|
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. |
On November 11 2016 09:28 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:22 Kickstart wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? No, they are emotionally attached because Trump has been sold as a racist/bigot/sexist/clown/etc. In the same way there are large groups that think similar things about Clinton. When you think you are voting against someone who is literally evil and everything wrong with the country, it is no surprise that you are attached to the person you are supporting and that you are shocked/ somewhat distressed when the person who you thought was Hitler won. I see, emotional attachment more against Trump than for Hillary.
Yes. It has been happening for quite some time. I was born right before Bill Clinton won, and I remember the other side demonizing whoever was the president since I can remember. I was too young to really remember much with Clinton, but they did impeach him and all that, the left of course railed hard against Bush, Obama was made out to be a Kenyan born Muslim socialist, and the same is happening/happened with Trump. It is a bit ridiculous but I must admit that I too get caught up in it sometimes. It is like I said before, politics has turned away from pragmatic solutions to running the country and had a surge in ideologues who refuse to work with people they disagree with.
|
On November 11 2016 09:26 LegalLord wrote:
So have the markets decided whether or not they are ok with a Trump presidency?
Stocks are up but bonds are massively down. Trump appears to be a reflationary president ( more growth, and of course inflation ). There is also a lot of fretting as to whether he will replace Fed head Janet Yellen with someone more in the 'gold and guns' camp, since her line has been directly inspired by Bernanke's, i.e. very market-friendly. Volumes and conviction are low.
|
That is what the media does. No different than what the TL writers do when it comes to covering video games.
|
United States15275 Posts
On November 11 2016 09:36 StarStruck wrote:
That is what the media does. No different than what the TL writers do when it comes to covering video games.
One group believes in their self-created drivel and the other doesn't. 
|
On November 11 2016 09:33 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:28 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:22 Kickstart wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? No, they are emotionally attached because Trump has been sold as a racist/bigot/sexist/clown/etc. In the same way there are large groups that think similar things about Clinton. When you think you are voting against someone who is literally evil and everything wrong with the country, it is no surprise that you are attached to the person you are supporting and that you are shocked/ somewhat distressed when the person who you thought was Hitler won. I see, emotional attachment more against Trump than for Hillary. Yes. It has been happening for quite some time. I was born right before Bill Clinton won, and I remember the other side demonizing whoever was the president since I can remember. I was too young to really remember much with Clinton, but they did impeach him and all that, the left of course railed hard against Bush, Obama was made out to be a Kenyan born Muslim socialist, and the same is happening/happened with Trump. It is a bit ridiculous but I must admit that I too get caught up in it sometimes. It is like I said before, politics has turned away from pragmatic solutions to running the country and had a surge in ideologues who refuse to work with people they disagree with.
Hmm, I had meant to imply initially that kids needing counseling to cope with the election results was a symptom of deeper emotional invesment than in previous years. You think this is a culmination of years of mudslinging, then?
|
On November 11 2016 09:22 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? No, they are emotionally attached because Trump has been sold as a racist/bigot/sexist/clown/etc.
Sold as? These students aren't dumb; they watch and listen to Trump's rhetoric. They know what he says and does. When the raw video footage of Trump is racist/bigoted/sexist, then they're going to draw the logical conclusion. The news hasn't been doctoring fake footage of Trump saying bad things; they've just been showing clips of Trump saying and doing outrageous things. It speaks for itself.
Trump has sold himself as a "racist/bigot/sexist/clown/etc.".
|
On November 11 2016 09:38 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:33 Kickstart wrote:On November 11 2016 09:28 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:22 Kickstart wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? No, they are emotionally attached because Trump has been sold as a racist/bigot/sexist/clown/etc. In the same way there are large groups that think similar things about Clinton. When you think you are voting against someone who is literally evil and everything wrong with the country, it is no surprise that you are attached to the person you are supporting and that you are shocked/ somewhat distressed when the person who you thought was Hitler won. I see, emotional attachment more against Trump than for Hillary. Yes. It has been happening for quite some time. I was born right before Bill Clinton won, and I remember the other side demonizing whoever was the president since I can remember. I was too young to really remember much with Clinton, but they did impeach him and all that, the left of course railed hard against Bush, Obama was made out to be a Kenyan born Muslim socialist, and the same is happening/happened with Trump. It is a bit ridiculous but I must admit that I too get caught up in it sometimes. It is like I said before, politics has turned away from pragmatic solutions to running the country and had a surge in ideologues who refuse to work with people they disagree with. Hmm, I had meant to imply initially that kids needing counseling to cope with the election results was a symptom of deeper emotional invesment than in previous years. You think this is a culmination of years of mudslinging, then?
In my opinion it is worse, but that is of course entirely subjective. I think you could probably point to things like longer and longer election coverage, the recession (people being worse off, or at the very least feeling that they are worse off than they have been), among other things and say that those things on top of the mudslinging make the political climate worse.
I don't know. I personally stand to lose a lot and be in pretty bad shape if Trump does some of the things he has said he would do. But I don't need counseling for it.
EDIT:
On November 11 2016 09:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:22 Kickstart wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? No, they are emotionally attached because Trump has been sold as a racist/bigot/sexist/clown/etc. Sold as? These students aren't dumb; they watch and listen to Trump's rhetoric. They know what he says and does. When the raw video footage of Trump is racist/bigoted/sexist, then they're going to draw the logical conclusion. The news hasn't been doctoring fake footage of Trump saying bad things; they've just been showing clips of Trump saying and doing outrageous things. It speaks for itself. Trump has sold himself as a "racist/bigot/sexist/clown/etc.".
I mean I agree with you, I voted for Hillary. I'm just saying that calling our President elect a racist/bigot/sexist isn't going to accomplish anything, and labeling the people who voted for him with those labels will do even less. I get that it is fresh and that people want to vent about it, but the sooner they get real about the situation and think about ways of actually combating what is now a republican controlled government the better.
|
|
|
On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives.
is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel
like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away?
User was warned for this post
|
One thing I've read a lot the recent days is "Bernie would have won" and the consensus seems to be to blame the loss on Hillary, but wasn't Bernie in the end just America's Corbyn? The guy couldn't stop the Brexit and Labour is probably going to be decimated, why are people so confident in their hypothetical Bernie scenario although nobody could even predict Trump's win a day before?
|
On November 11 2016 09:10 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 08:52 MasterCynical wrote:
wtf did Obama tell Trump? He looks so shaken. There is a reason that presidents age 30 years in 4-8 years. This will be by far the most work Trump has ever had to do.
I actually wonder if he can bring himself to do it for 4 years.
Not to say he would step down, that's never happening, but I can certainly see him moving more and more responsibility off himself to others (Pence).
Being the President is damn hard work
|
On November 11 2016 09:59 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives. is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away?
I would say yes, because nothing Hillary (or Obama over the past 8 years, for that matter) has said would actually imply that she/ he wanted to take away people's guns/ repeal the 2nd Amendment. Background checks and closing loopholes on gun purchases are things that the majority of Americans, gun owners, and NRA members all support, and that's not the same as taking away guns/ killing the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, Trump has explicitly promised to screw over plenty of minorities.
People are scared that Trump and Pence will do what they promised they'd do, so it's not just fabrication or fearmongering.
|
United States15275 Posts
On November 11 2016 10:04 Nyxisto wrote:
One thing I've read a lot the recent days is "Bernie would have won" and the consensus seems to be to blame the loss on Hillary, but wasn't Bernie in the end just America's Corbyn? The guy couldn't stop the Brexit and Labour is probably going to be decimated, why are people so confident in their hypothetical Bernie scenario although nobody could even predict Trump's win a day before?
Any blame that can be laid at Hillary's feet was an extension of the Party's ethos. As much as I dislike her policies and opportunistic nature, I wouldn't blame her solely for anything related to the campaign's failure.
On November 11 2016 10:04 Nyxisto wrote:
One thing I've read a lot the recent days is "Bernie would have won" and the consensus seems to be to blame the loss on Hillary, but wasn't Bernie in the end just America's Corbyn? The guy couldn't stop the Brexit and Labour is probably going to be decimated, why are people so confident in their hypothetical Bernie scenario although nobody could even predict Trump's win a day before?
I find the question somewhat moot. The Democratic Party in its current incarnation would never accept a democratic socialist as their nominee. With their Third Way economic policy and close connections to big business, he would be unpalatable at best.
|
On November 11 2016 10:04 Nyxisto wrote:
One thing I've read a lot the recent days is "Bernie would have won" and the consensus seems to be to blame the loss on Hillary, but wasn't Bernie in the end just America's Corbyn? The guy couldn't stop the Brexit and Labour is probably going to be decimated, why are people so confident in their hypothetical Bernie scenario although nobody could even predict Trump's win a day before?
That's a really good question, and I'm not personally convinced that Bernie would have wrecked Trump the way some of my friends are insisting. I have heard, however, that he had more appeal with rural white males than Hillary did, which was a big demographic that favored Trump over Hillary.
|
On November 11 2016 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 09:59 IgnE wrote:On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives. is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away? I would say yes, because nothing Hillary (or Obama over the past 8 years, for that matter) has said would actually imply that she/ he wanted to take away people's guns/ repeal the 2nd Amendment. Background checks and closing loopholes on gun purchases are things that the majority of Americans, gun owners, and NRA members all support, and that's not the same as taking away guns/ killing the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, Trump has explicitly promised to screw over plenty of minorities. People are scared that Trump and Pence will do what they promised they'd do, so it's not just fabrication or fearmongering.
Minorities aka illegal immigrants and radical Islamist terrorists.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Well, here we are then...
On November 11 2016 10:04 Nyxisto wrote:
One thing I've read a lot the recent days is "Bernie would have won" and the consensus seems to be to blame the loss on Hillary, but wasn't Bernie in the end just America's Corbyn? The guy couldn't stop the Brexit and Labour is probably going to be decimated, why are people so confident in their hypothetical Bernie scenario although nobody could even predict Trump's win a day before?
We'll never know for certain obviously, we don't have an alternate universe where we can test out other possibilities for experimentation sake. Personally I don't think it would have hurt anything. He would have pulled some of the people that just want change, but not necessarily the baggage that came with Trump. Would that have been enough, who knows. But Bernie voters made up 43% of the primary voters, he had a very sizable following. You can't be seen as going against 40% of your base and come out roses in the end. It does you no favors at all.
In the end it is what it is, not happy about it but being from Minnesota I'm used to loss, I bounce back pretty fucking quick. Grief takes time, people out there are upset and its understandable. People would be just as upset on the other side if she won. People will settle down and then we can work on a proper postmortem. I think anything coming out now is knee jerk, it's been 36 hours. Let people come at it with cooler heads and sift through the wreckage and rebuild bigger and better for next time. Maybe its Bernie, maybe its this, maybe its that, we gotta work on the autopsy first after people have calmed down.
|
Not where I live.
I am in Kentucky,and to say that Bernie appeals to rural white males here is not true. More than Hillary maybe, but not more than Trump appeals to them.... nah.
Bernie is too easy for them to laugh off as a socialist and not think any more about anything he has to say.
EDIT:
On November 11 2016 10:18 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:59 IgnE wrote:On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives. is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away? I would say yes, because nothing Hillary (or Obama over the past 8 years, for that matter) has said would actually imply that she/ he wanted to take away people's guns/ repeal the 2nd Amendment. Background checks and closing loopholes on gun purchases are things that the majority of Americans, gun owners, and NRA members all support, and that's not the same as taking away guns/ killing the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, Trump has explicitly promised to screw over plenty of minorities. People are scared that Trump and Pence will do what they promised they'd do, so it's not just fabrication or fearmongering. Minorities aka illegal immigrants and radical Islamist terrorists.
Not true. I am a white male, but still part of a minority, and as I have said before I am worried about my personal situation with a Trump win and republican controlled government. I would explain further but I don't really expect any understanding or sympathy about it so I see little point. Millions stand to be impacted if Trump and congress do the things they have said they intend to do, not just those two groups.
|
On November 11 2016 10:18 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:59 IgnE wrote:On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives. is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away? I would say yes, because nothing Hillary (or Obama over the past 8 years, for that matter) has said would actually imply that she/ he wanted to take away people's guns/ repeal the 2nd Amendment. Background checks and closing loopholes on gun purchases are things that the majority of Americans, gun owners, and NRA members all support, and that's not the same as taking away guns/ killing the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, Trump has explicitly promised to screw over plenty of minorities. People are scared that Trump and Pence will do what they promised they'd do, so it's not just fabrication or fearmongering. Minorities aka illegal immigrants and radical Islamist terrorists.
... and women and LGBT Americans and blacks and Hispanics and Muslims and anyone who has dark skin who could be mistaken for black/ Hispanic/ Muslim...
Issues like these:
"During an interview with James Dobson, host of the wildly homophobic Focus on the Family, Mike Pence assured his interviewer and his supporters that any progress made toward protecting LGBTQ rights under President Obama will be swiftly undone under President Trump. Issue by issue, he asserted over and over again a plan to marginalize and invalidate an entire group of citizens whom he is about to lead as vice-president.
Remember President Obama issuing orders to protect transgender citizens from being exposed to transphobia, hatred, and violence in public restrooms inside schools and federal buildings? Those protections are over."
~http://usuncut.news/2016/11/10/pence-promises-supporters-that-lgbtq-rights-will-be-first-to-go-video/
Now maybe there's a chance that Trump and Pence have been lying about being anti-LGBT/ anti-marriage equality/ pro- conversion therapy just to ensure some votes from people who presumably hate the LGBT community, but the point is that the LGBT community is legitimately worried that Trump and Pence will do what they pledge. It's not some crazy spin or fabrication or fearmongering; if the president-elect and vice president-elect are sincere in their disdain for the LGBT community, then the LGBT community is fucked.
|
On November 11 2016 10:04 Nyxisto wrote:
One thing I've read a lot the recent days is "Bernie would have won" and the consensus seems to be to blame the loss on Hillary, but wasn't Bernie in the end just America's Corbyn? The guy couldn't stop the Brexit and Labour is probably going to be decimated, why are people so confident in their hypothetical Bernie scenario although nobody could even predict Trump's win a day before?
Bernie did really well in Wisconsin because of his worker-centered focus. Trump flipped these voters from blue to red. I think it is fair to assume that Bernie would have won Wisconsin at least.
|
United States15275 Posts
On November 11 2016 10:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 10:18 RealityIsKing wrote:On November 11 2016 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:59 IgnE wrote:On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives. is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away? I would say yes, because nothing Hillary (or Obama over the past 8 years, for that matter) has said would actually imply that she/ he wanted to take away people's guns/ repeal the 2nd Amendment. Background checks and closing loopholes on gun purchases are things that the majority of Americans, gun owners, and NRA members all support, and that's not the same as taking away guns/ killing the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, Trump has explicitly promised to screw over plenty of minorities. People are scared that Trump and Pence will do what they promised they'd do, so it's not just fabrication or fearmongering. Minorities aka illegal immigrants and radical Islamist terrorists. ... and women and LGBT Americans and blacks and Hispanics and Muslims and anyone who has dark skin who could be mistaken for black/ Hispanic/ Muslim... Issues like these: "During an interview with James Dobson, host of the wildly homophobic Focus on the Family, Mike Pence assured his interviewer and his supporters that any progress made toward protecting LGBTQ rights under President Obama will be swiftly undone under President Trump. Issue by issue, he asserted over and over again a plan to marginalize and invalidate an entire group of citizens whom he is about to lead as vice-president. Remember President Obama issuing orders to protect transgender citizens from being exposed to transphobia, hatred, and violence in public restrooms inside schools and federal buildings? Those protections are over." ~http://usuncut.news/2016/11/10/pence-promises-supporters-that-lgbtq-rights-will-be-first-to-go-video/ Now maybe there's a chance that Trump and Pence have been lying about being anti-LGBT/ anti-marriage equality/ pro- conversion therapy just to ensure some votes from people who presumably hate the LGBT community, but the point is that the LGBT community is legitimately worried that Trump and Pence will do what they pledge. It's not some crazy spin or fabrication or fearmongering; if the president-elect and vice president-elect are sincere in their disdain for the LGBT community, then the LGBT community is fucked.
The link you posted showed why you should not be afraid of Trump and deathly afraid of Pence. Trump gladly flip-flopped on issues to gain whatever leverage he could, but Pence is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative and just bland enough to seem like a harmless stooge. More importantly, Trump will probably lean on Pence on matters of domestic policy during the initial period of his presidency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
