The Knights Who Say Cuck rally around Trump in wake of KKK controversy

Dig up, Joe. You’re a smart guy but that was an ignorant thing to have said and doubling down on it only makes it worse. Dig up.

ETA: Joe’s post seems to be clinging to the bottom of the page. Is it just me?

From our polar perch up here in Soviet Canuckistan we’re beginning to think Trump might actually win it all. So, is he a paper tiger playing to his audience, distracting them from the status quo he’ll maintain, or is he for real? Hillary is guaranteed neoliberal status quo, but Trump is guaranteed for nothing. The only sure thing that will happen under him is the macho nonsense these losers love so much will have no effect on Russia, China, Iran or any other rising contender state, and where will that leave the talking hairdo? One finger on the button I suppose.

Maybe Joe’s post was so damn bad it spontaneously developed sapience and is hiding in shame.

@K3, @sbel – Yeah, I live in the DC area, too, and I’ve heard a disconcerting number of people who have had to deal with Hillary Clinton tangentially (that is, not as another power broker) say that she’s a genuinely horrible, unpleasant person who gives zero actual shits for “the little guy” on a person-to-person level.

That being said…that’s true for a lot of them*. I’ll still vote for her if she’s nominated, holding my nose the whole time. She’s still not Donald or any of the rest of the GOP nominees, and anyone who says, “The President doesn’t matter,” hasn’t thought through what a Gore 1st term would’ve looked like vs Bush’s.

Edit: Ninja’d by quite a few + the convo moved on, but I replied as soon as I read the first exchange.

* Hell, for that matter, when I was working at a Borders when Bush first got into office (pre-9/11), I looked up to see Dick Cheney was the next person in line to be rung up. (It was a massive, very busy store. I’d registered an unusual number of guys I’m suits around, but someone said, “Oh, the Vice President’s here.” I thought they meant the VP of Borders. “Wow, he sure seems to be a security hound…” ;p )
And, you know what? He was perfectly lovely and polite, had apparently even waited in line. That doesn’t make his public and foreign policy any less repugnant, though.

The private email server was definitely a mistake on Clinton’s part. The only reason to not use your government-issued email address is to keep your emails from being easily FOIAed. The GOP gives Republicans in office private email accounts on their party servers for exactly this reason.

Oh, wait. You mean Clinton was doing something that Republicans do routinely. The very Republicans who are hammering on about her not using her government email address as though that were evidence that she is in league with the literal devil. Huh.

What happens post-Trump? Has he succeeded in moving the Overton Window far to the right? If he fails to win – or if (Cthulhu forbid) he gets to the White House, but proves to be a sub-par tyrant – will 2020 see a competent fascist standing for election?

What happens post-Trump? Has he succeeded in moving the Overton Window far to the right? If he fails to win – or if (Cthulhu forbid) he gets to the White House, but proves to be a sub-par tyrant – will 2020 see a competent fascist standing for election?

My hope is that it would resolve with a an upswelling of anti-Trump sentiment resulting in a a liberal sweep of all branches!
My fear is that it would result in a 30 year reign of Our Glorious Leader, Trump the Yugely Magnificent and Naturally Hirsute.

Folks, please turn down the flaming. I am not a Trump fan (he’s one step away from being the Antichrist, IMO) nor am I a supporter of the GOP. This is quite clear if you read my original post. To reiterate, I don’t think any of the people running for the nomination, irrespective of party, would be good for the US. None of them.

As for my statement about the parties being two sides of the same coin, I’m talking about the fundamental foundations, not the surface platforms. The reality is that each side has things which are good for the people/country/world and things that are bad. But when you dig past their respective platforms, you see that everything they do or say is all about gaining money and power. You can’t honestly think there’s an altruistic motivation behind any politician who has made it to the pinochle of government.

Lastly, just because I say something that is different that the opinion of others doesn’t warrant an attack blindly calling me misogynistic and bigoted. Isn’t that the kind of reaction one would expect from a different community? If you want to call me a cynical pessimist, I can’t argue with that. But, to assume I am something that a 30 second Google search would disprove, is not the kind of tolerance I’d expect from this forum.

Is it a wonder that I often refrain from commenting here because I fear anything I say will mean being attacked as a misogynist, MRA, “bro”? Maybe next time, if there is one, ask for clarification before blindly blasting away.

Just a thought.

The last time we “had no difference” between the candidates, we ended up with eight years of George Bush. We do not need to go through that again.

it takes a good bit of arrogant privilege to think that just because there are negative aspects to both parties, the one that is vocally racist and misogynistic is just as bad as…well, any other political party.

Ugh, we just had this exact discussion as a society in the last national elections (october-november 2015).

We ended up with Mauricio Bush Trump as a president.

Please don’t let it happen to you… if only because it will impact even harder on us!

(Also, there’s no point in classifying political parties as “evil” or even using “evil” as something that can be measured. Apolitical minds work with concepts of “good and evil”. Political minds would rather ask: “what’s in it for me/us/everyone?”)

@ JoeKlemmer

Your original post stated that there was no ‘lesser evil’ between the Dem candidates and the Repubs. People here have repeatedly and generally quite politely explained to you why they strongly disagree with that assessment, and why what you (rather dismissively) call ‘surface platforms’ are in fact a big, HUGE deal for those who have to live with the direct consequences of whatever ‘surface platform’ gets elected.

No one on here has ‘flamed’ you in the slightest, nor ‘blindly blasted away’. Honestly, if you find that people so regularly assume you are something you don’t like based on what you write that you are afraid to post, can I suggest that maybe it’s time to do some self-reflection and consider just why they are repeatedly coming to that conclusion? Just a thought.

And now the martyrdom begins.

Look Joe. I’m not saying you’re a terrible person. I’m not saying to not criticize Democrats or not to be cynical about the parties.

We’re saying you’re arguing from a very privileged perspective. You haven’t even addressed any of our points about how the policies enacted by elected officials (not just the President of course) impact the day to day lives of millions of Americans. You might not outright hate women, POC, LGBT people, people who need EBT or SNAP, etc. But you seem to be viewing the people who literally need as few Republicans in office as possible as less important than your cynicism.

I’m not saying you’re an MRA. But I am saying that your attitude enables misogyny and other kinds of hatred. When the left disengages because they’re “all the same” it’s effectively a vote for the GOP because their base stays engaged. It pushes the Democratic party rightward. I’m not trying to flame you or being mean to you. I’m saying you are being clueless and privileged because you are and that’s a real life threat to marginalized people.

@Joe

As for my statement about the parties being two sides of the same coin, I’m talking about the fundamental foundations, not the surface platforms. The reality is that each side has things which are good for the people/country/world and things that are bad.

So it sounds like what you’re saying here is that the Republican and the Democratic party platforms are roughly equal in terms of how much goodness and how much badness they will inflict on your country/the world. This is what people are objecting to. They have been pointing out the many ways that Republicans seek to harm marginalized people that Democrats don’t. I’m going to repost this passage from WWTH on page one:

The Ds are far, far from perfect and in no way above criticism, but they aren’t stirring up violent racism, xenophobia, and Islamophobia. They aren’t introducing hundreds of bills a year that restrict reproductive freedoms and shut down family planning clinics. They aren’t trying to keep gay people second class citizens and force trans people into using the bathrooms of the gender they aren’t. They aren’t introducing bills that excessively monitor the EBT usage of poor people. The minimum wage wasn’t raised enough, but it was the Dems that raised. Health care reform didn’t go far enough, but the ACA is better than what we had and Dems did that.

If you don’t consider any of that to be evidence that the Republican platform is more harmful than the Democratic platform, then you’re no ally to marginalized people.

But when you dig past their respective platforms, you see that everything they do or say is all about gaining money and power. You can’t honestly think there’s an altruistic motivation behind any politician who has made it to the pinochle of government.

No one has claimed that any candidate is motivated by altruism. What people are talking about is the effects that a Republican or a Democratic administration would have, not the underlying motivation.

I don’t know why you seem to think that political motivations are the “deeper,” more important concern, and actual plans for how different parties will govern are merely “surface” issues. How either party chooses to run your country affects real people, and you’re dismissing that as a mere triviality.

Dude, Joe, nobody’s accusing you of being a Trump supporter. All anyone’s saying is that your pseudo-cynical assertion – of Democrats and Republicans essentially being the same – excuses right wing politicians of trying to deny the rights of women and minorities at every turn.

There’s nothing wrong with critiquing the political system for its flaws, but simply dismissing all politics as useless for it is imo a bit immature.