11-10-2020, 02:29 AM
(11-10-2020, 02:04 AM)Dill Wrote: On this MB I have frequently contested monolithic constructions of Trump support. I don't think I am guilty of that here.
I'll certainly give you the benefit of the doubt.
Quote:Some understood that a Trump win means lower taxes, and that trumped any ethical problem they might otherwise have with banning Muslims or calling Mexicans "rapists" or admiring and defending murderous dictators or obstructing justice or separating parents and children at the border to "send a message."
You don't start off too strong here. Trump never banned Muslims (this is an obvious sore spot for you btw). Also, and this does not help your argument, you throw a lot at the wall here, perhaps hoping some of it will stick. You also assume these specific reasons resulted in people voting for Trump, which is not a fact in evidence, but apparently presented to bolster your position.
Quote:Trump got some 80% of the Evangelical vote--comprising millions who believe he was chosen by God to play a role in the Endtime.
This is an incredibly strong statement. Do you you have any proof of this? Given your dislike for absolute statements about muslims this statement about evangelicals comes off as strongly hypocritial.
Quote:Their fabulously wealthy leaders may care about taxes, but many of the rank and file do not. Ending abortion was more important--and securing Israel. The norms of democracy are "man's law" not God's. God's purpose trumps man's, etc. Hindering Trump was hindering God's will--not a view which favored impeachment.
Again, much of this argument strikes me as hyperbolic in the extreme, perhaps designed to shock the reader into acceptance. I'd very much like to see any solid evidence that backs it up.
Quote:Trump also had the support of Alt-Righters, and of people who followed politics very little but who understood that their livelihoods depended upon coal or fracking and Trump was their best shot to keep that going. Among all of these groups were people who felt that white identity was under threat by immigration. Trump was certainly their "bulwark" against that.
You once again combine multiple concerns under one umbrella, as if they were inseparable. This does not lend your argument any credibility, in fact it does the opposite.
Quote:Recognizing that people supported Trump for diverse reasons does not rule out, however, that his campaign and its media arm worked to create an alternative reality in which the Russia investigation and impeachment and pandemic were "hoaxes"--though they were not. An environment in which more reputable news sources and military, scientific and medical authorities were all suspect, while Trump-endorsed crackpots like Dr. Atlas or Rudy Giuliani were not.
Once again you present one side as indisputably correct and the other as the opposite. This position is the opposite of nuanced or well considered when considered as presented.
Quote:I dispute any claim of symmetry between the MSM and the network of right wing media which includes Fox and Christian Broadcasting etc. as if "both sides" were somehow equally disinforming and constructing audiences open to manipulation.
No one familiar with your posting history would be surprised by this. The problem is it presents nothing to convince other than your opinion.
Quote:The clash of alternative realities was abundantly clear in the final debate as Trump spewed baseless accusations that Biden had received "millions from Russia" and the like. All mystifying to "middle-of-the-road-types," but gospel truth those feasting on Hannity and Rush.
Ahh, this is an interesting statement, as it frames all who oppose Biden as wholesale believers in deep state conspiracies. This isn't as subtle as you think. nor is it as effective.
Quote:So of course Trump supporters oppose what Trump opposes--the "deep state" and Democratic "worst excesses" like "socialism" and "the Biden crime family." He is a "bulwark" against the fears that he and his right wing backers have worked decades to generate. And as Max Weber reminds us, "Charisma" is not IN politicians and prophets, but is projected onto them by followers. That's why his odious and vulgar behavior has no traction outside the right wing bubble, but produces adulation inside it.
Here is where you really veer off the highway of logical analysis and buy wholesale into partisan positions. If you're attempting to persuade the undecided with this post I'd have to guess you failed miserably. Labeling anyone who doesn't adhere to your positions as robotic simpletons is no way to win them over with your argument.
Quote:Every single Trump supporter might not be credulous. But millions certainly were/are, and continue to be--played now by fears of new "Dem excesses," Trump endorsed rumors of myriad instances of voter fraud in swing states which criss-cross their blogs and Facebook and Twitter accounts faster than they can be refuted.
Again, further proof, if any was needed (might be?). You see your ideological opponents as credulous simpletons, willing to believe anything if it fits into their preconceptions. You don't see your opponents as people of intelligence capable of nuanced thought or feeling. You, apparently, and forgive me if I am wrong, see them as ideological robots. For a man as aged and learned as yourself this position is surprisingly absolute and brooks no dissension, at least without extreme rebuke. I might postulate that your own position is as credulous as those you claim to abhor, but I don't like to traffic in such absolutes. I'll simply chalk it up to your dislike for Trump and hope for an improvement within the next few years.
