Categories
4chan anti-Semitism antifeminism cuckolding literal nazis misogyny oppressed white men racism

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

Donald Trump: Sees no evil
Donald Trump: Sees no evil

The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive is on! If you haven’t already, please consider donating through the PayPal button below. Thanks!

Uh oh! Donald Trump, the great orange hope of America’s internet nazis, is facing a teensy bit of controversy, including some rather intense criticism from fellow Republicans, for his refusal to unequivocally condemn former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke and all the other white supremacists who love him so dearly.

On Twitter, the assortment of nazis and trolls and nazi trolls who seem to be his most enthusiastic backers are rallying around their man. And saying “cuck” a lot.

Here are some highlights — by which I mean lowlights — from the, er, discussion so far.

https://twitter.com/ChateauEmissary/status/704403592510369792

https://twitter.com/ChateauEmissary/status/704408949223727104

https://twitter.com/ChateauEmissary/status/704405411416432640

(I’m pretty sure ChateauEmissary is none other than our old friend Heartiste.)

https://twitter.com/Yann_Perrod/status/704382226457190400

https://twitter.com/TheNeoCohen/status/704147353624707072

https://twitter.com/PizzaPartyBen/status/704382897675841537

https://twitter.com/RecycledSpoons/status/704393042967527424

https://twitter.com/Western_Triumph/status/703675348551081984

https://twitter.com/SamBowersGW/status/704169440628191233

https://twitter.com/cuckservative/status/704088212759830528

https://twitter.com/ragingAchilles/status/704076332414562305

https://twitter.com/voxday/status/703992645291528193

https://twitter.com/FashyKuroneko/status/703974688779710464

https://twitter.com/FashyKuroneko/status/704401699914403840

https://twitter.com/occdissent/status/703928769904517120

https://twitter.com/JackBurtonReflx/status/703826180806316037

https://twitter.com/Anthonylefevre3/status/703926313032155136

Classy.

https://twitter.com/paulrdube1/status/704036548984107008

Alas, Paul D is probably right.

EDIT: Or not. Trump isn’t winning them all.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

218 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
katz
4 years ago

David. Please listen carefully. I’ll use small words.

There are lots of different issues in politics. Some people vote because of wars and bailouts. They might have reasons not to vote for Democrats. But other people vote because of race issues, gun control, global warming, women’s rights, gay rights, and lots of other reasons. They have very good reasons to vote for Democrats. Just because you ignore the issues they care about doesn’t make them wrong.

Does that make sense?

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Jackie; currently using they/their, he/his, she/her pronouns)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Jackie; currently using they/their, he/his, she/her pronouns)
4 years ago

Slightly O/T but to all Mamotheers of the Valleys, Happy St David’s Day!!!

Wow, a whole day dedicated to Our Living Saint David Futrelle, and with such festivities! What a glorious time to be alive.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

@David N-T, I just don’t understand. This is not a “ra-ra go Democrats!” thread. This is not a “the US federal election process is just great”* thread. The only claim that’s being made here, on a post where the OP is about Neo-nazis and their love for the likely Republican nominee, is that the US would be better off with a Democrat in charge. Not that it would be perfect, not that no reform is needed, not that people are patting themselves on the back for being great heroes when they vote, not that Democrats are pure of intention, none of that.

*In fact, from the outside, it seems extremely expensive and long and convoluted, and I’m sorry you all have to deal with it as-is.

katz
4 years ago

Even the idea that Republicans and Democrats are equally bad on economic and foreign policy is nonsense. Republicans are the party of torture, killing terrorists’ families, and “nuke the desert until it glows;” I mean, there’s hawkish, and then there’s war crimes. And as for economic policy, well, this.

comment image

But at some point you just can’t argue with someone who keeps saying “They’re all the same!” When you get to the point where you’re arguing that Hillary Clinton, one of the Republican Party’s biggest bogey(wo)men for 20 years, is basically a Republican, you’re so far detached from reality that there’s just no conversation to be had.

Iseult The Idle
Iseult The Idle
4 years ago

To be fair, it’s easy to be cynical about politics because, among other reasons, so much of it is theater. And not necessarily good theater, either, but the dreary and tedious drone that you have to wade through to support your friend who has recently discovered a passion for amateur re-enactments of famous speeches.

Some of it, of course, is so diabolically good theater as to be invisible.

And some, as we can currently see, is all about the theater of fear. Fear of the Other, fear of the future, fear that success and happiness and joy are all zero sum and for anyone else to share in them necessarily means that I will have less.

Nothing, of course, could possibly farther from the truth. Remember that old saw used to such great success in the Reagan era? “A rising tide lifts all boats.” This is actually true, as it turns out; but the tide has to lift from the bottom up, not from the top; otherwise it doesn’t raise my little boat – it swamps it.

Also, here’s hoping Fingie is feeling better today.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
4 years ago

So I don’t see how anyone can reasonably argue that there is no moral difference.

Well, if you look at it from the PoV of a privilege-blind, middle-to-upper-class, able-bodied, neurotypical cishet white man of an accepted religion/nonreligion who has no health or employment issues and isn’t a rape survivor, and egocentrically ignore that everybody else exists and is human…

… You give yourself a headache, for starters.

guy
guy
4 years ago

Even given that, you’d think they’d still have an opinion on the question of whether or not to start a nuclear war. The Republicans are proposing offensive first use.

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
4 years ago

Nobody is saying that the Democratic party is above criticism, but that we have the argument that they’re the same in a thread about Trump being the white supremacist candidate, is mind blowing.

This isn’t the 1990s and disengaging from the whole process is not going to help progressive causes.

Tovius
Tovius
4 years ago

Regarding the “both sides are just as bad” thing, the phrase that comes to my mind is “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”

Lea
Lea
4 years ago

Thanks, EJ.

Freemage
Freemage
4 years ago

David N-T:

The problem is that you don’t present an alternative action plan that might do any good.

Here’s a few, but they’re all long-term solutions:

1: Get a SCOTUS ruling that ends gerrymandering, hard. This would almost completely demolish the GOP’s stranglehold on the House, without any voters actually changing their opinions. It would also weaken their control of many state legislatures.
2: On the state and local levels, push for changes that allow more third-party participation in the process. A strong Green or Socialist movement in a state can signal the candidates that it’s time to veer left.

Now, here’s the thing: That first one? Yeah, that isn’t gonna come from a SCOTUS packed with states-rights Republican nominees. We’ve got an opening since Scalia passed, but the GOP knows this and are stonewalling anyone Obama might care to name. So it’s likely going to come down to the next President. If that person is not a Democrat, option 1 is going to be off the table for the next four years, at best (and more likely, 8-10).

The argument here–the sole argument, really–is “less shit piled on top of us is better than more shit”. And the party of less shit is the Democrats.

kupo
kupo
4 years ago

The argument here–the sole argument, really–is “less shit piled on top of us is better than more shit”. And the party of less shit is the Democrats.

I’d say it’s more like shit piled on top of us vs. flaming shit-bombs. Shit may be stinky and annoying, but the flaming shit-bombs can and do actually harm you.

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@Anarchonist

What constitutes as genocide to white supremacists:

1) People living their lives

2) People having babies

What does NOT constitute as genocide to white supremacists:

1) Genocide

This is brilliant! You’ve written my new talking points.

@Imaginary Petal
I’m glad that Fingie is doing well! Kitty health can be a worrisome thing.

Iseult The Idle
Iseult The Idle
4 years ago

The GOP members of the Judiciary Committee met with the President today and confirmed that they will not even meet with any SCOTUS candidate he nominates.

Harry Reid says this has never been done, in the history of the country. Nominations have been shelved, but never has the Committee simply refused to entertain the idea of a nomination.

The evil side of me *really* wants Obama to nominate the most conservative qualified judge he can find, just to hear the spines cracking.

Freemage
Freemage
4 years ago

kupo
March 1, 2016 at 3:44 pm

The argument here–the sole argument, really–is “less shit piled on top of us is better than more shit”. And the party of less shit is the Democrats.

I’d say it’s more like shit piled on top of us vs. flaming shit-bombs. Shit may be stinky and annoying, but the flaming shit-bombs can and do actually harm you.

I’ll accept that amendment, with the further notation that ultimately, even non-flaming shit can be toxic. It’s a slower harm, but it shouldn’t be ignored entirely.

Biot (yet again!)
Biot (yet again!)
4 years ago

I’ll be derailing things here, I think, but YURGH. There’s a Teddy Beale tweet in the bunch that David posted.
Quick edit: Ninja’d by ej.

ColeYote
ColeYote
4 years ago

Fucking hell, American politics are awful.

David N-T
David N-T
4 years ago

David. Please listen carefully. I’ll use small words.

There’s really no need to talk down to me like that.

There are lots of different issues in politics. Some people vote because of wars and bailouts. They might have reasons not to vote for Democrats. But other people vote because of race issues, gun control, global warming, women’s rights, gay rights, and lots of other reasons. They have very good reasons to vote for Democrats. Just because you ignore the issues they care about doesn’t make them wrong.

Does that make sense?

I don’t ignore the issues you bring up: they are emblematic of what I’m talking about. Sure, Democrats clear the incredibly low bar set by Republicans on the environment, racism, women’s rights, gun control and gay rights. However, their positions/proposals on these issues are so watered down and middle of the road that it sometimes comes across as nonsensical. Compare the way Democrats reacted to police killings of young black men with Black Lives Matter. Compare the way Barack Obama talks to what Malcolm X or MLK said over 50 years ago. Compare the environmental policies proposed by the Obama administration with the demands of environmental groups and the scientific consensus.

Does that make sense?

GenJones
GenJones
4 years ago

Wow. Literally the most dignified and political discussion ever.

katz
4 years ago

There’s really no need to talk down to me like that.

Yes there is, honey.

Catalpa
Catalpa
4 years ago

David, I just… What is your point for coming here?

We know that the system is corrupt and that the Democrats aren’t amazing saints that will fix everything that’s wrong with the country. It’s not a difficult concept to grasp.

But you have not used that information to come to any kind of conclusion about WHAT can or should be done about it, and have come to spout your nonsense on a page that is suggesting that the best current option is to have the Democrats in power instead of the Republicans, which implies that you disagree with this conclusion.

With your lack of any kind of suggestions about how the system might be changed, the conclusion that can be drawn from your posts is that you think people should just give up voting or influencing how others vote and instead simply whine about how the system sucks, while letting the Republican party get enough votes unopposed to seize power and negatively impact the lives of hundreds of thousands of already marginalized people.

zumahzumah
zumahzumah
4 years ago

Wow, you guys are really bad at civil disagreement and arguing with people without insulting them and making assumptions about them.

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

There’s really no need to talk down to me like that.

Yes there is, honey.

Katz, you are my favourite person. That is all.

rugbyyogi
rugbyyogi
4 years ago

@mockingbird – that utility issue is a tough one. But pols are under a lot of pressure and a lot of people want something from them. They have to sift through people pretty quickly. It’s unfortunate. Even the nice ones have to do it. Some of them are genuinely more ruthless in their political aims. Karl Rove is a ruthless operator, but I read an account of where he’d been invited to the home of someone who didn’t share his political views (their kids went to the same pre-school) and Rove was jovial and engaged and just all around a nice guy in the context of this kids’ party.

People say bad things about Hillary Clinton – I’ve only met her once. I was absolutely a NOBODY at that time (and in the context of US politics I still am), not a donor, not a mover and a shaker, and given that I was a student, not even a statistically reliable voter – but she could not have been warmer or more engaged. She made me feel important. I politically ‘fell in love’ with her on that one meeting.

She is a wonk. I get that a lot of people don’t like that. But I’m a wonk, too and I love that she’s a wonk and I think that having someone who actually cares about policy and its intended and unintended consequences in the White House is a GOOD THING. Certainly it’s better than the alternatives – especially Cruz or Trump (I don’t know how much Rubio is wonkish or not) who simply don’t care.

Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

zumahzumah | March 2, 2016 at 1:25 am
Wow, you guys are really bad at civil disagreement and arguing with people without insulting them and making assumptions about them.

One, we’re not here to argue about politics or anything, we’re here to mock. It’s right in the header. David marched in here and said something objectionable, thus, people are responding.

Two, you’re really bad at knowing what a civil disagreement is. Civil disagreement isn’t always “you sit down and you patiently explain to someone why they’re wrong while they come in here and fling shit everywhere”.

This is civil. People aren’t just going “Lol, you’re an idiot, David! Shut up!”, they’re actually sitting down and explaining why they disagree. They’re having a conversation. David got condescending, so people replied in kind. That much would have been apparent had you read the posts before knee-jerking into Whine Mode because we didn’t pat someone’s head and take their fee-fees into consideration before responding to them going “but you’re all wrong and you should do things my way, because I’m assuming you’re making x argument!” ad nauseum.

Three, anyone else catch a whiff of Eu de Backup Sock?

Dalillama
Dalillama
4 years ago

@rugbyyogi

I read an account of where he’d been invited to the home of someone who didn’t share his political views (their kids went to the same pre-school) and Rove was jovial and engaged and just all around a nice guy in the context of this kids’ party.

And Hitler could be a charming dinner companion by many accounts. The ability to tell jokes doesn’t mark a worthwhile person. Karl Rove has devoted his life to hurting people, in ways large and small. He doesn’t get decent person points for not chewing the scenery 24/7.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
4 years ago

Compare the way Barack Obama talks to what Malcolm X or MLK said over 50 years ago.

Okay, I was actually planning a teal deer of a metaphor to try and explain the basic concepts of “Empathy” and “Object permanence” for a tenth time, but no. You just used ML-fucking-K as a beat stick in the context of “Well, I didn’t personally like the first black president because ME ME ME IT’S ALL ABOUT ME, therefore I’m stumping for a fascist wannabe-dictator who’s running on a platform of deporting and/or executing all PoC.” You are evil and I feel dirty for ever enjoying your past posts. Go suck on a banhammer. Scumbag.

I’ll let somebody else tackle the whitesplaining portion of this most vomitous of sentences, I need to go take my anger out on a few virtual zombies.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ rubiyogi

but she could not have been warmer or more engaged

It was often said of Bill Clinton that his special skill was that, whoever he spoke to “he made you feel like the most important person in the room“. So it looks like Hillary also has that, or maybe she taught it to him, who knows.

DerangedDan
DerangedDan
4 years ago

1: Get a SCOTUS ruling that ends gerrymandering, hard. This would almost completely demolish the GOP’s stranglehold on the House, without any voters actually changing their opinions. It would also weaken their control of many state legislatures.

I am so, so pessimistic on gerrymandering. My state passed a constitutional amendment making gerrymandering illegal. Then the next redistricting came around, and the state legislature gerrymandered the shit out of it. It was challenged almost immediately, and it took 4 years to finally get struck down by the courts. 2 separate rounds of house elections with illegal districts.

And although we finally get fairer districts for the next election (the state legislature ultimately didn’t get to draw these ones after failing 4 times to draw legal districts), we don’t even get enough time to vote out all the legislators who got their seats through gerrymandering before the next redistricting. And I guarantee that map will be illegal, because there ultimately aren’t any repercussions for doing so.

EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

And I guarantee that map will be illegal, because there ultimately aren’t any repercussions for doing so.

This is not only the truest thing said all day, but also the wisest observation on constitutional law that I’ve heard for a while.

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
4 years ago

I always enjoy when someone who has contributed absolutely nothing to this conversation or any other that I recall comes in here to tell us how we’re doing it wrong. That’s got to be one of the most inane shallow type of internet comment there is.

Anyway. I was front row at a Bill Clinton speech once. I’ve always been lukewarm about him, but that day I was a huge fangirl. Like, I shook his hand and didn’t want to wash it ever again. That kind of fan. I can’t even describe it. We’ve all met charming and charismatic people before, but he’s on a whole other level. It took days for it to wear off, if not weeks. If I believed magic spells were a thing, I would sincerely believe he’d done one.

Iseult The Idle
Iseult The Idle
4 years ago

Anyway. I was front row at a Bill Clinton speech once. I’ve always been lukewarm about him, but that day I was a huge fangirl. Like, I shook his hand and didn’t want to wash it ever again.

Totally. He’s not good-looking, but the man has charisma. I really believe he was able to accomplish as much as he did in the face of a hostile Congress because of it. You could hate him all you wanted, but you’d find yourself nodding along anyway. Drove the opposition nutty.

Too bad charisma is not a virtue.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

@zumahzumah

Wow, you guys are really bad at civil disagreement and arguing with people without insulting them and making assumptions about them.

This is pretty plainly inaccurate. You can find plenty of civil disagreement on these pages, as Paradoxical Intention pointed out.

You will also find examples of people expressing frustration and not engaging with the trolls, but that says nothing about their ability to disagree civilly. It just speaks to their willingness. Your issue is that you seem to believe anyone who wanders in deserves civil disagreement as a matter of course. Arguing against harmful beliefs takes time and energy, and no one is entitled to that just because they said something risable in a comments section.

Imagine how rude it would be to make that same assumption in every day life. When I’m playing cards with my family, is it fair to ask me to stop enjoying myself every single time my uncle brings up his deeply held conviction that women are not able to reach the same heights in Bridge play as men?* Should I be required to pull out my handily prepared list of sources that disprove his theory? Or am I permitted to be annoyed and talk to someone else instead?

*Yes, my real uncle really believes this, and yes, he feels a need to bring it up whenever someone (usually me) is getting uppity.

zumahzumah
zumahzumah
4 years ago

@Paradoxical Intention – Resident Cheeseburger Slut

haha,

so you are a paragon of civil disagreement but still feel the need to call me a sockpuppet and write “That much would have been apparent had you read the posts before knee-jerking into Whine Mode because we didn’t pat someone’s head and take their fee-fees into consideration” which is obviously super friendly and civil.

I like reading this blog, but I occasionally I have the misfortune of being tempted to check out the comment section and I tend to quickly get pretty sick of all the name calling and the hyper sensitivity and the purer-than-thou attitudes (not to mention the smugness and forced jokes). That’s why I don’t comment here otherwise, I just did so on impulse earlier because I was in bad mood and felt a need to publicly roll my eyes at all your annoying attitudes here. I find most of you unpleasant, at least in this setting. (bye, I know I won’t be missed)

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

Translator’s note: We believe that the above mysterious message can be rendered into human-speak as follows.

HELLO EVERYONE!

YOU ARE ALL TOO HYPERSENSITIVE AND I FIND THAT THIS IRRITATES ME!

YOU’RE PURER-THAN-THOU, WHICH SOMEONE LIKE ME WOULD NEVER BE!

NOT THAT I’M SMUG ABOUT IT.

I WOULD NEVER STOOP TO TYPE THE THINGS THAT I’M CURRENTLY TYPING.

I DISLIKE YOU ALL BUT HOPE YOU’LL MISS ME WHEN I LEAVE

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ viscaria

I recommend you read “Moonraker” by Ian Fleming. The book goes into great detail on how to rig a Bridge game to show someone up.

LindsayIrene
4 years ago

People who think that WHTM has a uniquely nasty comments section must have never been anywhere else on the internet ever.

Newt
Newt
4 years ago

Shorter zz:
You should patiently explain the basics to me. Even when you’re telling me why you don’t have to patiently explain the basics to me. No, that wasn’t patient enough. [door slam]

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
4 years ago

People who think that WHTM has a uniquely nasty comments section must have never been anywhere else on the internet ever.

Well, it is (relatively) unique in that feminists are allowed to be nasty to misogynist trolls rather than the reverse seen every-bloody-where else.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

@Alan, thanks for the rec! I think I’ll skip it though, just because I have a James Bond allergy. In any case, I doubt that there is absolutely anything I could do to best my uncle at that particular game, as I’m just a terrible bridge player and he used to play professionally.

I’d much rather find some way to convince him that my personal skills do not reflect badly on every woman who’s ever lived, as we’re, you know, different people, and furthermore you don’t have to bring it up just because you’re losing at Hearts, you 60 year old baby.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ viscaria

As a straight white bloke I never have to worry about that “representing the group” thing but the best comment I ever heard about that was from a guy called Romesh Ranganathan: “I feel bad about how much I’ve contributed to racism, because if you were ever on the fence about Asians and then you met me…”

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
4 years ago

What does forced jokes mean?

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

A forced joke is something which you treat like fetch, trying to make it happen even though it isn’t going to happen.

I’m trying to work out which things we say can be classed as forced jokes. Possibly SFHC confusing Matt Forney and Mike Cernovich?

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
4 years ago

@EJ

Forney, Esmay and Barnes, not Forney and Cernovich. And it’s not a joke, I seriously can’t tell the difference between those three.

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

Matt Forney, Dean Esmay and Jack Barnes are different people? I thought it was the same person using different names depending on how long his hair was at the time.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

Be careful! I don’t think you folks are allowed to joke around about Matt and Dean and Jack until zumahzumah gives their official verdict as to whether those jokes or forced or natural, as well as if they fall within the bounds of civil disagreement.

LindsayIrene
4 years ago

Trump voter on Fox News says he likes that Trump doesn’t give specific policy ideas because otherwise other candidates might steal them.— Elise Foley (@elisefoley) March 2, 2016

katz
4 years ago

Katz, you are my favourite person. That is all.

comment image

I was just really annoyed because there had been like three rounds of “They’re exactly the same because economics and foreign policy!” “But there are critically important differences in social issues that will have a huge impact on people’s lives.” “Economics and foreign policy!” “Social issues exist, you know.” “LA LA LA ECONOMICS AND FOREIGN POLICY!”

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

Forced joke?

I would need an example. If someone else found it funny it was not forced. Because humor is subjective things can be objectively funny and not-funny to different people. But you can’t force funny. Humor is about turning the negative into the positive in feeling terms which is why if it does not work the reactions tend to be bad.

Unless the suggestion is that people are pretending it’s funny via social pressure?

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
4 years ago

Hahaha. The GOP is starting to talk about usurping the popular vote at the convention and give the nomination to Cruz or Rubio.

For those who don’t know, only 60% of the delegates are selected by primary and caucus voters. The rest of the delegates are Superdelegates. Party bigwigs who can vote whoever they like.

I so hope this happens. It will rip the party apart as Trump would probably run as an independent and split the Republican vote.