He's got a good point, but he's missing the more important one. He seems to think that the Trump voters were actually affected by any of this stuff he lives amid, that the leftists affected the Trump voter directly. Nah. They only heard about it second hand, and misrepresented. Speaking as someone who actually does talk, every day, with Trump voters - actually does engage and so forth, does not run around labeling them instead of listening to them, and does all that good stuff he seems to think leftists don't do (and in the process, seems to have confused leftists with Clinton supporters) - his central miss is simply taking for granted that discussion and dialogue and labeling and all that are the prerogative of the Left. You want to know who's been labeling, refusing to discuss, preventing people from speaking, enforcing their politically correct language and cowing anyone who objects? The Trump voter and their media world. You want to have a discussion with them? You can't. They aren't listening, and they lack a basis in information for discussion, and they are proud of that. And they are adults - people with agency, responsible for their actions. The idea that it's the Left's responsibility to engage with them, as if they were children, is for starters condescending, and in the second place laughably self-important - you, lefty, are not significant in their lives. You don't even have a communication channel open to them, for you to blow them off through if you did want to. Look, nothing any lefty did is responsible for this tantrum they just threw. They didn't actually acquire these wingnut opinions and obstinate irrationalities and self-destructive denials of reality in reaction to anything any lefty said or did - or anything a Clinton supporter said or did, even. They got all that second and third hand from their sources: Limbaugh, Fox, Hannity, Beck, Coulter, the whole schmear of stank that has been their world of enlightenment since around 1992. And the central situation is that the corporate paymasters of the rightwing media - increasingly, "the media" - have been ripping the Trump voters off since 1980, and blaming the "Left" and the "Liberals" for the damage. Nothing any actual Left or Liberal did is involved - it's all lies and slanders, and it's all the Trump voter knows about the outside world.
Well I talk with trump voters IRL, some of whom are my friends, and their sources are examiner, breitbart, prager, to a higher degree the the usual suspects of low intelligent misinformation (high intelligent misinformation instead). And no it is not our duty to engage with them, rather that is simply what civilized adults humans should do is engage with others in dialogue and discussion even arguments, but calmly and rationally. I would agree that the right-wing media claims that if only we deregulate more and trickle down more then that would fix our economy has been very effective on them, pointing out that we have had decades of trickle down economics now and look where we are at only causes them to apply epicycle logic for why it is not working. But I would also disagree that our behavior on the left has not "triggered" them: the sjw and regressives is all they jabber on about, and yes based on how off the polls were, many of them clearly feared admitting their true opinions until they got into the ballot box.
He was going to end corruption in DC, and he just hired a bunch of corporate lobbyists for his transition team. Con man breaks his promises in 3 days.
Good pont.!!! Then this must be his plan::: Sinse Obama screwed up an some people didnt get to keep ther Doctor... an Obamacare wasnt affordable for some people... the only changes Trump needs to make is gurantee that everbody will get to keep ther Doctor... an make health insurance affordable to everbody... an that will make everbody happy an then it will deserve to be called Trumpcare.!!!
That had nothing to do with any actual behavior by actual people on the left. That was all based on the lies and slanders and deceptions and bs they swim in as their news of the world. Most of the pre-vote polling error seems to have been based on inaccurate calibrations of the likelihood of voting by certain demographic groups. Some of it appears to have been some kind of as yet unexamined problems with the vote tabulation itself. Little or none of it appears to have been fear of admitting their true opinions to pollsters.
Pretty sure it has things to do about actual behavior on the left, unless your redefining who is on the left, you can watch video of these "leftist" triggering the right. Fascinating theory, please present your evidence.
The inaccurate calibration is how such pre-vote polling anomalies almost always happen - it's the standard, first guess, presumptive explanation, known weakness of pre-vote polling, and in this case easily supported (less educated white people voted in higher percentages than anticipated) explanation. The vote tabulation issue arises when comparing the exit poll data with the vote count - there are consistent patterns in the errors, and they are much larger than chance allows. Here's one of several reports: http://tdmsresearch.com/2016/11/10/2016-presidential-election-table/ The lack of voter intimidation is supported by the distribution of the effects - where smaller numbers of Trump voters were voting in the middle of larger majorities of intimidating Clinton supporters, the pre-vote polling was more rather than less accurate. You claimed it was me and people like me who were "the left". It wasn't me or anybody like me who did any of that stuff. Nobody acting like me did any triggering of the right in that fashion. And I don't pay much attention to videos purporting to show large-scale patterns. They are a common constituent of the lies and slanders and deceptions and bs that is responsible for the "triggering" of the Trump crowd. The ease with which Trump voters are led by (triggered by) Trump means that at least for a while - years, maybe - he doesn't have to do anything in particular.
Which ones, the pre-vote? For one thing, because their estimates of likelihood to vote were more accurate. That's always the weak spot in a pre-vote poll. They work in a different State than they vote in? The lack of an intimidation factor was visible at all scales. btw: The lack of an intimidation (or shy, embarrassment, etc) factor is a statistical fact: there are several ways shyness could have existed in the world without registering in the stats. The most obvious way is if Clinton and Trump voters were more or less equivalently suppressed by wariness of some kind, so the differential was washed out. There is some evidence of this. Another way is if the intimidation worked to suppress voting as well as poll preferences. There is no evidence of that. And so forth. No, this is not a disagreement. I'm telling you something. Listen up: You don't get to say that I have been doing things I haven't been doing. You especially don't get to blame me for the consequences of actions I never performed, things I never said, and so forth. It's slander, it's lies, it's bullshit, and you should not do it any more. If you do, I am going to call you on it. Whenever he wants to. Sure. You didn't notice? He just tells some kind of lie, or delivers some kind of outrageous quote, done. Point being: Trump can get by with almost total nonperformance of promised deeds for a long time - years - by jacking his base around, focusing their attention on something else, etc.
I guess so... but its lookin more an more like him or nobody else has a clue what it is Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Again, using conservative logic, it would be welcome to the lower class, welcome to the effects of capitalism. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Do you think its liberals who are the ones most responsible? lol. Oh you want protectionism? You think your middle class status should be assured? Conservatives are all about competition, even cuthroat unless they are on the short end of the stick. They have no compassion or sense of fairness but for themselves. Anyone else asking for consideration when they are on top is chastised as a communist or socialist or unamerican but when they are, its never that because of their sense of entitlement of their own.
What the left does not see is, the vote for Trump was a vote for equality and justice. In the world of the left, if you are (any or all) male, white, Christian, straight, you are considered a sexist, racist, hayseed, with a phobia. Not only does this deplorable demographics have no rights, but all the other groups, opposite you, will get specials rights and freebies. There are women's rights, but if you ask for not men's rights, you are sexist? Much of this has to do with political manipulation by the left. They divided the country by offering freebies to the demographics that vote for them, and then by scapegoating the opposing demographics. The promise of free tuition goes to one of their primary liberal voting blocks; young. This scam is reinforced by the liberal media and liberal Hollywood. A white male has no extra rights, like black lives matter or women's rights, because the liberal sales pitch is he has male and white privilege. This abstraction, justifies no rights and even a liberal shakedown for freebies for their constituency. The white, christian, straight male got sick of being used and abused by the left, and saw Trump as their champion. Trump was not PC from the get go. This made Trump a hopeful leader, since he was not beaten down by nagging PC, which tries to conform limit discussion to their needed narrative. That narrative is white males needed to be treated like second class citizenship, by law, since they are responsible all the woes. This justifies shaking then down for taxes, and displacing them with quotas. This group feels like the dad, who has worked two jobs to help his ungrateful family, who wants more and more. Instead of appreciating his decades of sacrifice, to appease their fears and satisfy their needs, they keep nagging and manipulating him to work a third job, to pay for even more freebies. Electing Trump was dad putting his foot down. All that Trump will do is help create a level playing. The white, male, Chirstian, straight does not want or need freebies. It wants their liberal family not to be so high maintenance and never happy.
I'm on the left wellwisher, and I don't support special rights and freebies, I support equality under the law and equality of services. Take a look at the numbers: At present count in total Trump did not gain any votes over Romney (60.4M vs 60.9M), losing as many "Never-trump" republicans and neocons as he gained in independents and straight white cis christian male voters, the problem was Clinton underperformed compared to Obama (61M vs 65.9M) by ~5 million votes, millions of democrats did not show up to vote for her or voted third party instead. Many of us on the left were sicken by her corruption, and sickened by the regressive left, such that we did not feel like voting democrat or at all this time.
For a lefty, you sure seem to be fond of adopting Republican media spin, memes and slanders and all. You will forgive us our doubts, but "sickened by her corruption?" Uh, no, that's not believable from a lefty. At least not one more than about 13 years old. Clinton's a familiar entity, well known throughout the American Left, and among the less corrupt politicians on the bigtime national scene (certainly less corrupt than any of the major Republican candidates, including the President elect). This may be only because she is and always has been under far more detailed and intrusive scrutiny than others, and has been forced to keep her nose relatively clean, but there may also be a factor of personal integrity involved - it fits the evidence. But I do thank you for a new term - I have no idea how I missed the term "snarl word", but it's now in my lexicon, from your employment of one: "Regressive left?" http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Regressive_left
You and Tiassa both, did you know the Nazis were against smoking, had huge anti-smoking campaigns, I guess not smoking means I'm a Nazi? Hillary Clinton has an extensive list of scandals going back decades, regardless if you believe them or not enough Americans did to not vote for her, and that is what matters! Her unelectability was why I did not vote for her in 2008 and I was right, by 2016 she had more scandals and a FBI investigation on her, and even if you can wave that away it could not be waved away for millions of voting Americans. To make it simple: we should run candidates with the least amount of dirt on them, regardless if you believe that dirt is real or not, because, and this might surprise you, not all Americans think like you. To win we need at least some of the independent voters, and that means we need at least some of people that have agreed with some of decades of republican media spin. You might know this if you ever went out to suburbia and campaigned door to door, farm to farm, and met people all over the political spectrum and tried to convince them to vote for democratic candidates. Aside for voting democrat across the board, I am an elected committee member of my county's democratic party, have personally put hundreds of dollars into this election and dozens of hours campaigning door to door for our candidates included Hillary Clinton, I had grave concerns about her electability, but I shut up, sucked it up, and argued for her personally and repeatedly in person. And yet here you are questioning if I'm liberal enough, well go ahead, since I don't perceive liberalism as a cult like you do, I don't care how liberal you think I am. Rationalwiki ehh? You preference for echo-chambers is showing. By the way have you ever listen to Maajd Nawaz?
Now you are talking as if I and the people like me are the ones who backed Clinton in the first place. You are also talking to me as if I didn't know how my neighbors, relatives, co-workers, and fellow bar patrons thought. Since when is a voter mentally co-opted by Republican media spin for decades "independent"? And since when is this Republican media spin the fault of people like me? You are talking to me as if I could prevent Republican media spin by never giving them anything to use - that's crazy. They are liars, remember? They don't need a reality to work with. Uh, I was handing you the origin of your term, not mine. You're the guy yammering on about the "regressive left" and then telling me I'm part of it, with all my screaming and calling people names. You're the guy who told me I had abandoned economic policy for transgender bathrooms. Look: I'm sorry you got stuck trying to sell the likes of Clinton to a bunch of folks with Republican-spun mental faculties. But it wasn't my fault. And the sooner you realize how it happened, and whose fault it is, the sooner you can begin to focus on the real issues.
His administration does. And they're going to be running this show. Reagan would be the model here. By the time he retired as figurehead, there was an arms/cocaine/money import/export triangle trade being run out of the basement of the White House, to supply terrorism and military coups in South America.
