Trump, where do you stand on him now?

[*Nately120*]

(11-19-2020, 09:58 AM)GMDino Wrote: Oh I know people (family) who have done that to their friends and other members of the family.  I have not.

I muted a few "friends" on social media but I didn't cut anyone out of my life.  Basically because 1) They are not my closest friends so the interactions are fewer and 2) If they are older/closer friends we have so much more in common than politics.  

I draw the line at those who are violent in action or words toward other groups that are not them.  So far I haven't ran into that extreme yet.  Maybe I choose friends well?  I have strictly republican friends who have gay children for example and seem to not agree with the right' policies about them.  More likely the more casual friends hide some of their darker thoughts.  

My friends and wife are of the lean left persuasion with various degrees of intensity in there vocalization about politics.  Practically all of my friends have very conservative parents/families, though while my family is a bunch of lifelong democrats and pseudo hippies. My mother is the only person I know who has seen The Beatles and JFK in person, to sum that up.  I admit that I "lucked out" by not having a bunch of family members who think I'm an America-hating commie because I don't like Trump, rather some of my family members pressed me on not voting Biden when it was "too important" not to, but they also heard me out and accepted that I had logic behind my 3rd party insanity. One of my best pal's parents legitimately believe he hates America because unlike them he hasn't traded in his blue collar pro union PA democrat support for his ticket on the Trump train.

My wife's family is ultra nice but also rural "Trump is the only one who loves this country" to the max so I sort of keep things diplomatic and just avoid any sort of in-depth discussion on the stuff.  My job involves background checks for government security clearances and my mother in law is pretty sure I spend my time investigating whether people are Muslim or not.

[BigPapaKain]

(11-18-2020, 06:16 PM)Goalpost Wrote: I guess I voted for Trump both times because it is my right to vote for him.  And I don't think anyone has a right to question me on it.  When I walked in the booth there were plenty of signs and people outside.  But nobody crossed that boundary from either side looking to convince me at last moment.

I wish I could say the same, not that anything anyone could say would have changed my mind, but the wife and I were immediately approached by an old gentleman outside our voting place spewing his rhetoric trying to get us to vote his way. Honestly it's kind of insulting that someone would do that at the 1 yard line like that.

[Goalpost]

My sister is definitely left leaning. She voted for Biden. And yet we can still have lunch together. Shoot a round of golf together. Give out a happy birthday text. We can coexist on many levels beyond our political leanings. If anything when the subject comes up, we can chuckle about it. I'm quite sure she voted against Trump because he was a bad example for her kids to see. I understand that.

[GMDino]

(11-19-2020, 10:15 AM)Nately120 Wrote: My friends and wife are of the lean left persuasion with various degrees of intensity in there vocalization about politics.  Practically all of my friends have very conservative parents/families, though while my family is a bunch of lifelong democrats and pseudo hippies.  My mother is the only person I know who has seen The Beatles and JFK in person, to sum that up.  I admit that I "lucked out" by not having a bunch of family members who think I'm an America-hating commie because I don't like Trump, rather some of my family members pressed me on not voting Biden when it was "too important" not to, but they also heard me out and accepted that I had logic behind my 3rd party insanity.  One of my best pal's parents legitimately believe he hates America because unlike them he hasn't traded in his blue collar pro union PA democrat support for his ticket on the Trump train.

My wife's family is ultra nice but also rural "Trump is the only one who loves this country" to the max so I sort of keep things diplomatic and just avoid any sort of in-depth discussion on the stuff.  My job involves background checks for government security clearances and my mother in law is pretty sure I spend my time investigating whether people are Muslim or not.

I'm with you on just avoiding it.  My MIL, not a typically political person, hates Trump and will start talking about him with anyone, anywhere and if I am there I will direct the conversation elsewhere.  She will end up going overboard with whomever she is speaking with.

My family is democrat.  Period.  More so than I am.

My wife's family other than her mom is all in on Trump.  They just don't talk about it with me.  

[*Nately120*]

(11-19-2020, 11:09 AM)GMDino Wrote: I'm with you on just avoiding it.  My MIL, not a typically political person, hates Trump and will start talking about him with anyone, anywhere and if I am there I will direct the conversation elsewhere.  She will end up going overboard with whomever she is speaking with.

My family is democrat.  Period.  More so than I am.

My wife's family other than her mom is all in on Trump.  They just don't talk about it with me.  

Any time people go in-depth on politics I talk more about our financial structure and the artificial nature of paper currency the government can print up willy-nilly and the flaws our of privatization of profit and socialization of loss.  People realize I'm not just going to talk about which political party caters more to lazy people and which politicians are the biggest sex offenders so I get a combination of acceptance and confusion from most sides.

[Dill]

(11-18-2020, 06:16 PM)Goalpost Wrote: I guess I voted for Trump both times because it is my right to vote for him.  And I don't think anyone has a right to question me on it.  When I walked in the booth there were plenty of signs and people outside.  But nobody crossed that boundary from either side looking to convince me at last moment.

It was your right to vote for Biden too.

The question is not whether you have the right, but why you exercised it on behalf of Trump rather than Biden? 

What I'd like to know is whether you view Trump as a stable leader with clear policy goals, beyond tax cuts and Supreme Court picks.

What costs and benefits for the nation did you see in four more years like the last four? 

[Dill]

(11-18-2020, 06:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It's absolutely the case.  One of your buddies throws the racist term out at the drop of a hat.  As I said, Hollo has noticed it, and called it out, on numerous occasions, yet somehow you always miss it.

Oh my, that simply isn't true at all.  

Hahaha, I do love it when people make my point for me.  I dislike hypocrisy and hyperbole, hence my having issues with some of the hot takes on this board from time to time.  I suppose I'm a Trump "normalizer" but not a "supporter"?  I do love when the conversation veers into the semantic.

No need to respond further, I don't see anything being further resolved from this discussion.  You have your position and I have mine.  I suppose we'll wait and see how many Trump supporters respond to this bait thread to see who is correct.

Can't figure out which buddy throws out the "racist" term at the drop of a hat. Bpat or Dino? Bengalzona? Hollo has "called it out" numerous times?  

I think you should want to hear my response, especially about the "normalizer" and "supporter" distinction. 

A Trump supporter at a rally who cheers when he reads the snake poem is certainly supporting Trump, but without normalizing his behavior. A lot of supporters "perform" his abnormal (for a politician) behavior right along with him. If you tell them the behavior is not normal, they'll happily agree because they didn't want "normal": they wanted someone who would "shake things up." 

There are non-supporters, though, who don't vote for Trump and don't attend his rallies, and are often willing to grant he is a boor, yet when his racism, misogyny or authoritarian behavior are criticized, they step forward to criticize the critics.  When Trump critics remark on chaotic and unprecedented turnover of WH staff, and the demeaning public treatment of those fired, these non-supporters are quick to remind us that there is turnover in every administration and Trump has a right to have people who will carry out his views, not their own. His Muslim ban was "not really" a Muslim ban, and so not really a very public attempt to scapegoat a world religion. Complaints about insults to allies, and cabinet picks with no experience and nepotism, are just "butthurt" because Hillary lost.  See: "normal" nothing really out of the ordinary here. Supporters do this too, of course. 

So clearly people can normalize Trump's behavior without supporting him, just as they can support him without normalizing it.  It would be absurd to argue that people can only normalize Trump's behavior if they are supporters.

Perhaps the ground of this normalizing behavior is that the people who don't support Trump also don't think he has done much damage at all to the U.S. government and its individual institutions from the military  to the CDC to the post office to the State Department. Nor has he done much damage to civil discourse; Dems are "just as bad."   From that perspective, Trump critics who insist the damage be publicly recognized are just acting out hyperbole, or "hypocrisy"--whattabout the Clintons?  From their perspective they are fair and balanced, standing in the middle. Both sides do it, whatever "it" is. And that definitely helps one side.

[BmorePat87]

Openly asking lawmakers to overturn election results by appointing GOP electors in states he lost will also be a defining moment in his failure of a presidency.

[*Nately120*]

(11-19-2020, 10:29 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Openly asking lawmakers to overturn election results by appointing GOP electors in states he lost will also be a defining moment in his failure of a presidency.

GOP electors throwing democracy in the trash so a guy who was a democrat a decade ago can remain president even though he lost...what a concept!

A few weeks after they acquiesce to his demands he will start telling them his son needs to be "elected" in 2024.  Just give in, im pretty sure Abe Lincoln would approve. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-19-2020, 09:18 PM)Dill Wrote: Can't figure out which buddy throws out the "racist" term at the drop of a hat. Bpat or Dino? Bengalzona? Hollo has "called it out" numerous times?

Oh, I know, because you never seem to "see it" when it happens.  Fort someone who's on here constantly you appear to miss a lot.

Quote:I think you should want to hear my response, especially about the "normalizer" and "supporter" distinction. 

Please continue.

Quote:A Trump supporter at a rally who cheers when he reads the snake poem is certainly supporting Trump, but without normalizing his behavior. A lot of supporters "perform" his abnormal (for a politician) behavior right along with him. If you tell them the behavior is not normal, they'll happily agree because they didn't want "normal": they wanted someone who would "shake things up." 

OK.

Quote:There are non-supporters, though, who don't vote for Trump and don't attend his rallies, and are often willing to grant he is a boor, yet when his racism, misogyny or authoritarian behavior are criticized, they step forward to criticize the critics.  When Trump critics remark on chaotic and unprecedented turnover of WH staff, and the demeaning public treatment of those fired, these non-supporters are quick to remind us that there is turnover in every administration and Trump has a right to have people who will carry out his views, not their own. His Muslim ban was "not really" a Muslim ban, and so not really a very public attempt to scapegoat a world religion. Complaints about insults to allies, and cabinet picks with no experience and nepotism, are just "butthurt" because Hillary lost.  See: "normal" nothing really out of the ordinary here. Supporters do this too, of course. 

This argument is lacking as it ignores the very real possibility that the criticism of Trump's critics can be wholly justified.  You deal in a lot of absolutes for someone who claims to pride themselves on the quality and subtlety of their arguments.

Quote:So clearly people can normalize Trump's behavior without supporting him, just as they can support him without normalizing it.  It would be absurd to argue that people can only normalize Trump's behavior if they are supporters.

Alternatively it would be equally absurd to assume everyone criticizing Trump isn't guilty of what they are accused of in return.  You don't "see it" just like you don't "see it" when your friends casually throw around serious accusations.  I'd hesitate to say this was intentional, but the evidence that it is seems to be mounting.

Quote:Perhaps the ground of this normalizing behavior is that the people who don't support Trump also don't think he has done much damage at all to the U.S. government and its individual institutions from the military  to the CDC to the post office to the State Department. Nor has he done much damage to civil discourse; Dems are "just as bad."   From that perspective, Trump critics who insist the damage be publicly recognized are just acting out hyperbole, or "hypocrisy"--whattabout the Clintons?  From their perspective they are fair and balanced, standing in the middle. Both sides do it, whatever "it" is. And that definitely helps one side.

Again, absolutism, allowing for no distinctions in the middle.  One could vote for Trump because they think Biden will implement policies making the populace solely dependent on the government.  One could vote for Trump because they dislike Biden's extreme stance on the 2nd amendment.  In short there are numerous reasons to vote for Trump over Biden over solid policy disagreements.  One can vote for Trump while holding their nose because the tend to agree with more of his positions than Biden, but not really support him beyond that.  You don't allow for this as you, by your own admission, see people who vote for Trump as credulous rubes.  Which brings me to my last point, there are people who vote for Trump because they dislike people like you and want to thumb their nose at you.  In short, you perpetuate what you claim to despise, but I'm sure you don't "see that" either.

[Dill]

(11-19-2020, 11:50 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:Perhaps the ground of this normalizing behavior is that the people who don't support Trump also don't think he has done much damage at all to the U.S. government and its individual institutions from the military  to the CDC to the post office to the State Department. Nor has he done much damage to civil discourse; Dems are "just as bad."   From that perspective, Trump critics who insist the damage be publicly recognized are just acting out hyperbole, or "hypocrisy"--whattabout the Clintons?  From their perspective they are fair and balanced, standing in the middle. Both sides do it, whatever "it" is. And that definitely helps one side.

Again, absolutism, allowing for no distinctions in the middle.  One could vote for Trump because they think Biden will implement policies making the populace solely dependent on the government.  One could vote for Trump because they dislike Biden's extreme stance on the 2nd amendment.  In short there are numerous reasons to vote for Trump over Biden over solid policy disagreements.  One can vote for Trump while holding their nose because the tend to agree with more of his positions than Biden, but not really support him beyond that.  You don't allow for this as you, by your own admission, see people who vote for Trump as credulous rubes.  Which brings me to my last point, there are people who vote for Trump because they dislike people like you and want to thumb their nose at you.  In short, you perpetuate what you claim to despise, but I'm sure you don't "see that" either.

Two quick points in response to this:

1. I have never "admitted" that Trump voters are "credulous rubes." 

2. In passage below, from a response to B-zona on another thread, I think I covered most or all of the motives of Trump voters you say I don't recognize above, including the people who "dislike [me] and want to thumb their nose at [me] and people who "hold their nose." Almost as if you were paraphrasing me above. 

 "I agree that Trump's base should not be regarded as monolithic. I've said before that it is somewhat motley, including Evangelicals whose one priority is ending abortion and protecting Israel, 4chan trolls who just like to see liberal heads explode when government is broken, out of work miners/union labor who desperately want to believe their jobs will come back, and establishment Republicans who are embarrassed by Trump, but see party goals met in tax cuts, deregulation of environmental protections, and the record number of judicial appointments, so they exchange temporary shame for what they think will be long-term gain--like Gloria Steinem supporting Bill Clinton."

In any case, the paragraph you quote does not refer to Trump voters/supporters. The paragraph ONLY refers to a fraction of people who don't support/vote for Trump, but who normalize his behavior by criticizing those who criticize that behavior.  So I am indeed "allowing for distinctions" and remarking on a very odd "middle"--a group which "normalizes" Trump by casting his critics as the problem. This doesn't mean that Trump critics can't be wrong sometimes. It means that the degree to which they are right about an unfit president is not recognized. 

And that could very well be because of the way some construe and prioritize their 2nd Amendment rights in a way that dismisses or minimizes autocratic leadership and breaking government. They don't see the latter as a serious problem in a Trump second term, so long as the "extremists" can't take their guns.

[Dill]

(11-19-2020, 11:50 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:There are non-supporters, though, who don't vote for Trump and don't attend his rallies, and are often willing to grant he is a boor, yet when his racism, misogyny or authoritarian behavior are criticized, they step forward to criticize the critics.  When Trump critics remark on chaotic and unprecedented turnover of WH staff, and the demeaning public treatment of those fired, these non-supporters are quick to remind us that there is turnover in every administration and Trump has a right to have people who will carry out his views, not their own. His Muslim ban was "not really" a Muslim ban, and so not really a very public attempt to scapegoat a world religion. Complaints about insults to allies, and cabinet picks with no experience and nepotism, are just "butthurt" because Hillary lost.  See: "normal" nothing really out of the ordinary here. Supporters do this too, of course. 

This argument is lacking as it ignores the very real possibility that the criticism of Trump's critics can be wholly justified.  You deal in a lot of absolutes for someone who claims to pride themselves on the quality and subtlety of their arguments.

So clearly people can normalize Trump's behavior without supporting him, just as they can support him without normalizing it.  It would be absurd to argue that people can only normalize Trump's behavior if they are supporters.

Alternatively it would be equally absurd to assume everyone criticizing Trump isn't guilty of what they are accused of in return.  You don't "see it" just like you don't "see it" when your friends casually throw around serious accusations.  I'd hesitate to say this was intentional, but the evidence that it is seems to be mounting.

You questioned the possibility of any substantive distinction between "normalizers" and "supporters" of Trump. 

The job of my argument then was to show what it showed--that Trump supporters may be distinct from Trump normalizers. 
And you haven't shown any factual or logical flaw in that argument.

It doesn't ignore "the very real possibility that the criticism of Trump's critics can be wholly justified." Sure it "can" be and other hypotheticals; but it's up to someone who thinks he show mis-criticism of Trump's behavior is a more serious threat to the Republic than Trump's behavior to demonstrate that. Just saying it "can" be does no more than draw another red herring across the trail.

My task is to explain/argue why people ought to be listening to the critics who recognize what Trump actually does, instead of normalizing and minimalizing bad behavior. There is no "dealing in absolutes" at all. As you are using the term, anyone who criticized anyone would be guilty of "absolutism." 

Finally, continually accusing me of not being able to "see" posts whose existence you are unable or unwilling to demonstrate, is just nonsense.  Evidence cannot "seem to be mounting" when it is not even there. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-20-2020, 01:23 AM)Dill Wrote: Finally, continually accusing me of not being able to "see" posts whose existence you are unable or unwilling to demonstrate, is just nonsense.  Evidence cannot "seem to be mounting" when it is not even there. 

Sure, you "can't see it" because it isn't there.  I honestly thought we'd be able to reach a détente but you seem willfully obtuse in this regard.

[Belsnickel]

So, here is where I am at. There have been people inside the White House that have said there is an intentional effort to make things more difficult for the Biden administration. That, combined with the stalling that is delaying the transition, is completely unacceptable. Trump and his loyalists inside the administration have shown they do not care about the country, only about their own power. It's anti-democratic (small d, just note that), and it's anti-American. Anyone who supports these actions are the same.

[GMDino]

(11-20-2020, 08:12 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, here is where I am at. There have  been people inside the White House that have said there is an intentional effort to make things more difficult for the Biden administration. That, combined with the stalling that is delaying the transition, is completely unacceptable. Trump and his loyalists inside the administration have shown they do not care about the country, only about their own power. It's anti-democratic (small d, just note that), and it's anti-American. Anyone who supports these actions are the same.

I wish I could say that those who are supporting him like Jordan and Cruz and the rest will suffer some kind of blowback but it just won't happen.

[GMDino]

More of what I'm gathering is there are the usual suspects who still back Trump 100%.  I'm talking people I know and that I interact with in person and online.  

Then there are those who say what Trump is doing is "indefensible" but also won't condemn those actions.  They just shrug and say "he has a right" even if they can't go so far as to add that he should stop.

Then a few are seeing the light of how Trump acts and want him gone.  I don't know that they can admit he was ALWAYS like that but the can at least SAY they see it now and say he should stop.

[*Nately120*]

(11-20-2020, 11:16 AM)GMDino Wrote: More of what I'm gathering is there are the usual suspects who still back Trump 100%.  I'm talking people I know and that I interact with in person and online.  

Then there are those who say what Trump is doing is "indefensible" but also won't condemn those actions.  They just shrug and say "he has a right" even if they can't go so far as to add that he should stop.

Then a few are seeing the light of how Trump acts and want him gone.  I don't know that they can admit he was ALWAYS like that but the can at least SAY they see it now and say he should stop.

I haven't done a deep dive, but the handful of Trump fans I know are 100% sure he actually won The election and they are hoping he can do whatever it takes to stay in the office that is rightfully his.  

[grampahol]

Perhaps some miss my point and I really don't care, but to clarify so there are no misunderstandings I have friends who are conservative and who have voted for republicans. I don't agree, but I don't shun them. No, I shun those who openly support the dolt knowing the things he's said and done and cheer him along. Hey look, there are also plenty of liberals I can't stand as well. It's the people who have willfully pretended that trump is the greatest president we've ever had when in fact he's by far the worst and only getting worse by the hour. I could spend the next 4 years doing nothing but writing about the misdeeds of the current administration and never run out of things to write, but I have better things to do with my life than dwell on stupid.   I have plenty of quite conservative customers here in South Carolina where people voted for trump overwhelmingly, but I don't know of one who openly supports him. In fact I've talked to many who have told me they would still vote for republicans, but not trump.

[BmorePat87]

Trump tweeted throughout the first G20 conference and then skipped the Pandemic conference to golf...

good to see he's taking his job seriously

[Tiger Teeth]

(11-14-2020, 01:28 AM)Interceptor Wrote: RE: Trump, where do you stand on him now?

He's a scumbag full of pettiness.

^This X 1000