One year since Trump's election

[HiGirlsRHot]

Well the one thing I thought she had over Trump was stability.

Now I have no idea what to make of things. Impeach him? Lock her up? He has gone up a little in my view, her way way down. So down, unbelievably down...

I like Rand Paul, Trey Gowdy, and Tulsi Gabbard at the moment.

All the fake news outlets can go to hell. Fox actually had the Uranium One story debunked in the morning, pushed again in the evening. Unreal.

This is confusing, why is your opinion of Hillary way down? Sure she wrote of book blaming lots of folks for her loss. But that is pretty much par for the course for Hillary. At one point she blamed all the women coming forward about sex (consensual and forced) with Bill Clinton on the vast right wing conspiracy, instead of her husband being a sexual predator. But as you said Hillary is stable, nothing she has done post-election is out of character.

I guess stability can boring at times, but for the President of the US, it is pretty fucking important, unless you enjoy waking up every day wondering what crazy shit thing Trump tweeted for the day, and searching for the near bomb shelter, so we can play Fallout in real life.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

This is confusing, why is your opinion of Hillary way down? Sure she wrote of book blaming lots of folks for her loss. But that is pretty much par for the course for Hillary. At one point she blamed all the women coming forward about sex (consensual and forced) with Bill Clinton on the vast right wing conspiracy, instead of her husband being a sexual predator. But as you said Hillary is stable, nothing she has done post-election is out of character.

Because I have watched pretty much every speech and interview she has given since the election. Forgive me for sounding Alex Jones-ish here, but she has a reptilian quality to her (no I don't mean alien). She may beat Trump in stability (i.e. PC) department, but I don't believe she is much more honest (if at all).

Because @Kitsune said something during the election, and I thought it was a dumb conspiracy theory, and it turned out to be true.

Because another conspiracy theory (she was sick) was ridiculed by her press machine (move along, nothing to see here), but Donna Brazille came out and not only made the same claim, but brought up Seth Rich. "He was a patriot. And I hope to God we find out who murdered Seth Rich.”

Because it appears that her campaign may have done the same thing to the Department of Justice that Elizabeth Warren and Donna Brazile claim she did with the DNC.

Meh, loose associations. Probly just coincidence.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

I'm more upset over not enough people voting than those who voted. The Millennial turnout rate was shitty compared to the Silent generation, and they're old as fuck and still went to vote.

I feel really guilty for not voting but I was going through a bad health thing that day and didn't have access to transportation.
I agree that just showing ID should be enough to vote. I hated registering to vote and having to decide whether I'd put myself as a Democrat or not. I didnt, because I still see myself as Independent.

I'm super active now, kind of in a way where I'm seeking redemption for not being politically responsible (staying well informed, refusing bandwagons, contributing however much I can through $/voice.

Low turnout is almost always the case for those at the younger age spectrum of eligible voters. I think Obama was the only President to have such a high turnout of younger voters.

Don't beat yourself up too much about missing an election day. It happens due to circumstances such as you experienced, which is out of your control. I do admire your tenacity for being a voter. Wish more people had similar, as we'd have seen different election turnouts over the years.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Early voting helps those with health issues, disabilities or just work for asshole that won't excuse them from work to go vote.
Absentee have been around for decades. Again it helps homebound citizens and is the only way out military serving overseas to protect us can vote. You surely don't advocate the opinion that those risking their lives defending our freedom lose their right to vote because they chose to serve do you?
I don't believe the electronic machines are secure enough. I remember the old "voting booth" where you pulled the lever for who you supported. However all types of voting methods are able to be changed by those that want to. It's been happening for centuries.

I understand that removing absentee/early ballots can remove a person's ability to vote early. But, there has to be a better way. There are large numbers of occurrences election staff "misplacing" or "forgetting" early voter ballots in the trunks of their cars, forgotten in an office, etc.
Yes, any voting method can be subject to tampering. Some just typically are more susceptible than others.

 

[dilligaf0]

I understand that removing absentee/early ballots can remove a person's ability to vote early. But, there has to be a better way. There are large numbers of occurrences election staff "misplacing" or "forgetting" early voter ballots in the trunks of their cars, forgotten in an office, etc.
Yes, any voting method can be subject to tampering. Some just typically are more susceptible than others.

Regarding absentee voting:
No sarcasm intended (although it probably will sound that way) but I don't know of a better way. We can't say "Hey guys, stop your wars and terrorism for a few days so our soldiers can come home to vote". Nobody wants to be inconvenienced by helping those that need help to get to the polls to vote on election day.
If you have a better solution, I'd love to hear it because I can't think of one.
Regarding regular (non-absentee ballot) voting:
I do agree we need better solutions, but for the life of me I can't think of one that's foolproof.
We can't have someone show I.D. and be recorded as voting for specific candidates. That goes against the whole "voting by secret ballot" thing the founders wanted. That also opens up the can of worms of "intimidation" to vote a certain way.

 

[Val Vega]

So what are you doing about the problem?

You just gonna bitch about it without providing any solutions?

I do stuff about it all the time. I'm extremely politically active. And if any Nazis/KKK demonstrate anywhere near here, they're going to be in for a world of fucking hurt.

There is a difference between civil disagreement, and making comments which are hate speech. Replace the group mentioned with ones such as LGBT/Gay/Black/Oriental/Christian/etc. and it is no different. Or, are we going to say that hate speech doesn't apply to all, much like some made comments early on that you can't discriminate against white people?

Hate speech, regardless of the group mentioned, is hate speech. Just like discriminatory comments, regardless of the demographics, it's directed at, is discrimination. If we start picking and choosing what is acceptable against certain groups, are we any different than those who say similar to whatever demographics one is trying to protect/stand up for?

It's extremely different. How can you lump in any of those groups with Nazis/KKK? You do realize one side calls for genocide of the other and the others are just trying to live, right? There's no such thing as hate speech against Nazis and the KKK. That's ridiculous. Are you seriously going to prop them up as victims in this whole mess?

Just like Charlie said, all of you that are siding with Nazis/KKK are basically creating this false bogeyman to justify doing so. You are totally ignoring reality and the experiences of the people that are affected by the rise of these groups. You damn well better believe I'm going to react violently when I feel my existence and the existence of those I care for is being threatened. That's a reaction to violence from groups that are calling for people like me to be killed or cast off from society. The key word here is REACTION. There would be no need for a reaction were it not for actions being taken against me or those I care about.

 

[Val Vega]

Because I have watched pretty much every speech and interview she has given since the election. Forgive me for sounding Alex Jones-ish here, but she has a reptilian quality to her (no I don't mean alien). She may beat Trump in stability (i.e. PC) department, but I don't believe she is much more honest (if at all).

Because @Kitsune said something during the election, and I thought it was a dumb conspiracy theory, and it turned out to be true.

Because another conspiracy theory (she was sick) was ridiculed by her press machine (move along, nothing to see here), but Donna Brazille came out and not only made the same claim, but brought up Seth Rich. "He was a patriot. And I hope to God we find out who murdered Seth Rich.”

Are you seriously going to bring up the Seth Rich scandal, which is the fucking definition of fake news? Even his parents have come out against any of the incredibly stupid allegations regarding his death. Donna Brazile is the definition of a political hack. She has come out on all sides of this to get her name out there. And her most recent interview with ABC she stated there was no rigging in the DNC.

 

[heybarkeep]

Can't help but feel that the decline of the left will continue, almost unrecognized and mostly self inflicted. I get that crisis precipitate change. Had just naively always assumed that the change would be for the better. I'm probably putting way too much importance on perception but many that choose to wave the liberal flag have lost any qualities that make the party appealing. Qualities replaced by efforts to one up the other side with hate mongering and childish name calling. Self imposed isolation. Totalitarian mindsets. Us versus them amplified to cliche levels. Willful paranoia. Delusional fear. Irrational and misplaced anger. I don't blame any younger people that are just gaining the privilege to vote for feeling general apathy or even disdain for the people that represent the party. Those disillusioned will continue to feel vindicated by the choice to abandon the increasingly unstable ship. What will be left then? Obnoxious and unlikable loudmouths that have no appeal and a few outliers unwilling to speak against the undesirables now perceived as representatives of the party.

Mostly joking here but I sometimes wonder if some psy ops type shit has been going on for a while now. Like people are being paid to call themselves liberals and being told to make the party appear as repulsive and hypocritical as possible. Seriously, how does the Republican candidate win without pandering, at all really, to the God fearing types? Wasn't shocked by Trump winning. Any willing to brave the treacherous terrain outside of their cozy safe space saw the writing on the wall. Was surprised he did it without a bunch of religious rhetoric. I knew they would likely vote for him due to loyalty or allegiance anyway but was still surprised how little effort was there to insure the Jesus crowd. The left had become so unappealing and, as much as I hate to use this word in a non mocking manner, toxic, in perception to many, maybe he felt it was just unnecessary. Why bother when you can just sit back and watch the left engage in autosarcophagy.

I hope those on the left are able to take a long hard look in the mirror and are willing to take the necessary steps to becoming more universally appealing. I'm aware that my posts on this topic have a gloomy and melodramatic tone to them. I'm also aware that I'm probably nuts for placing so much importance on perception but unless things change, hard not to predict more victories by default for Republicans. Which sounds really fucking boring if you ask me. Soon enough they might even have respectable candidates.

 

[Val Vega]

It baffles me seeing people still acting like HRC would have been similar or worse than Trump. His entire first year in office has been one disaster after the other. And he has worked entirely against the American people in every avenue of his administration. From trying to take away healthcare, to killing DACA, to trying to pass a tax bill that would represent a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich, to the entirely politically-motivated trans military ban, to staffing government agencies with people fundamentally against their existence, so on and so forth.

 

[JoleneBrody]

I was 14 in 2007. Most people I know who support Trump are about my age. So, that's why. We were kids too busy smoking pot and being teenagers to realize what a difference he made.

Yeah that makes sense for the youngsters. I had a house swept up in the mortgage crisis, so it's seared into my brain.

 

[heybarkeep]

Anyone who votes for or supports Roy Moore deserves a few punches though.

Would like to believe that we can all agree on this one. Willing to engage in fisticuffs any who feel differently.

 

[JoleneBrody]

There is a difference between civil disagreement, and making comments which are hate speech. Replace the group mentioned with ones such as LGBT/Gay/Black/Oriental/Christian/etc. and it is no different. Or, are we going to say that hate speech doesn't apply to all, much like some made comments early on that you can't discriminate against white people?

Hate speech, regardless of the group mentioned, is hate speech. Just like discriminatory comments, regardless of the demographics, it's directed at, is discrimination. If we start picking and choosing what is acceptable against certain groups, are we any different than those who say similar to whatever demographics one is trying to protect/stand up for?

Oriental?

 

[Val Vega]

Oriental?

Is it really surprising someone like him would say something like that considering his stances here? I'm sure that's not the only slur he uses daily.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

Are you seriously going to bring up the Seth Rich scandal, which is the fucking definition of fake news? Even his parents have come out against any of the incredibly stupid allegations regarding his death. Donna Brazile is the definition of a political hack. She has come out on all sides of this to get her name out there. And her most recent interview with ABC she stated there was no rigging in the DNC.

Well, no. I pretty much wrote Seth Rich off as a conspiracy a while back. Donna Brazile bringing it up is something I have been weighing, and I am aware of the fact it may be a publicity stunt. She may have done it to encourage conspiracies, I don't know. Open mind. But here is the thing; one of these "conspiracies" came true last year. One that I had completely written off.

Mostly joking here but I sometimes wonder if some psy ops type shit has been going on for a while now. Like people are being paid to call themselves liberals and being told to make the party appear as repulsive and hypocritical as possible. Seriously, how does the Republican candidate win without pandering, at all really, to the God fearing types? Wasn't shocked by Trump winning. Any willing to brave the treacherous terrain outside of their cozy safe space saw the writing on the wall. Was surprised he did it without a bunch of religious rhetoric. I knew they would likely vote for him due to loyalty or allegiance anyway but was still surprised how little effort was there to insure the Jesus crowd. The left had become so unappealing and, as much as I hate to use this word in a non mocking manner, toxic, in perception to many, maybe he felt it was just unnecessary. Why bother when you can just sit back and watch the left engage in autosarcophagy.

I hope those on the left are able to take a long hard look in the mirror and are willing to take the necessary steps to becoming more universally appealing. I'm aware that my posts on this topic have a gloomy and melodramatic tone to them. I'm also aware that I'm probably nuts for placing so much importance on perception but unless things change, hard not to predict more victories by default for Republicans. Which sounds really fucking boring if you ask me. Soon enough they might even have respectable candidates.

Sir, you saved me a lot of writing. Keep that in mind if you watch this video. In fact, every video. And every TV channel. And every blog/news site you read.

 

[Val Vega]

Wearing a MAGA hat is tantamount to saying you support racism and homophobia. No different than wearing a swastika or white hood. You better be prepared for whatever happens to you.

 

[Val Vega]

Also, Blaire White is the fucking Milo Yiannopoulos of trans women. A fucking conservative hack that makes overtures to the conservative base for fame and fortune. I guarantee-fucking-tee that piece of shit was out there goading people. That's Blaire's entire shtick. She's the token fucking tranny of the conservative movement.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

Also, Blaire White is the fucking Milo Yiannopoulos of trans women. A fucking conservative hack that makes overtures to the conservative base for fame and fortune. I guarantee-fucking-tee that piece of shit was out there goading people. That's Blaire's entire shtick. She's the token fucking tranny of the conservative movement.

Not a real tranny? Wouldn't surprise me.

A question; are you?

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Regarding absentee voting:
No sarcasm intended (although it probably will sound that way) but I don't know of a better way. We can't say "Hey guys, stop your wars and terrorism for a few days so our soldiers can come home to vote". Nobody wants to be inconvenienced by helping those that need help to get to the polls to vote on election day.
If you have a better solution, I'd love to hear it because I can't think of one.

No sarcasm taken, as this is a serious matter to me as well. I wat to ensure those serving overseas are able to exercise their vote, the same as citizens stateside can. Whether they exercise that right, is up to them.

One of the things I thought of was to have ballots and voting booths setup for states/jurisdictions, or swap out whenever for groups of voters from similar regions of the US. It would be difficult to do the first couple of times. But, I think it would allow them to vote at that time, instead of beforehand. Then, the results can be sent the same as they are during normal elections.
It would take a lot of coordination, and may not work that well the first time or two. But, for those on a base, it might actually be a better option. For those in the field or forward deploy, still thinking on it.

Regarding regular (non-absentee ballot) voting:
I do agree we need better solutions, but for the life of me I can't think of one that's foolproof.
We can't have someone show I.D. and be recorded as voting for specific candidates. That goes against the whole "voting by secret ballot" thing the founders wanted. That also opens up the can of worms of "intimidation" to vote a certain way.

I believe in showing proof of who you are when you walk in the door. You have to point and sign your name on a dotted line saying that's you as it currently stands. This just ensures you are who you are. But, under no circumstance should a ballot be associated with the ID of a voter.

 

[heybarkeep]

Wearing a MAGA hat is tantamount to saying you support racism and homophobia. No different than wearing a swastika or white hood. You better be prepared for whatever happens to you.

Most people will stop taking you serious when you make idiotic statements like this. Still, it is your right as an American I suppose.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

 

[Val Vega]

Not a real tranny? Wouldn't surprise me.

A question; are you?

What are you even getting at here?

Most people will stop taking you serious when you make idiotic statements like this. Still, it is your right as an American I suppose.

If you cannot see how profoundly racist and homophobic Trump and his administration are and the connotations of wearing a MAGA hat in relation to that, you're either woefully naive or you're content to ignore reality and push an agenda. The MAGA hat is a symbol of oppression.

 

[Val Vega]

So you're to cite a single token instance of inclusion as somehow being representative of the whole thing? That's like saying Trump is an ally to the LGBT because he held that rainbow cloth. The words and actions of him, his government, and his base speak much more loudly.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Wearing a MAGA hat is tantamount to saying you support racism and homophobia. No different than wearing a swastika or white hood. You better be prepared for whatever happens to you.

So, you're saying that harrassment is acceptable?




You would be mad as fucking hell if the roles were reversed, and the harrassers were doing this to you.

You better be prepared for whatever happens to you.

"Whatever happens to you" huh? Harrassment, or worse, physical violence is never acceptable. If it turns violent, those perpetrators who turned it violent need to be willing to accept the consequences. Whatever they may be.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

What are you even getting at here?

I am saying that if a token transgender is important in the identity politics game, a transgender agent provocateur is every bit as important.

So you're to cite a single token instance of inclusion as somehow being representative of the whole thing? That's like saying Trump is an ally to the LGBT because he held that rainbow cloth. The words and actions of him, his government, and his base speak much more loudly.

I am showing you a little snapshot. That's all. Interpret it as it suits you.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Is it really surprising someone like him would say something like that considering his stances here? I'm sure that's not the only slur he uses daily.

What are my stances, and please show proof to support your claims.

 

[heybarkeep]

If you cannot see how profoundly racist and homophobic Trump and his administration are and the connotations of wearing a MAGA hat in relation to that, you're either woefully naive or you're content to ignore reality and push an agenda. The MAGA hat is a symbol of oppression.

If you say so. I'd argue that the comparison was insane hyperbole and was almost insulting to those who have faced real oppression by those sporting real symbols of hate but fuck it, let's play make believe and pretend that a dumb hat is now oppressing people. Totally rational. I will inform all the little old ladies and goobers with no fashion sense that they are oppressing people with their symbol of hate. They most likely don't hate or see it that way but why be rational or reasonable when being angry and dumb is so much more fun.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Wearing a MAGA hat is tantamount to saying you support racism and homophobia. No different than wearing a swastika or white hood. You better be prepared for whatever happens to you.

No, it does not. It means they supported Trump, while it true that many Trump supporters are racist, homophobic, or xenophobic, I know plenty of people who voted for the guy that aren't. There is also big difference between the casual racist and nazi and clansman. People have every right to walk the streets without fear of being assaulted in the same way Trans people do. Although I'd say they should expect lots of people to say Trump is a disaster.

 

[JickyJuly]

For those of you who've cited Hillary's negatives in this thread as a positive for Trump, does that make you feel any better about his presidency for real? I mean, couldn't we just find decent humans to take part in government? The she did this so he's fine argument doesn't even work when you're a kid. Why are we accepting that for highly paid government workers? Pointing out how crappy the other side is in order to defend our own disgusting candidate is not what politics is meant to be.

I've been clicking around seeing folks defend Roy Moore by pointing out the ills of a few Dems, and it's bizarre. Like, how are we not all on the same page that the stink of sexual assault on someone should make them disqualified? Let's get those Dems out of office not use them as an excuse to put a new sleazebag in. And, while we're at it, let's put an asterisk next to every President with a pussy grabbing past and start expecting people who want to be in politics to at least meet the criteria for not being a complete trash human. There are still enough good people in this country to not let rapists and child molesters run things. Not to derail. I think it's worth discussion since Trump and Clinton would both be presidents with an asterisk.

 

[Val Vega]

So, you're saying that harrassment is acceptable?




You would be mad as fucking hell if the roles were reversed, and the harrassers were doing this to you.



"Whatever happens to you" huh? Harrassment, or worse, physical violence is never acceptable. If it turns violent, those perpetrators who turned it violent need to be willing to accept the consequences. Whatever they may be.

Harassment of racists? Yes, absolutely. I really love how how you're trying to paint racists as victims here. No one is telling them to be bigots. They were not born bigots. They chose to be bigots. They are the ones choosing to exercise speech and behavior that marginalizes others. There's nothing legitimate about their stances. Like I said, it is easy to sit there when you're not the one being regularly attacked by these people for simply existing. You can choose to be a coward or a sympathizer that enables their bigotry. Others are not afforded the luxury of being able to be complacent around them.

I've been getting beaten up, maligned, and made into a pariah ever since I was a kid for being a "faggot." And then I got beat up, maligned, and made into a pariah against for being a "Tranny." I'm not going to sit around and take it. I'm not going to let people around me paint these people as victims. They're predators that attack the marginalized and when finally confronted, they try to act like victims for having the violence they perpetrate on others thrust back against them.

I am saying that if a token transgender is important in the identity politics game, a transgender agent provocateur is every bit as important.

I am showing you a little snapshot. That's all. Interpret it as it suits you.

"Identity politics" is just a way for conservatives to catalogue and dismiss legitimate grievances. If anything, the biggest proponents of identity politics are conservatives who only believe in one identity: white, cis, and Christian.

No, you trying to paint a narrative that is opposite of reality.

What are my stances, and please show proof to support your claims.

You have made your stances clear. You think racial minorities and the LGBT defending themselves against the KKK/Nazi are just as bad as them. That's your stance.

If you say so. I'd argue that the comparison was insane hyperbole and was almost insulting to those who have faced real oppression by those sporting real symbols of hate but fuck it, let's play make believe and pretend that a dumb hat is now oppressing people. Totally rational. I will inform all the little old ladies and goobers with no fashion sense that they are oppressing people with their symbol of hate. They most likely don't hate or see it that way but why be rational or reasonable when being angry and dumb is so much more fun.

Now you're trying to frame what real oppression is to me? A transgender sex working atheist from the South. You don't think I can recognize what is and isn't a symbol of oppression?

Old little ladies and "goobers", as you call them, were right there opposing civil rights and trampling gays for decades. Just because they're frail old fucks now doesn't change who they are or were.

 

[Val Vega]

No, it does not. It means they supported Trump, while it true that many Trump supporters are racist, homophobic, or xenophobic, I know plenty of people who voted for the guy that aren't. There is also big difference between the casual racist and nazi and clansman. People have every right to walk the streets without fear of being assaulted in the same way Trans people do. Although I'd say they should expect lots of people to say Trump is a disaster.

That's like someone supporting the rise of Hitler saying "Oh, I didn't really care about his stance on the Jews. I just cared about his policies on economics." You can't have one without the other. It's total bullshit. Don't even fucking go there.