Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Donald Trump - MAGAtwat news and discussion

Hmm, not at all suspicious 🤔. For someone so polarising, does this make any sense?

Edited because I forgot to give details. A short piece (around 6 mins) concerning the concerns about the veracity of the election result, with Hakeem Jeffries making some very valid points.

 
Last edited:
Anyway, happened to see this bit of writing from a trans woman living in rural West Virginia today and thought it was really good, here's an extended extract:

A journalist named Edward R Murrow has a quote that floats through my head often enough: “remember that we are not descended from fearful men.”

We queers have a lineage of bravery that simply cannot be argued.

The longer quote from Murrow is actually worth bringing up too, in this context and this moment. He was writing about Senator McCarthy, he was writing against the red scare. “We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men–not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular.”

The idea in that quote is that we must fight McCarthyism, for sure, but also that we ought not to be driven by fear into an age of unreason. We ought not to let fear of one another dominate our lives. For the most part, I want to say this to all of the people who have bought into the propaganda against queer people, especially trans people, of late. But I also want to remind myself of this. We ought not walk in fear, one of another.

I have enemies, to be sure. They’ve sent me photos of my family. They’ve told me they would burn down my house with me inside. But the average person, including the average person here in West Virginia where I live, is not my enemy. I am frustrated–beyond frustrated–to know that an overwhelming majority of my neighbors voted for a president who explicitly spreads hatred against queer people. Yet these people have never made me feel unsafe personally.

I’ve lived in an awful lot of places, and frankly I’ve dealt with far more harassment in cities (coincidentally blue state cities, based on where I’ve lived) than I’ve ever gotten in small towns (often in red states). This isn’t because the countryside is some magical place free from bigotry, but simply because there are fewer people here. If I walk down the street in New York City, I will pass literally thousands of people, so it’s far more likely that someone will say something terrible to me.

My data is also skewed by the fact that I subconsciously expect to be safer in big liberal cities, so I take fewer precautions and dress more provocatively. Where I live, sometimes I “boy mode.” Sometimes I don’t. Some of the people around here know I’m a trans woman, some just think I’m a weird queer man with bangs and earrings (and pickup truck and a Carhartt coat, which helps). No one really gives me shit.

It’s not like you cross the imaginary line from Maryland to West Virginia and suddenly everyone is a different type of person. The people here aren’t, you know, monsters. No matter what horror movies have told you.


The motto you run across most in community defense is “we keep us safe,” and it’s something I believe to the bottom of my soul. I do not have an expectation that the state will keep me safe. Maybe I should be able to have that. It’s nice when there are laws in place telling employers they can’t fire employees for being trans. But even when those laws are in place, it’s damned hard to find a job as a non-passing trans person. (I am lucky personally, because in my field as “anarchist author and podcaster” it’s not a problem.)

There’s a difference between “fault” and “responsibility” that people sometimes struggle with in activist circles. It is not my fault that society sees me as monstrous—that viewing me as monstrous is older than the modern English language. It is not my fault that people struggle to accept me. It is not my fault that trans women are the center of a culture war because we make such a good wedge issue with which to try to divide progressives from liberals.

My own safety and liberation, though, are my own responsibility. No one else (besides a broader community “we” of queers and anarchists and activists) is going to do it for me. If I want to live in a better world, a safer world, I need to accept that that is on me and stop waiting for someone else to save me.

Even anti-discrimination laws, who are they enforced by? The cops? The cops are, famously, not exactly the most accepting of people.

But I, and “we,” are not alone in this fight.

Years before I moved to West Virginia, I came through to try to help out in the fight against mountaintop removal coal mining. I stayed up late one night talking to an old retired union coal miner, a white man named Sid who has sadly since passed on.

He told me a story about fighting against the Vietnam War in the late 60s. He said: “We would stand on one corner with our anti-war signs, and on the other corner were the Black radicals with their anti-racism signs, and on a third corner were the gay folks with their gay rights signs. Then one day we all realized we’d all be stronger if we all stood on the same corner, so we did and we were.”

It was so simple and true. A metaphor and a true story all at once.

He’s also an example of the one of the kinds of person you’ll find in West Virginia, the kind of coal miner who stood with Black and gay activists fifty years ago and was arrested defending the mountains ten years ago, in the autumn of his life.

I’m afraid of what’s coming, but I’m not terrified. I’m aware of the fact that I live in a red state, but I’m not terrified. If we are monsters, then we have claws and we have fangs. If we are monsters, then we can terrify. If we are monsters, then we have friends. If we are monsters, then we have a lineage of power. If we are monsters, we have each other.

Or none of us are monsters, us or them, and we’re all people. Dangerous people.
 
does this make any sense?
We find it useful when people post a little précis of videos. Maybe what to expect if we click the link, how long the video is, what the subject is, what the provenance is.

Eg “Here’s a 5 min video from Newsnight debunking the claim that fluoride in drinking water makes you good at Latin and Tap”.

The reason is that not everyone can watch videos. Some people are at work, for example, or visually impaired, or the format doesn’t suit their neuro spiciness (raises hand), or some other reason. And if it’s long, or some conspiracy nut channel, then people might chose not to watch.

It’s just a wee courtesy we find helps things along.
 
This is going in circles. Yes, Trump is a liar, a rapist, a racist, a fascist, a bizarre clownish buffoon. We know. We agree. Saying that over and over isn’t progressing us any further.

And actually, there’s a lot of things he said he’s going to do that I hope he was a lying about. Or doesn’t get round to.

It’s the next step in your argument that I’m not sure is helpful. The one that says therefore those who voted for him are stupid.

OK, let’s assume you’re right. They are stupid. That’s it: they’re just stupid.

What do you want from us? That we agree they’re stupid? Then what? What is achieved?

I mean, it’s alarming having all those stupid people. And they’re a majority, or at least they’re able to win an election. If our analysis is that stupidity is winning, how do we respond?

That’s one thing to consider. Can we start with that?
Who's trying to achieve anything? I don't actually need anyone to agree with me but I know that I'm not alone in feeling this way.

I happen to believe that voting for Trump was/is stupid but I accept that some other folks don't think that. Yes, it's my opinion but it's as valid as that of someone who thinks it isn't/wasn't stupid to vote for him. I don't care all that much whether anyone agrees with me or not. Faced with the evidence before us, I doubt I'm ever going to change my opinion but I'm not going to be told that I'm wrong when it can't be proven one way or another.

It isn't a competition...

You're right that reiterating all of Trump's shortcomings and crimes does not progress things any but neither does accepting them as if they don't matter all that much. They matter a great deal and those who wish to sweep such issues aside as if they don't matter are simply giving him what he wants - a free run to do exactly what he likes and without repercussions. Hell, it remains to be seen if there are to be any consequences whatsoever for his criminal conduct.

I was under the impression that this was just a place to exchange points of view but being here often just feels like being perpetually browbeaten because some people constantly strive to achieve the perceived "win" - even to the point of being downright abusive. (Not including you in that, incidentally). Sadly, that's what this thread - and some others - feels like much of the time.

I don't like being abused by complete strangers when it is unwarranted and 99% of the time it IS unwarranted. For what it's worth, I also don't like being rude in return but I won't just sit by and have abuse hurled at me without responding, if I feel like doing so.
 
Who's trying to achieve anything? I don't actually need anyone to agree with me but I know that I'm not alone in feeling this way.

I happen to believe that voting for Trump was/is stupid but I accept that some other folks don't think that. Yes, it's my opinion but it's as valid as that of someone who thinks it isn't/wasn't stupid to vote for him. I don't care all that much whether anyone agrees with me or not. Faced with the evidence before us, I doubt I'm ever going to change my opinion but I'm not going to be told that I'm wrong when it can't be proven one way or another.

It isn't a competition...

You're right that reiterating all of Trump's shortcomings and crimes does not progress things any but neither does accepting them as if they don't matter all that much. They matter a great deal and those who wish to sweep such issues aside as if they don't matter are simply giving him what he wants - a free run to do exactly what he likes and without repercussions. Hell, it remains to be seen if there are to be any consequences whatsoever for his criminal conduct.

I was under the impression that this was just a place to exchange points of view but being here often just feels like being perpetually browbeaten because some people constantly strive to achieve the perceived "win" - even to the point of being downright abusive. (Not including you in that, incidentally). Sadly, that's what this thread - and some others - feels like much of the time.

I don't like being abused by complete strangers when it is unwarranted and 99% of the time it IS unwarranted. For what it's worth, I also don't like being rude in return but I won't just sit by and have abuse hurled at me without responding, if I feel like doing so.
I’m not trying to achieve a win. But I do think a discussion amounts to more than everyone saying “Trump’s bad news” a bunch of times. That would get boring very quickly. And very dispiriting.

Don’t you want to explore if there’s anything we can actually do?
 
We find it useful when people post a little précis of videos. Maybe what to expect if we click the link, how long the video is, what the subject is, what the provenance is.

Eg “Here’s a 5 min video from Newsnight debunking the claim that fluoride in drinking water makes you good at Latin and Tap”.

The reason is that not everyone can watch videos. Some people are at work, for example, or visually impaired, or the format doesn’t suit their neuro spiciness (raises hand), or some other reason. And if it’s long, or some conspiracy nut channel, then people might chose not to watch.

It’s just a wee courtesy we find helps things along.
Actually an interesting short video - he's saying that five out of the six (?) swing states returned democrat governors while returning trump as president and he finds that somewhat strange.

There have been questions about how secure the voting software is - produced by a republican company as I recall.
 
Actually an interesting short video - he's saying that five out of the six (?) swing states returned democrat governors while returning trump as president and he finds that somewhat strange.

There have been questions about how secure the voting software is - produced by a republican company as I recall.
Thanks. That’s interesting. Is the source reliable? And is cross ticket voting unusual? (In Scotland it’s quite normal to vote for different parties on the constituency and list votes in the same election. So much so that the SNP in particular tried to get across the message that their voters shouldn’t).
 
Actually an interesting short video - he's saying that five out of the six (?) swing states returned democrat governors while returning trump as president and he finds that somewhat strange.

There have been questions about how secure the voting software is - produced by a republican company as I recall.
Yes, the group of computer experts I mentioned earlier have urged an investigation, as it doesn't add up. The people put in place for running voting in some of these areas have had four years to get the details of the software and possibly tamper with it. Tina Peters is currently sitting in prison for what she did, and they were saying it just doesn't look right.
 
Actually an interesting short video - he's saying that five out of the six (?) swing states returned democrat governors while returning trump as president and he finds that somewhat strange.

There have been questions about how secure the voting software is - produced by a republican company as I recall.
Yeah, that is notable if reliable, but I don't think it necessarily indicates foul play, any more than, say, an area voting for a Labour MP but returning Green councillors means that there's something dodgy going on. I mean, I find it hard to imagine the mindset of someone who'd think "Hmmm, I'm ambivalent about the Republicans in general, and I certainly won't be voting for this particular Governor candidate, but I'll happily vote for Trump himself", but then the world does contain lots and lots of different kids of people.
 
It was a logical argument:

You say that people voted Trump due to stupidity. Therefore if someone votes Trump one time but not another they were stupid for the duration of their Trump vote only.

That does, surely, require further explanation of what a stupid person is. That seems pretty straight forward to me.


Is it not ironic to accuse me of that when in fact you’re literally ad homing millions of voters?
Wait a minute, I never said anything about Trump voters being stupid.
I only called non voters stupid.
I mean, if you can't be bothered to engage in the democracy that was fought for so hard then you are dumb and maybe...
 
Last edited:
Thanks. That’s interesting. Is the source reliable? And is cross ticket voting unusual? (In Scotland it’s quite normal to vote for different parties on the constituency and list votes in the same election. So much so that the SNP in particular tried to get across the message that their voters shouldn’t).
Hakeem Jeffries is the top Dem in the House, and hopefully could topple Johnson as Speaker. I believe another Republican has withdrawn support from her party today, and says she will not caucus with them, (she is a maga loon though, so I don't quite know what she's trying to achieve). It has made the numbers even tighter, and Johnson's role extremely shaky, but that's another issue. Anyway, Jeffries was not accusing but suggesting that the Dems should not be running away from who they are. They got the votes in all of these other positions. Coach D, the commenter, was just discussing the situation, saying it made him think, even though he wants evidence before suggesting fraud. It just does not make sense to me that someone like Trump would be voted for, when these voters went Dem down the ticket.
 
To be fair though, if you voted for Trump because he said he's going to get rid of Obamacare but you thought you are OK because you've got the Affordable Care Act then you are stupid or at the very least, ignorant.
 
Wait a minute, I never said anything about Trump voters being stupid.
I only called non voters stupid.
I mean, if you can't be bothered to engage in the democracy that was fought for so hard then you you are dumb and maybe...
Out of interest, who do you think politicians are most worried about trying to appeal to? Is it the people who they know can be relied on to vote for them whatever happens, or is it the people who do not currently vote for them but might potentially be won over?
 
Wait a minute, I never said anything about Trump voters being stupid.
I only called non voters stupid.
I mean, if you can't be bothered to engage in the democracy that was fought for so hard then you you are dumb and maybe...

So people don't vote because they can't be bothered? All non-voters or just some of them? Might there be other reasons people don't vote?

And is 'engaging in democracy' just about voting?
 
I’m not trying to achieve a win. But I do think a discussion amounts to more than everyone saying “Trump’s bad news” a bunch of times. That would get boring very quickly. And very dispiriting.

Don’t you want to explore if there’s anything we can actually do?
I know you're not.

I'm not sure that there's a whole lot that the wider world CAN do. I appreciate the fact that this is what the people of the US voted for... however, sadly the rest of the world is stuck with him as well, but with no opportunity to do anything about it.

It's galling enough that this has happened at all but it's also the fact that he is inevitably going to get away with his crimes and that he will undoubtedly pardon all the low-life Jan 6 insurgents too. That absolutely stinks and the prospect of another four years of that vile individual's perpetual whining is more than I can countenance.
 
Back
Top Bottom