in a way that offshoring doesn't
also if people get really mad they can break the robots, which incentivizes slightly better treatment of those people on the part of the capital owners, in a way that using foreign scab labor doesn't
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-21
The left has never had a path to the WH and never will.
n/a taterbizkit 2017-01-21
Cool story bro. Keep fuckin' that chicken.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-21
http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1478/50/1478507772947.png
n/a Fucking_That_Chicken 2017-01-21
you'll be hearing from my attorney
n/a nanonan 2017-01-21
Figuring out they weren't voting against their best interests will take even longer.
n/a Rachat21 2017-01-21
Rich people don't know what violence is? What kind of logic is that
n/a OnlyRacistOnReddit 2017-01-21
I'm glad that material girl has been woke!
n/a Ernigrad-zo 2017-01-21
she had one of those kabbalah bracelets, that's all it takes.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-01-21
Isn't that an admission of terrorism?
Gee, Sean Penn must've left some brain damage.
n/a Re_LE_Vant_UN 2017-01-21
His right must have left it.
n/a Senator_Chickpea 2017-01-21
"You never leave the bitch full retard!"
n/a big_guyforu 2017-01-21
Those right-wing hooks got her dribbling.
I'm sure Vadge's "I'll suck dick for votes" scheme actually lost Hilldog the win.
n/a godofdae 2017-01-21
OH MY GOD SECRET SERVICE A BOMB!
A BOMB
n/a wwyzzerdd 2017-01-21
Madonna has become so irrelevant that she has to make threats against the US Government to get media attention.
Oh how the mighty have fallen...
n/a reekybobby 2017-01-21
Like North Korea.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-01-21
This should be in r/cringe
n/a DistortedLines 2017-01-21
White women were a mistake tbh
n/a neutralvoter 2017-01-21
madonna built her career and name off of pandering to the image of silly materialistic women that live for male attention and now the same women who rail against such an image are using her as a talking head. They are mocking themselves at this point.
n/a WokeAsFuck 2017-01-21
This is my pick for the most woke moment of the protest.
n/a pm_me_pics_of_ur_nan 2017-01-21
Well there goes any hope of Judd getting elected statewide in Kentucky.
n/a jabrontoad 2017-01-21
Starting the speech off by insulting trump's skin color. I'm so confused how they preach tolerance but then make comments like this....Madonna preaching peace and love, then segments into bombing the white house? This is getting a bit ridiculous honestly.
n/a MooseHeckler 2017-01-21
Woke as fuck!
n/a willfe42 2017-01-21
Part of me really wishes Trump were the evil fascist neo-Hitler the left says he is, just so I could watch well-dressed jackbooted thugs put their knees to the back of these celebrities' and protester's necks.
n/a AceToMouth 2017-01-21
I agree. They are so overly dramatic it's embarrassing.
n/a NecessaryPiglet 2017-01-21
where's the drama? Also, are white people basically asking to be removed now?
n/a pm_me_pics_of_ur_nan 2017-01-21
I could have waited for an r/videos thread, but I figured a world-renowned celebrity contemplating the destruction of a national monument, due to an undesirable electoral outcome was dramatic enough. Just let me agendapost in peace pls
n/a Elisionist 2017-01-21
sow what's the endgame here what are they aiming for?
n/a pm_me_pics_of_ur_nan 2017-01-21
He stopped Hillary Clinton.
n/a Elisionist 2017-01-21
right but why is that bad?
n/a subpoutine 2017-01-21
#HitleryDidNothingWrong
n/a pm_me_pics_of_ur_nan 2017-01-21
Long story short, Hillary's presidency was seen as inevitable by a large portion of the public for the better part of the last two years, particularly her supporters. When Trump was nominated as her opponent, this inevitability was only magnified, because he was viewed as a loose cannon and the least electable Republican in the field.
It's hard for people who have been supporting her for the past couple of years to cope with the fact that she was defeated by the person they largely viewed as the easiest opponent she could possibly face.
n/a wwyzzerdd 2017-01-21
I can't wait for the movie.
n/a nicethingyoucanthave 2017-01-21
apparently, there's already an episode of Law and Order "ripped from the headlines" about it. heh.
n/a HostOfTheNightmare 2017-01-21
It's better than the Civ 5 Brave New World expansion pack
n/a lukas8u 2017-01-21
Damn you people can't get over your "we beat the mighty hillary" meme.
n/a Vinod_Paswan 2017-01-21
He isn't wrong though. I'm not an American and even I laughed when Trump was announced as the opponent for Hillary Clinton.
n/a Jaymie13 2017-01-21
He has no respect for women and wants to take our rights away as well as yours.
n/a FuckURedditor 2017-01-21
No, he wants to get rid of your special privileges.
I am not well off, but the ACA cranked up my insurance premiums to give you, as a woman, all manner of free healthcare. That's just fucking wrong. And now you brats are throwing a fit about it, because we had an election and you lost.
n/a Jaymie13 2017-01-21
Thank you for reminding me of why I am proud and happy to be Canadian with my single payer system.
I can smell your pure hatred for women from here.
n/a Clark_Savage_Jr 2017-01-21
Trump is going to take rights away from women in Canada?
That's a neat trick I'd like to see.
n/a Jaymie13 2017-01-21
I know it's a large stretch of your imagination to think women here might be speaking in support of American women.
n/a Vinod_Paswan 2017-01-21
You are a special kind of person, aren't you?
n/a Jaymie13 2017-01-21
Yes I am, thanks for noticing!!
n/a thefran 2017-01-21
What the fuck are you even talking about?
n/a The_Reapulsive_One 2017-01-21
honestly i'm not even sure but looking at twitter they're basically marching for shit they already have, like equal rights etc.
n/a FuckURedditor 2017-01-21
Too many modern women are convinced that it's eternally 1927.
Histrionic cunts, that is.
n/a Soulwound 2017-01-21
It's kind of complicated but Hillary's campaign (to some extent) and the media (to a ridiculous extent) spent the last year or so painting Trump and his political allies as fascist bigots who hate gays, muslims, immigrants, Mexicans, and women, and will be the worst thing to happen to this country and destroy all the Progress™ the progressive liberals have made over the last eight years.
That isn't to say Trump doesn't have his flaws, I didn't vote for him. But I didn't vote for Hillary either.
If Hillary had won the election, this wouldn't be an issue, but now anyone who literally believed the narrative (that is still being pushed: see Salon.com et al) is afraid what a bigoted, fascist President of the United States of America will do.
It's kind of the opposite of the extreme right-wing's panic when Obama took office, except in this case the major news media are on their side instead of making fun of them.
n/a FuckURedditor 2017-01-21
The ACA gave a lot of free healthcare to women, basically. It didn't give anyone else access to yearly checkups or preventative care, but it gave a ton of free shit to women. Trump is going to get rid of it, because while most (60%) of Democratic voters are female, 60% of Republican voters are male, and men didn't get jack shit from the ACA but a premium increase.
n/a thefran 2017-01-21
The fuck are you even on? Before the ACA, basically everyone got denied because of pre-existing conditions. You're just saying that you might as well fuck everyone over as long as women get fucked over more? Women carry children, dipshit. Children's health correlates with the mother's health enormously.
n/a BFFan33 2017-01-21
big if tru
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-21
If you think the guy is terrible because of his previous speeches and appointments and whatever, then the idea is that he probably will do something terrible regardless of whether or not he's been able to in his first day. It's not exactly unreasonable.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-21
We need something terrible, to be fair.
n/a mtile 2017-01-21
She should be arrested
n/a LSeww 2017-01-21
No no no, she will ensure trumps re election in 4 years, don't touch her.
n/a seventynineinches 2017-01-21
And the rest of her quote was...
n/a CucksLoveTrump 2017-01-21
I forwarded it to the FBI just in case
n/a go2hello 2017-01-21
> love me or die
Literally a ctrl-left whale call.
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
That totally changes the fact that she said she's thought about blowing up the white house and making terroristic threats.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
It does, doesn't it? Not sure if you're being sarcastic.
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
"I thought about murdering a bunch of people then i decided it was better not to."
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
Yes. Is it illegal to have those thoughts? What's the issue here?
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
Really? It's fucking psychotic to think about blowing up any building. Are you not aware that that's an extremely weird thing to say? Do you have aspergers?
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
Is it illegal though?
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
To say you're thinking about blowing up the white house? Yeah, actually. If it wasn't Madonna that said it, the person that did would probably be locked up right now. Utterances of violent threats against the president of the US is a felony and according to several news websites she's being investigated by the Secret Service.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
Did you listen to the full quote? I take ir you didn't, according to your shocked reaction.
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
My shocked reaction is from your level of stupidity. I heard the full quote and I read what you wrote above. What you're not getting is the second part of that quote doesn't negate the first. You can't say that you thought about committing an act of terrorism but then decided not to. It's illegal to say "I've thought a lot about blowing up the white house." It's a threat against the President's life, which is why she is now being investigated by the secret service.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
Alright, good luck explaining your little theory to a judge in court. Really? Context doesn't matter? "I am going to kill the president. In this videogame." Whoops, guess I'll be prosecuted for felony now!
You idiot. Free speech matters but only when I agree. /s
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
She. Is. Currently. Being. Investigated. By. The. Secret. Service.
Literally. She is currently and literally being investigated by the secret service. Free speech doesn't cover threats of violence or calls to violent action, dummy. You are so profoundly stupid it kind of bums me out.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
What do you think "investigated" means?
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
Oh, do people not get investigated when they're being accused of committing a crime?
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
No... People are accused AFTER they've been investigated. That's what the secret service is doing. They're investigating her statements, and they'll come up with nothing, after which she will not be prosecuted for committing a felony. Nothing will happen. End of.
That's how these things work. When someone makes a statement, an investigation is started, which either turns up with something or nothing. The law isn't a end all authoritarian force. Imagine if she could be arrested for saying something! That wouldn't be very American, would it?
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
God damn. You accuse someone of a crime and then they are investigated to see if there is any validity to those accusations.
Why is she being investigated if she didn't say anything wrong, dipshit? Threats against the president and threats in general are illegal and NOT protected speech.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
You seem to be misunderstanding me. The secret service is investigating if her statement is LIABLE for PROSECUTION. She isn't charged with any criminal act, they're investigating to see if they should. Spoiler alert: they won't. Because at the end of the day, sensible people can place words into context, without having to cherry pick evidence to fit their narrative. What Madonna did will have no consequences, no matter how outraged you are.
I find it hilariously ironic that her speech got posted in this sub, a sub that supposedly laughs about drama. Yet, I've never seen a group of people with their panties in a bunch as much as I've seen in this thread. Also, did the sidebar get hacked? kek
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
Never said they would. Never said she was charged with anything.
It is illegal to utter threats against the president and the secret service isn't going to take those threats, real or imagined, lightly. She is going to be investigated to see if there's any validity to her words and if they do see any evidence that she actually entertained this idea (if they treat her like any other person, they're going to go through all her shit including computers and phone records) she has a very real chance of being prosecuted since, as I've said a million times before this, threats of violence against the president are fucking illegal.
"LOL! So funny that people are freaking out about a washed up old 'musician' like Madonna saying she has been thinking about blowing up the white house! Come on, guys. That's like, a totally normal thing for a person to say on national television."
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
lol
I don't see anyone freaking out but you. Then again, if you're used to a bit of common sense, you'd know Madonna wouldn't actually blow up a government building, and her comment was very obviously hyperbole. But oh, who am I fooling, she's a liberal, which means anything she says is bad.
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
You don't think if some random person said "I've been thinking a lot about blowing up the white house but instead I've chose love or death" on Facebook or something that the secret service or some other government agency wouldn't come knocking on their door, asking them questions, and seizing their property? You're delusional if you don't believe that.
You literally just said: "I find it hilariously ironic that her speech got posted in this sub, a sub that supposedly laughs about drama. Yet, I've never seen a group of people with their panties in a bunch as much as I've seen in this thread."
Yes, obviously. But you're not the secret service and they don't take threats, especially those made on national television, lightly. Even if she laughed and said "naw. just kidding" after, she'd probably still get some questions.
Only if it's fucking stupid, like saying she's been thinking about blowing up the white house. I think it's pretty disgusting that you're making excuses for her. If this was some right wing nut talking about blowing up the white house while Obama was there, you'd be flipping your pink and purple wig.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
Context matters so, so much here but you seem to forget that. A random facebook status vs a public emotionally driven speech.
I've had my fair share of videos of right-wing gun nutters threatening the government, and never have I given a shit. (PLEASE note that these are actual threats instead of hyperbolic expressions)
It wasn't a threat, and yes she will, and no nothing will come of it. Are we done here?
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
They... are... investigating... her... you keep forgetting the fact that they are currently investigating her for a crime. It doesn't matter what you think the context means or how much it matters. They are currently investigating her. They do not give a FUCK about the context.
Then you're an idiot if you think threats of violence are no big deal and also kind of a piece of shit.
Once again, never said anything will come from it. Anyway, yeah, we're done. You're dismissed.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
Oh by the way can you provide a source for that? Forgot to ask earlier.
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
Fuck off and use google.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
So no source then?
Burden of proof is on you mate.
n/a WhiskeyWeekends 2017-01-21
I don't give a shit if you don't believe me. Remain ignorant. You're use to it by now.
n/a shrekinator 2017-01-21
Haha, so you were talking out of your ass all this time. Should've known.. should've known.
n/a UnFisico 2017-01-21
TREASON WITH HER
n/a TheChtaptiskFithp 2017-01-21
cuck
n/a Horcruxo 2017-01-21
I mean she yanked an underage girl's breasts out live on stage a few years ago why would anyone want her to speak anywhere? She seems horrible tbh and I'm not surprised she'd say something like this I hope she gets in trouble for it.
n/a FuckURedditor 2017-01-21
The female candidate, who lead a party that is 60% female, lost. That's all this is.
I don't get it. If 500k people they didn't agree with marched to retain special privileges and special funding that other groups don't get, would these feminists care? I doubt it.
n/a DivinePrince2 2017-01-21
...ouch.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-21
I didn't hate women before but now I do
n/a AgtCooper 2017-01-21
Poor Madonna. So desperate for attention.