|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible?
when i have ever said that i am happy he panders like that. I only admitted that he does pander so that base to gather support.
|
On July 13 2016 03:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 03:36 IgnE wrote:On July 13 2016 01:51 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 01:48 IgnE wrote:On July 13 2016 01:44 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 01:40 amazingxkcd wrote:
Im curious, why would there be statues for legality of letting people see classified information without clearance? That shouldnt be a hard question to answer. Because it depends on the facts. Was it an accident? How did they gain access? Did the person who provided access believe the person had clearance? And so on. If you ask most good attorneys questions like "If this happens, is it illegal?", they will respond requesting more information. Because almost all cases are fact driven, rather than a math equation. are math equations not fact driven? Law is not math. You don't throw a bunch of "facts" into an statute and get a verdict out the other side. Judges and juries decide rulings, not some order of operations. And if you get deep into math, it gets pretty subjective. Law is not math. But you see how what you said to me is not what you originally said right? Facts in math =/= Facts in law. The same word means different things in different contexts.
Even if that's true that's not even the line of argument you should be taking. What you want to be emphasizing is the difference between an algorithm and a socially-mediated decision by a subjective arbiter. It's the process that's different, not just the givens. Saying that "almost all cases are fact driven" does nothing to emphasize this point. A very complicated algorithm can also be "fact given" in the sense that constants have to be specified, initial conditions specified, etc.
|
its not kool aid... it's a measured perception that the status quo is better than the gamble that is trump
not even denying that he might end up better (its an untestable hypothetical in any case). but from a probabilistic evaluation, i dont wanna take that risk
|
On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible?
Are you implying Hillary doesn't pander to uneducated voters?
|
On July 13 2016 04:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Are you implying Hillary doesn't pander to uneducated voters?
at least not climate change deniers and antivaxxers...
btw i'm pro climate change
i think its inevitable and i think we waste a lot of time with useless legislation that wont really slow it down enough for me to care about
go all out and increase the albedo of the earths atmosphere or let it happen and scramble to get to the new habitable zones and increasing habitability in places that become difficult to inhabit
|
On July 13 2016 04:04 kapibara-san wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Are you implying Hillary doesn't pander to uneducated voters? at least not climate change deniers and antivaxxers,...
'your idiots are more idiotic than my idiots'
Lol
This whole discussion is silly.
|
On July 13 2016 03:58 zeo wrote:
... Before he was running for president?
Maybe I should pull out the Clinton thinks marriage is between a man and a women videos?
With Hillary her track record gives us an assumed level of bullshit where we can make an appropriate separation between what she says and what she actually gets done.
Trump's status as a political outsider means that we don't actually know where things will fall once he's not campaigning but actually doing things, and how much of what he says is pandering vs. actual idiocy. Trump supporters give him the benefit of the doubt, while Trump detractors will be hyper-critical of everything, but the fact of the matter is we don't really know where he's going to stand once he's not just vying for votes--and on some level it's scary for people to put someone like that in a position of power.
|
On July 13 2016 04:02 amazingxkcd wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? when i have ever said that i am happy he panders like that. I only admitted that he does pander so that base to gather support.
Yeah, well I would prefer presidential candidates not promote people endangering their children just to pick up a couple votes. I'm weird like that.
|
On July 13 2016 04:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:04 kapibara-san wrote:On July 13 2016 04:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Are you implying Hillary doesn't pander to uneducated voters? at least not climate change deniers and antivaxxers,... 'your idiots are more idiotic than my idiots' Lol This whole discussion is silly.
you can make it sound silly but i think its a valid point
less idiotic idiots comprising a certain amount of the voter base is more palatable to me
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
people tell me i have the best idiots! they call me "Oh xkcd, your idiots are the most idiotic people ever. How do you do it?" Do we love our idiots?
|
On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible?
The problem is Kwark barely understand what is politics and thus identify any topic that would contredict "technic" or "science" as "populism" - a bad thing. What's responsible is to respond to the fears of the population, what is irresponsible is to declare those feelings irrelevant because science and technology as an ideology gave us the "right" answer (and that's how you create a Trump btw).
The discussion around vaccination is a good exemple of that : vaccine can cause, in some marginal cases, individual harms and have great collective benefit. Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases.
When you're unable to defend that political choice, and show how this choice has been beneficial to us through out history (which it has), then you hide behind science and claim experts are right and Trump is stupid.
I was really impressed by this congressionnal earing tho, it is a great political ritual.
|
On July 13 2016 04:07 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases.
trump certainly didnt accurately paint the picture of how vaccines can cause marginal harm, so i didn't think that was ever actually a point
|
United States44283 Posts
On July 13 2016 04:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:04 kapibara-san wrote:On July 13 2016 04:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Are you implying Hillary doesn't pander to uneducated voters? at least not climate change deniers and antivaxxers,... 'your idiots are more idiotic than my idiots' Lol This whole discussion is silly.
I think of it more in terms of one set of idiots being more dangerous than another. The "white people have never been poor" idiots might moan about reparations which is politically unfeasible and if it ever happened would be nothing more than a broadening of the welfare net. The "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity" idiots are the reason why Iran felt like it needed nukes.
I guess broadly speaking liberal idiots want to fuck shit up on a micro scale by demanding that you recognize their new gender identity of genderfluid while conservative idiots want to know why we don't nuke Japan again, just so they know we're not sorry about the first two times after Obama went to a memorial.
|
On July 13 2016 04:07 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? The problem is Kwark barely understand what is politics and thus identify any topic that would contredict "technic" or "science" as "populism" - a bad thing. What's responsible is to respond to the fears of the population, what is irresponsible is to declare those feelings irrelevant because science and technology as an ideology gave us the "right" answer. The discussion around vaccination is a good exemple of that : vaccine can cause, in some marginal cases, individual harms and have great collective benefit. Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases. When you're unable to defend that political choice, and to show how this choice has been beneficial to us through out history (which it has), then you hide behind science and claim experts are right.
Although I agree with some of Kwarks points, it is not the reason I dislike populism. I view populism, or telling voters what they want to hear even if it is not viable or straight up dangerous, the exact opposite of leadership. And someone like Trump, who just panders at all time to whoever he is speaking to at that moment, is not showing leadership. He is simply telling people what they want to hear, making promises he will never be able to deliver on.
|
On July 13 2016 04:09 kapibara-san wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:07 WhiteDog wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases. trump certainly didnt accurately paint the picture of how vaccines can cause marginal harm, so i didn't think that was ever actually a point
Autism is not marginal ?
On July 13 2016 04:11 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:07 WhiteDog wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? The problem is Kwark barely understand what is politics and thus identify any topic that would contredict "technic" or "science" as "populism" - a bad thing. What's responsible is to respond to the fears of the population, what is irresponsible is to declare those feelings irrelevant because science and technology as an ideology gave us the "right" answer. The discussion around vaccination is a good exemple of that : vaccine can cause, in some marginal cases, individual harms and have great collective benefit. Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases. When you're unable to defend that political choice, and to show how this choice has been beneficial to us through out history (which it has), then you hide behind science and claim experts are right. Although I agree with some of Kwarks points, it is not the reason I dislike populism. I view populism, or telling voters what they want to hear even if it is not viable or straight up dangerous, the exact opposite of leadership. And someone like Trump, who just panders at all time to whoever he is speaking to at that moment, is not showing leadership. He is simply telling people what they want to hear, making promises he will never be able to deliver on.
What is not viable or straight up dangerous in Trump proposals ? I think it's a better discussion than saying than Trump is a populism - which to me is a quality (not of Trump, but in general).
|
On July 13 2016 04:07 WhiteDog wrote:
The discussion around vaccination is a good exemple of that : vaccine can cause, in some marginal cases, individual harms and have great collective benefit. Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases.
I would argue that, even on an individual level, actually acting on that very marginal risk is still a -EV choice and requires either ignorance of the likelihood of benefit/harm or an irrational level of risk aversion. It's usually the former, but the latter doesn't constitute sound, intelligent decision making either.
|
On July 13 2016 04:12 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:09 kapibara-san wrote:On July 13 2016 04:07 WhiteDog wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases. trump certainly didnt accurately paint the picture of how vaccines can cause marginal harm, so i didn't think that was ever actually a point Autism is not marginal ?
autism is not actually one of the risks of vaccines
|
On July 13 2016 04:10 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 13 2016 04:04 kapibara-san wrote:On July 13 2016 04:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Are you implying Hillary doesn't pander to uneducated voters? at least not climate change deniers and antivaxxers,... 'your idiots are more idiotic than my idiots' Lol This whole discussion is silly. I think of it more in terms of one set of idiots being more dangerous than another. The "white people have never been poor" idiots might moan about reparations which is politically unfeasible and if it ever happened would be nothing more than a broadening of the welfare net. The "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity" idiots are the reason why Iran felt like it needed nukes. I guess broadly speaking liberal idiots want to fuck shit up on a micro scale by demanding that you recognize their new gender identity of genderfluid while conservative idiots want to know why we don't nuke Japan again, just so they know we're not sorry about the first two times after Obama went to a memorial.
There is also the "open the floodgates and let in infinity billion potentially malicious immigrants" idiots from the liberal side. That's plenty harmful in quite a few ways.
|
United States44283 Posts
On July 13 2016 04:12 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:09 kapibara-san wrote:On July 13 2016 04:07 WhiteDog wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Refuting the fact that it can cause some marginal harm in some marginal cases is not scientific, it is the result of a political choice that favor the important collective gain against the marginal harm it can cause in some infinitesimal cases. trump certainly didnt accurately paint the picture of how vaccines can cause marginal harm, so i didn't think that was ever actually a point Autism is not marginal ?
Firstly, vaccines don't cause autism.
Secondly, vaccines don't cause autism.
Thirdly, being autistic is not caused by vaccines.
Fourthly, not getting vaccinated will, if enough people do it, kill a shitton of people including those who got vaccinated.
Fifthly, vaccines don't fucking cause autism.
|
On July 13 2016 04:14 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 04:10 KwarK wrote:On July 13 2016 04:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 13 2016 04:04 kapibara-san wrote:On July 13 2016 04:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 13 2016 04:00 Plansix wrote:On July 13 2016 03:57 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 13 2016 03:54 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2016 03:50 amazingxkcd wrote:
nice blanket dismissal of trump supporters. if this is truly what you assume, then nothing i say will change your opinions. at least this is good to know The fact that not all Trump supporters are like that doesn't change the fact that tweets like those linked are pandering to that crowd. im fine with him pandering to those crowds. some pandering has to be done to garner support. Not unlike bernie pandering to college liberals or hillary to her voting base. but to make a remark that "oh a large part of his voting base are dumb insecure people" is just fucking unbelievable. So you are happy that he panders to the uneducated who would endanger their child’s welfare and panders to their dangers beliefs, but get upset when someone points out that isn’t very responsible? Are you implying Hillary doesn't pander to uneducated voters? at least not climate change deniers and antivaxxers,... 'your idiots are more idiotic than my idiots' Lol This whole discussion is silly. I think of it more in terms of one set of idiots being more dangerous than another. The "white people have never been poor" idiots might moan about reparations which is politically unfeasible and if it ever happened would be nothing more than a broadening of the welfare net. The "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity" idiots are the reason why Iran felt like it needed nukes. I guess broadly speaking liberal idiots want to fuck shit up on a micro scale by demanding that you recognize their new gender identity of genderfluid while conservative idiots want to know why we don't nuke Japan again, just so they know we're not sorry about the first two times after Obama went to a memorial. There is also the "open the floodgates and let in infinity billion potentially malicious immigrants" idiots from the liberal side. That's plenty harmful in quite a few ways.
i never got the impression that there were that many of that disposition among the american liberals
i could be wrong though idk
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
