How did he vote for Trump in 2016? No ad hom here. — Monitor

Right. You were playing “gotchya!”, I get that. What I was commenting on is your post afterwards where you said:

So you lived in the US and then moved to Canada? I was just always surprised at your level of interest in US politics. — Monitor

To NOS asking you:

Is there a point there? — NOS4A2

So you indicated pretty clearly your point was something about moving to Canada or surprise at his interest US politics. Now youre back to playing “gotchya!”. So your answer to his question about your point was dishonest. I'm not accusing you of making an ad hom, im accusing you of being a liar.

The real success has been what Trump is trying to do in the US: division and polarization at such level that there's no turning back. — ssu

I hear ya, but there is a turning back. We can simply cut out the tribalism and superiority poses etc. Again, I'm not making a moral point, but a tactical one. It's not in our interest to play Trump's game with him. Here's the bumper sticker slogan. :-)

Ignore Trump, and embrace his base.

I think you are making a good point here, but how do you ignore Trump? His effect on discourse and divisiveness is very real, and has very real effect on trying to fo what your suggesting and make peace with his base.
How can you repair the rift with Trump stirring the pot? It seems to me that rather than ignore Trump, he must be accounted for in whatever solution employed.

Now seems a uniquely bad time to ignore Trump. His actions and inactions are becoming less and less palatable for a great deal of people, former and wavering supporters included. If anything this is precisely the time to foreground Trump, and associate all the trash that has been happening precisely to his person.

im accusing you of being a liar. — DingoJones

First of all If you have followed anything that NOS has posted on this forum you know that NOS can defend himself if he feels it's necessary. But of all the highly personal flaming that has occurred and been discussed on this forum you get triggered by:

So you lived in the US and then moved to Canada? I was just always surprised at your level of interest in US politics.
— Monitor

And you leap from your foxhole to defend poor NOS from such a vicious unprovoked attack.
I urge you to contact the Mods about me.

As for the Gotcha, I didn't ask him if he still beats his wife. In fact I was trying to let him correct an inconsistency that was apparent in my post and deflected in his response. This is not the first time there has been inconsistency in his posts. And we still don't know how he voted for Trump in 2016 while living in Canada? Dual citizenship? I don't know. But he has incensed people around here to the point that some think he is a Russian troll so I don't think I out of line by quoting him directly.

Perhaps you are like NOS and the late Chester and just love to argue for the sake of arguing.

Please check my spelling. You might find some ammunition to use against me that's accurate.

For decades that included the working man. Democrats largely abandoned those folks, so they found a new home. That's not Trump's fault, that's our fault. — Nuke

Studies of voter movement don't support that conclusion. The republican / democrat split doesn't run along income or occupation lines, but along education lines.

This is a good question. I'm not asking any Democrat to give up their principles. I'm suggesting we dial down the tribalism and show those with different views more respect. You know, the urban leftie mindset which thinks of rural citizens as country bumpkin bozo yahoos. Stuff like that has to go. — Nuke

It's hard to disagree with that. It's essentially prejudice against your political opponent, and prejudice is rarely a good thing. I think your intentions are good here, it's just hard not to conclude that people who still support Trump really must be in favor of tyranny, so long as they get to be part of the ruling class (or race).

I tried to offer some examples, and would encourage members to think of more. We don't have to agree with Trump's immigration policies to acknowledge that being concerned about immigration and population is a reasonable concern. Same for abortion. Same for guns. Same for religious freedom. What else? What am I missing? — Nuke

Any concern can be framed as reasonable from the position of the ones who have it. Even outright racism can be made "reasonable" if you're willing to entertain the notion that there are races, and some are just inferior. People don't usually hold intentionally unreasonable beliefs. But I am very sceptical about calls to "understand" such reasons. Shouldn't we instead figure out how to make people be better at being reasonable?

Then why did they lose the last election to a comic book character who boasts about assaulting women? Why were all the Democratic candidates in 2020 second rate figures who don't even know that a Presidential candidate should have something useful to say about nuclear weapons? Why did Bernie and Warren not grasp that "all angry all the time" is a recipe for failure, as has now been proven?

I don't share your confidence obviously. — Nuke

They obviously failed. The question is whether we could do better.

There you go, that's it. Thanks for saying it better than I could.

It's not just policies, it's culture too. Hillary Clinton's "basket of deplorables" comment sums up the snotty superior mindset of so much of leftie culture pretty well. We need to face that attitude squarely and do something about it.

Agreed. The condescending class were so out of touch with the country that they believed their chosen candidate had it in the bag right up until the night of the election. Then they cried wolf for years, promising us future Hitlers and nuclear wars, and here we are are still caught in the bubble they have built for themselves.

And we still don't know how he voted for Trump in 2016 while living in Canada? — Monitor

U.S. citizens can vote whilst living abroad.

The condescending class were so out of touch with the country that they believed their chosen candidate had it in the bag right up until the night of the election. — NOS4A2

Yes, that's it. It's not just that we lost, it's that we had no idea we were going to lose. Me too!

Studies of voter movement don't support that conclusion. The republican / democrat split doesn't run along income or occupation lines, but along education lines. — Echarmion

Aren't income/occupation and education very related??

I think your intentions are good here, it's just hard not to conclude that people who still support Trump really must be in favor of tyranny, so long as they get to be part of the ruling class (or race). — Echarmion

There are such folks on all sides. You know, some lefties want the government to control pretty much every aspect of our lives. If you need to fart, you must first file a 17 page application with the EPA. :-)

But I am very sceptical about calls to "understand" such reasons. Shouldn't we instead figure out how to make people be better at being reasonable? — Echarmion

Is it reasonable to be concerned about abortion? Yes. Is it reasonable to be concerned about immigration? Yes. Is it reasonable to want to own a gun? Yes. Is it reasonable to be religious? Yes. Is it reasonable to be worried that we are over spending ourselves in to a disaster? Yes. Is it reasonable to stop voting for people who think you are a "basket of deplorables"? Yes. Is it reasonable to stop voting for those who have ignored your concerns for years? Yes.

There will always be policy debates of course. My point is just that those debates will be more productive if we stop thinking of those on the other side as deplorable idiots etc.

I think you are making a good point here, but how do you ignore Trump? His effect on discourse and divisiveness is very real, and has very real effect on trying to fo what your suggesting and make peace with his base. — DingoJones

When Trump says something ridiculous so as to stay in the headlines, we don't have to feed the beast by playing his game and getting all excited. Example: If I was making a bunch of wild angry claims on the forum you guys would yell at me for a bit, and then you'd get bored and ignore me. Like that.

We all know who Trump is now. There is no educational value in describing him any further.

When Trump says something ridiculous so as to stay in the headlines, we don't have to feed the beast by playing his game and getting all excited. Example: If I was making a bunch of wild angry claims on the forum you guys would yell at me for a bit, and then you'd get bored and ignore me. Like that.

We all know who Trump is now. There is no educational value in describing him any further. — Nuke

Ignoring him normalize his behaviour. That's not a good thing.

Aren't income/occupation and education very related?? — Nuke

Related, yes. But as an example, non-college educated business owners aren't "working class", but apparently are an important part of Trumps base

There are such folks on all sides. You know, some lefties want the government to control pretty much every aspect of our lives. If you need to fart, you must first file a 17 page application with the EPA. :-) — Nuke

Fair enough. I guess every side tends to portray it's opposition based on their extreme fringes. When talking about US politics in particular, though, a big problem remains that the republican power base is a small, highly mobilised voting block. In almost all policy questions, the majority leans democratic. But because of the electoral college, voter suppression, and highly polarizing rhetoric, the Republicans have so far managed to stave off their demise. I say "so far" because the demographics have steadily shifted against them.

The flip side is that, on the part of the voters, views are more and more entrenched, and fears of becoming irrelevant work against any conciliation. Usually, the only chance of overcoming such divides is to leverage an existing emotional connection. So for friends and family members who you disagree with, seeking common ground and being understanding is a good idea. But I don't know how one would translate that into a nationwide reconciliation.

There will always be policy debates of course. My point is just that those debates will be more productive if we stop thinking of those on the other side as deplorable idiots etc. — Nuke

Well, yes. I see what you mean. Differences in world view don't mean someone is an idiot. And basing your self image on being one of the enlightened fighting against the dumb Trump voters is dangerous.

What I wanted to point out was that there must be limits to what is considered a reasonable position. I am sure "white replacement" theorists think of their concerns as "reasonable", but there is no way to consider their concerns without buying into their worldview. While it's definitely a good idea to try to understand their emotional state, I don't see how one could "address their concerns" in any meaningful way while maintaining that their worldview is irrational.

When talking about US politics in particular, though, a big problem remains that the republican power base is a small, highly mobilised voting block. — Echarmion

That is, they care about their issues enough to actually vote.

But because of the electoral college, voter suppression, and highly polarizing rhetoric, the Republicans have so far managed to stave off their demise. — Echarmion

That is, too many lefties don't care enough about their issues to actually vote. We can't blame that on anybody but ourselves. There's nothing about the electoral college, voter suppression, and highly polarizing rhetoric that can stop us from winning, if we will get off our ass and vote, and drop the pathetic victim claims which so often infect the left.

But I don't know how one would translate that into a nationwide reconciliation. — Echarmion

Stop demonizing the opposition in public conversations. Be intellectually honest enough to publicly admit that the opposition has some reasonable concerns, even if we can't fully agree on how those concerns should be addressed. Look for win/win solutions. To the greatest degree possible, ignore those on the left and right who want to stoke the partisan divide. All the same kind of things we have to do if we wish to have productive debates here on the forum.

What I wanted to point out was that there must be limits to what is considered a reasonable position — Echarmion

There are a minority of extremists on all sides who don't merit our respect, agreed. And there are many on all sides who care more about the emotional stimulation provided by polarization than they do the successful future of the country. So there is no perfect solution, I agree.

The phony protesters near Lafayette park were not peaceful and are not real. They are terrorists. — John Dowd

Which one is it? They can't be not real and real terrorists at the same time.

I was attacked by paramilitary unicorns!

I was attacked by paramilitary unicorns! — Benkei

I thought I was the only one!

If you need to fart, you must first file a 17 page application with the EPA. :-) — Nuke

You joke, but it’s not a joke for the people you’re talking about, who’ve been lead to hold all sorts of absurd prejudices.

How do you deal with prejudice? Firstly, the prejudiced need to want to overcome their prejudice. Then they can dissolve their prejudice by merely getting to know what they’re prejudiced against.

How do you deal with prejudice? Firstly, the prejudiced need to want to overcome their prejudice. — praxis

Yea man, that's what I'm trying to discuss. Do we lefties wish to overcome our prejudices?

Or do you mean that prejudices are an affliction that only those other people over there suffer from?

Again, this is not Father Nuke giving a moral sermon about being nice. This is a rational tactical political calculation. Which is more important to us? The joy of superior finger pointing? Or reaching policy objectives?

Again, what triggered all this for me was watching serious nuclear weapons experts and activists choose the joy of superior finger pointing. These highly educated and very well informed folks are so distracted by Trump bashing that it never seems to dawn on them that few to none of their objectives can be reached without lots of Trump voters on board. Seeing that was a pretty sobering experience. That really brought home to me how truly dangerous prioritizing emotional agendas can be.

First of all If you have followed anything that NOS has posted on this forum you know that NOS can defend himself if he feels it's necessary. But of all the highly personal flaming that has occurred and been discussed on this forum you get triggered by:

So you lived in the US and then moved to Canada? I was just always surprised at your level of interest in US politics.
— Monitor

And you leap from your foxhole to defend poor NOS from such a vicious unprovoked attack.
I urge you to contact the Mods about me. — Monitor

You aren’t listening. You even quoted me on it. This isnt about flaming, personal attack or defending anyone. You were being dishonest, and Im holding you accountable. Its important not to be dishonest, dont you think?

As for the Gotcha, I didn't ask him if he still beats his wife. In fact I was trying to let him correct an inconsistency that was apparent in my post and deflected in his response. This is not the first time there has been inconsistency in his posts. And we still don't know how he voted for Trump in 2016 while living in Canada? Dual citizenship? I don't know. But he has incensed people around here to the point that some think he is a Russian troll so I don't think I out of line by quoting him dire — Monitor

“Trying to let him correct..”? You were trying to play gotchya, trying to expose him as a liar. Your rephrasing is an attempt to
frame your response as something other than what it is, which is you playing gotchya. Thats very dishonest.
I understand it a subtle dishonesty, but we shouldnt do it. Its bad for discussion, to say nothing of the ethics.

Perhaps you are like NOS and the late Chester and just love to argue for the sake of arguing. — Monitor

Please. Like they are the only people who love to argue in this forum.
Im not interested in arguing, Im interested in people being honest so discourse is productive and interesting.

Please. Like they are the only people who love to argue in this forum.

My preferred pronoun is “he”.

Thats very dishonest. — DingoJones

I'll leave that right where it is. Go ahead and take the last word.

Ok, last word. You shouldnt be dishonest, it ruins discourse and even subtle dishonesty like yours habituates deception until it isnt even noticed as dishonesty anymore.

Lol, well I was referring to you and someone else so individual pronouns aren’t relevant.
Anyway, I didnt mean to speak for you or condescend to you by defending you, its about this clueless, blind dishonesty from way to many people on this forum. Its really starting to annoy me, So much bandwidth is taken up by this back and forth, posturing gotchya shit that it derails what would otherwise be interesting discourse.

I hear ya, but there is a turning back. We can simply cut out the tribalism and superiority poses etc. Again, I'm not making a moral point, but a tactical one. It's not in our interest to play Trump's game with him. Here's the bumper sticker slogan. :-)

Ignore Trump, and embrace his base. — Nuke

Hear hear.

Populism is inherently divisive at it's core, be it right-wing or left-wing. Being against Trump is one thing, but being against the supporters of Trump is totally another. Then you are actually against what democracy is about and what a republic is based on.

When Trump says something ridiculous so as to stay in the headlines, we don't have to feed the beast by playing his game and getting all excited. Example: If I was making a bunch of wild angry claims on the forum you guys would yell at me for a bit, and then you'd get bored and ignore me. Like that.

We all know who Trump is now. There is no educational value in describing him any further. — Nuke

I agree, as I said I think you are making a good point here. I think I can be more clear...
What Im wondering about Is if Trump is being ignored by his opposition, than how do you prevent his empowerment among the people who are not ignoring him? Wouldnt the cult of personality only get stronger?

How do you deal with prejudice? Firstly, the prejudiced need to want to overcome their prejudice.
— praxis

Yea man, that's what I'm trying to discuss. Do we lefties wish to overcome our prejudices? — Nuke

No, only three sentences after this you say the objective is "reaching policy objectives." Can that be achieved by everyone but Trump supporters overcoming their prejudices, and if they're not an obstacle to that objective then why bother? If it's true that "few to none of their [non-Trump supporter] objectives can be reached without lots of Trump voters on board," then the prejudices of Trump supporters might need to be somehow overcome.

Not denying biases on both sides, and personally, I've been working on trying to understand Trump supporters from day one, and studying the situation from various angles.

What Im wondering about Is if Trump is being ignored by his opposition, than how do you prevent his empowerment among the people who are not ignoring him? Wouldnt the cult of personality only get stronger? — DingoJones

One of the things feeding the cult of personality is our demonization of Trump's base. If we insist on calling them things like a "basket of deplorables" then we reap what we sow. I'm not saying we are the entire problem, only that our part of the problem is a factor we can do something about.

If we want to understand Trump voters, we could start by trying to understand ourselves. Why are we clinging to polarization? Why do we so enjoy having an enemy? Why are we so drawn to the endless repetition of superiority poses? These are things we can work on which don't depend on anybody else.

Celebrating a down tick in DEPRESSION-like (weekly) unemployment while ignoring in this very same report that unemployment numbers have gone up for Blacks & Latinos (i.e. Whites enjoyed all job "gains"), tRump fellated himself at a Maine press conference today ...

George [Floyd] is looking down right now, and saying 'This is a great thing that's happening for our country.' This is a great day for him, it's a great day for everybody. … This is a great, great day in terms of equality. — DJT, 6.5.20

DESPICABLE.

RACIST.

CUNT.

:mask: - FDT.

If we want to understand Trump voters, we could start by trying to understand ourselves. Why are we clinging to polarization? Why do we so enjoy having an enemy? Why are we so drawn to the endless repetition of superiority poses? These are things we can work on which don't depend on anybody else. — Nuke

Eric Hoffer, in a book called True Believer, wrote ......extremist cultural movements, whether religious, social, or national, arise when large numbers of frustrated people, believing their own individual lives to be worthless or spoiled, join a movement demanding radical change. But the real attraction for this population is an escape from the self, not a realization of individual hopes: "A mass movement attracts and holds a following not because it can satisfy the desire for self-advancement, but because it can satisfy the passion for self-renunciation"

And, "...when we renounce the self and become part of a compact whole, we not only renounce personal advantage but are also rid of personal responsibility. There is no telling to what extremes of cruelty and ruthlessness a man will go when he is freed from the fears, hesitations, doubts and vague stirrings of decency that go with individual judgment.”

I think this is the primary reason that Trump voters ignore so many faults of the man. They have a power now that they never had before and they want to keep it. The left looks at all the faults that we feel are harmful to all of us, while the Trump voters just want to be part of a winning team. The left feels superior to this position.

Yes, I understand that. Ive been saying that since he got in, you dont have to sell me on any of that. I think I misunderstood what you meant when you said to just ignore Trump. You mean ignore Trump in so far as listening to him will only make it harder to try and relate to his base/followers? Is that right?

I also agree anti-trumpers need to self reflect. The way id put it is they would get more mileage if they admitted their own part in creating the hyper-polarised state of affairs.