EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5292
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5673 Posts
| ||
|
Titan107
30 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 03 2016 05:59 Titan107 wrote: This thread seems to be a Hillary circle-jerk. It mirrors the voters views on trump. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On October 03 2016 05:07 WolfintheSheep wrote: Honest question here... If the candidates right here and now were George Washington vs a literal rock, what would the voting percentages look like? From what I can tell with the entrenched party lines in the US, the only thing needed to have a close election is for the Democrat and Republican labels to be attached to two individuals. well, a literal rock might not be eligible; but generally speaking, even with an utterly terrible candidate, you're likely to get at least 35-40% of the vote (for presidential elections); that's what people say anyways. for the less contested senate/house races, you sometimes see larger skews, generally when it's popular incumbent vs some nobody. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21801 Posts
On October 03 2016 05:56 oBlade wrote: I don't think we're judging partisanship right. If you have only one line separating two huge things and you look at it at any random moment, it's going to look like it's dividing the things reasonably evenly. You can get a 50/50 election from both candidates being really, really good. The fact that the long running names of each slice of the pie haven't changed, that doesn't tell you what voters have been doing, especially if you only look at the presidential level. And you wouldn't want people voting against their own motivations just to be able to say the electorate put aside party lines. Or is that what the point is, that people's motivations are such worlds apart? That point is that Presidential elections (for the most part) are pretty close regardless of which candidates are running or what the policies are. The point is that have a D or R behind your name gets you ~40% of the vote, regardless of what you do and/or say. Now that doesnt mean that candidates or policies don't matter. Because they are still what makes the difference for the 20% that is left and makes the difference in the end. But it means that the statement 'Why isnt Trump losing harder' is explained by this vote floor. | ||
KwarK
United States42983 Posts
On October 03 2016 05:59 Titan107 wrote: This thread seems to be a Hillary circle-jerk. Trump supporters typically don't get online so much and when they do they very rarely leave their safe spaces like /r/The_Donald which ban anyone questioning whatever Trump said most recently (even if that person is quoting Trump from before). They're not too keen on the internet, too many facts floating around which get in the way of how they feel. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On October 03 2016 05:59 Titan107 wrote: This thread seems to be a Hillary circle-jerk. people using that phrase generally have skewed perceptions and definitely have nothing useful to add. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6298 Posts
On October 03 2016 06:20 KwarK wrote: Trump supporters typically don't get online so much and when they do they very rarely leave their safe spaces like /r/The_Donald which ban anyone questioning whatever Trump said most recently (even if that person is quoting Trump from before). They're not too keen on the internet, too many facts floating around which get in the way of how they feel. Psychological projection Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting. According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.[2] | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9218 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28689 Posts
On October 03 2016 05:29 biology]major wrote: If trump is a child rapist human trafficking failure of a business man who has temperament issues, ask yourself why the polls are so close. The answer has something to do with the opposing party and their candidate, yeah she is a lot worse than this thread would have you believe. Really? Isn't the issue that Trump supporters just don't believe the more outlandish claims? Like, you accept that he has a big ego, that he's done some shady business deals and screwed some people over, that he might not have the best temperament, but you don't actually think he raped a 13 year old or that he's likely to start a nuclear war. That's what I do with hillary at least- I accept that she's not saintly, that she's a career politician with all that entails, that she has on occasion lied about stuff to make herself look better, but I don't believe in any of the crazier conspiracies. If you actually believe the crazier anti-trump claims and still plan on voting for him, that's absolutely insane imo - but distrusting them because you fundamentally distrust the origins of those claims is a wholly different matter. I just, I don't believe how good a candidate is is determined by their electability. I think electability in some ways corresponds with bad governing traits, not good ones. All the typical traits of a populist platform fit into this - making promises that you know can't be delivered upon might lead to uneducated voters believing you and voting for you for this reason - but on a long term basis it leads to increased distrust in the political system, which kinda starts (or is part of) a downward spiral. I have no problems understanding how in the american political climate with strongly established party identities, with each candidate being guaranteed 40% of the vote through party allegiance alone, a strategy based around flat out lying about your greatness to the least educated part of the electorate while smearing the other candidate to make people really unhappy about voting for her leads to a close election. It does not however make me believe both candidates are even close to equally good. edit: To be clear- I'm not saying all or even nearly all Trump voters are uneducated, not more so than democrats anyway. People voting across party lines aren't necessarily more educated just because they agree more with me. I'm just saying that the groups Trump brought in to the republican party, the normally-would-be-sitting-at-home crowd, those are attracted to his populist lies. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 03 2016 06:23 zeo wrote: Psychological projection Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting. According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.[2] This is a low grade burn that reeks of trying to hard. | ||
|
Howie_Dewitt
United States1416 Posts
On October 03 2016 06:31 Liquid`Drone wrote: Really? Isn't the issue that Trump supporters just don't believe the more outlandish claims? Like, you accept that he has a big ego, that he's done some shady business deals and screwed some people over, that he might not have the best temperament, but you don't actually think he raped a 13 year old or that he's likely to start a nuclear war. That's what I do with hillary at least- I accept that she's not saintly, that she's a career politician with all that entails, that she has on occasion lied about stuff to make herself look better, but I don't believe in any of the crazier conspiracies. If you actually believe the crazier anti-trump claims and still plan on voting for him, that's absolutely insane imo - but distrusting them because you fundamentally distrust the origins of those claims is a wholly different matter. I just, I don't believe how good a candidate is is determined by their electability. I think electability in some ways corresponds with bad governing traits, not good ones. All the typical traits of a populist platform fit into this - making promises that you know can't be delivered upon might lead to uneducated voters believing you and voting for you for this reason - but on a long term basis it leads to increased distrust in the political system, which kinda starts (or is part of) a downward spiral. I have no problems understanding how in the american political climate with strongly established party identities, with each candidate being guaranteed 40% of the vote through party allegiance alone, a strategy based around flat out lying about your greatness to the least educated part of the electorate while smearing the other candidate to make people really unhappy about voting for her leads to a close election. It does not however make me believe both candidates are even close to equally good. This election kind of reminds me of the gracchi brothers, with more technology. | ||
|
JW_DTLA
242 Posts
On October 03 2016 06:31 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/costareports/status/782591080352976898 To "legally paid taxes" he must have actually PAID taxes. He obviously doesn't. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5673 Posts
On October 03 2016 06:19 Gorsameth wrote: That point is that Presidential elections (for the most part) are pretty close regardless of which candidates are running or what the policies are. The point is that have a D or R behind your name gets you ~40% of the vote, regardless of what you do and/or say. Now that doesnt mean that candidates or policies don't matter. Because they are still what makes the difference for the 20% that is left and makes the difference in the end. But it means that the statement 'Why isnt Trump losing harder' is explained by this vote floor. I'm saying that is not independent from the fact that people actually believe in the platforms of what they're voting for. And it's a math mistake to think it's the same 40% each time. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3188 Posts
On October 03 2016 06:23 zeo wrote: Psychological projection Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting. According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.[2] TL;DR: "I know you are, but what am I?" | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On October 03 2016 06:23 zeo wrote: Psychological projection Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting. According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.[2] 67 days since Trump's last press conference. Just thought I'd let you know. | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NN3ARcc.jpg)
