Democratic senator "hopes Trump is assassinated"

[hollodero]

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It's actually not that hard to understand, which is exactly why I predicted it would happen.  I had a long discussion with a friend at work about this after the news that Bannon had been shitcanned.  Let me start off by saying I will be speaking in generalizations with the understanding from me, and hopefully everyone reading, that we are all aware of this and can process the argument as adults.  there are several factors that, combined, explain Trump's election.

As adults, how boring. I start by being so adult as to apologize for postponing my answer to you. Busy day.

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The past fifteen years have brought profound social change.  Same sex marriage is legal, homosexuals can openly served in the military, etc.  These steps were both logical and predictable, people saw them coming and, like them or not, were able to prepare themselves for the eventuality.  Very recently there has been a huge push to acknowledge transgender people in the same way.

Which seems like the right thing to do.

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: People who might have been troubled by homosexual gains in the civil rights area are going to be more affected by this as it wasn't a long time coming, it happened very quickly.  Still, I think if it had "stopped" there we wouldn't have seen a huge backlash.  Then the idea of there being no gender gained steam.  People were "non-binary", children were marked as "x" for gender on their birth certificate, children were given life altering treatments to make them a different gender.  Coupled with this was an undertone of condescension, from a minority to be sure but it did exist, against "cis" genders, especially "cis" straight men.  This was all a bridge too far for many who, in some ways justifiably, thought to themselves where this this end?  How far are we going to go down this path?  This pushed people directly towards the candidate who promised to take us back to a time when none of this was a consideration.

That sure is an explanation. It isn't an "excuse", and I'm sorry for this word, for every Trump voter can rightfully say that they need no excuses, especially not for a foreigner, especially not for a foreigner whose own country votes right-wing populism in higher totals of population percentage.
That the "everybody" parts of the constitution should also include transgenders and their rights seems obvious, doesn't it. In principle. You're a very principled person, argued - rightfully so - the same thing for Nazis, so you won't disagree. So that shouldn't be the problem, and if it is there should be feedback. That "people have no gender" seems a bit exaggerated, doesn't it? No one takes defining yourself as a male person away, transgenders are extreme minorities, as are children with sex changes (something I have a hard time not to consider as taking it a bit too far, in the sense that children should not make these decisions, should also not get breast imlants and all other things that one might see as cutting down their freedom). But for the rural, republican population transgender children are hardly something they have to digest in their everyday life. That they can serve in the military - well, that should be their right. And if someone disagrees, I couldn't say he disagrees for love of the constitution.

For the other part, I can not really come around to not consider this a bit whiny. Snow-flaky. A straight white male isn't really heavily mocked. And there are things like affirmative action, which I understand is a dicey topic, but whites are not really discriminated against on a broad scope. And seeing it that way looks like being over-sensitive. Or like a reaction of losing actual privilege.

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The racial make up of the United States is changing.  Whites will no longer be the majority in the not so distant future.  This, in itself, would not cause undue concern for most.  However, there was again an undertone of condescension, and sometimes outright hostility, towards white people and "white society".  Again, this was mainly directed at white men.  You see it being expressed right now in the desire to destroy monuments to the founding fathers.

Just so I get this right: You consider tearing down statues as an attack on the white race? If so - I disagree. I don't really follow this monuments story, for that's a bit too American to really understand. But aren't the statues in question mainly (I even thought exclusively) about Confederate heroes - that often were erected not in their time, but as a counter-measurement to the civil rights movement? Lee isn't exactly a founding father, and I didn't catch that statues of Jefferson et al. were called in question - even though Trump suggested as much.

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It has been expressed in college campuses like Missouri and Evergreen state (google Evergreen state no white people day if you are unfamiliar with this).  This kind of behavior and speech has led many to believe that the very fabric of the country they grew up in, and feel strongly about, is under attack by people who want to utterly destroy it.

Yes, your colleges and many students there seem to suck (as do ours). I can grasp that one wouldn't want the candidate these people want. Which would again lead me to a rant against the two-party system, but I will hold back on that one.
Just one thing, this "want to destroy America" is rhetorics that to me takes things too far. They want to change it, but I guess they still don't hate their country. It's a talking point I often hear from the right wing, but I don't think it holds merit.

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: While the fear is overblown it does have some rationale.  The groups that propagate this fear are small, but they are not insignificantly small.  They are certainly larger than the nazis that have so recently dominated the news.  Couple this with the fact that any criticism of this kind of extremism is branded as racist or an attempt to maintain the white male patriarchy.  This also drove people to the candidate who had no time for any of the above and openly mocked it, again promising to return us to a time in which this kind of thing did not occur.  I absolutely maintain that Obama being elected did not cause this concern at all, it is coincidental and easy for some to point to as a causal factor.

Again, if I'm being honest I would consider people feeling overly attacked because of college kids and ultra-feminists and whoever else falls in the groups you described as snowflakey.
Still an explanation.

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Lastly, you have the economic factor.  This is easiest to explain.  Clinton wanted more of the same and Trump professed an end to outsourcing, making American jobs for American citizens his priority.  Whether he did it, was going to do it, or ever will the very fact that he professed it made him infinitely more preferable than Clinton to many.

But aside from national debt, all economic numbers at the end of Obama's term looked positive... more of the same doesn't seem like the worst thing that could happen. I understand the "forgotten worker", I just think that if the forgotten worker goes republican, said worker truely is very naive. Not only because jobs that time deemed more and more obsolete do not come back, coal mining will vanish just like building carriages vanished at some time. But also because the republicans are corporation-friendly, which throughout history never translated into worker-friendly. Just as corporate gains never translate into higher wages and better working conditions; more often the opposite causes the gains in the first place. That might be the leftist talking out of me, sure. But I feel many vote against their own interest, as I said many don't own stocks and rather had clean water and all these things republicans aren't feverishly fighting for. But OK.

- One of my own explanations were quite simpler than all of yours: The way your system is built, there's a change in the president's color every 8 years, at least that push is high and gets stronger all the time. A democrat's candidate has a hard time not standing for "more of the same" if the predecessor was a democrat, and people always want "change". I think Trump won because after 8 years of Obama, it was again time for the swing that always comes.

(08-20-2017, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Human nature being what it is Trump's election was not a surprise to me.  The instant calls for his impeachment and mudslinging from the left (which I realize they are not alone in) merely reinforced everything above, justifying the decision they made as the right one.  This is why I think removing Trump from office, without 100% ironclad proof, will cause irreparable damage to the United States, damage from which we may not recover.  I hope this made some sense and clarified why so many made a choice you find inexplicable.

I agree, impeachment should be air-tight, otherwise it will create a martyr legend.
- And while I might expain the choice, what I do not get, actually, is the huge loyalty to him. So many "always Trumpers" around no matter what, 6 out of 10 CNN says.  Amongst so many other things, he openly admitted that his healthcare plan would mainly hurt his own electorate. Yes, he said, without any remorse. How a forgotten worker and all the others on the Trump train still could believe Trump gives anything about him is beyond me. The classical "always republican" is easier to get, although I would expect more pushback from the party and its affiliates by now. A censor would have been in order for some time now (an earlier instance being the Nordstrom tweet).