Donald Trump - MAGAtwat news and discussion

[Wilf]

If the 'people on here being called stupid' was me, I'll happily withdraw that. I didn't say they were stupid, I referred to failing to engage with the article was stupid. Anyway, happy to withdraw that if it gets in the way. Fwiw, I don't think people on here are stupid. However I do think there's a flaw in your analysis if your account of something like a presidential election reduces itself to 'stupid'. It's non-explanation.

 

[emanymton]

And same goes for people calling Trump supporters stupid?

And I've never seen anyone claim otherwise, yet people insist on arguing against a position I don't think anyone has.

 

[Wilf]

I've lived my life, with all the bumps in the road and ended up an anarchist, depressive and all sorts of other ephemera. If I'd lived the life of the people in the article I'd hope I'd ended up as the union organise, but it's just as likely I'd be in the cigarette shop with lots of misdirected anxieties (plus a genuine sense of community and fading social bonds). I think that's the way into this, not by making a judgement on someone's rationality or 'stipidity".

 

[emanymton]

If the 'people on here being called stupid' was me, I'll happily withdraw that. I didn't say they were stupid, I referred to failing to engage with the article was stupid. Anyway, happy to withdraw that if it gets in the way. Fwiw, I don't think people on here are stupid. However I do think there's a flaw in your analysis if your account of something like a presidential election reduces itself to 'stupid'. It's non-explanation.

I think you made a good point when you asked for an explanation of what stupid means as I think there are different interpretations and I think the same is true of its use as as a explanation.

I'm still waiting for an explanation of how the article somehow counters that.

But let's clear a few things up.

I don't think anyone has ever suggested that calling Trump supporters stupid is somehow a way to convince them not to vote for Trump.

No one thinks all Trump supporters are stupid or that their aren't stupid people who didn't vote for Trump.

Yet people seem to act as though people do hold those positions.

I tend to think of it more in the terms of a lack of rational thought and/or being quite heavily discounted from reality. And I think that any analysis that does not account for that that is flawed.

Let's say that Trump does massive damage to the US economy (I'm less convinced that will happen than many myself) and things get noticeable worse for most of those that voted for him. I think the impact that would have on his support levels will be very limited. Given how tight the election was it might be enough to swing the next one in favour of the Democrats. But the vast majority of his supporters will not only not blame him but instead balme some nebulous elite he is fighting against. This is not a rational position and is completely divorced from reality. That article makes me more convinced I am right about this not less.

 

[Wilf]

I think you made a good point when you asked for an explanation of what stupid means as I think there are different interpretations and
I tend to think of it more in the terms of a lack of rational thought and/or being quite heavily discounted from reality. And I think that any analysis that does not account for that that is flawed.

Portraying people as irrational tends towards the view there is a 'rational' position that 'we' can see and 'they' can't. I think the article does a good job of showing how a Trump vote is rational for people in their circumstances, who have lived their lives.

 

[emanymton]

Portraying people as irrational tends towards the view there is a 'rational' position that 'we' can see and 'they' can't. I think the article does a good job of showing how a Trump vote is rational for people in their circumstances, who have lived their lives.

Sure, rational is a relative term, most of the worse we have a loaded in some way.

But I think the article shows why a vote for Trump is irrational for them.

 

[Wilf]

Sure, rational is a relative term, most of the worse we have a loaded in some way.

But I think the article shows why a vote for Trump is irrational for them.

Well, the author laments a Trump win, wishes the people voted otherwise, but gives full recognition and respect to the what and how that brought the voters to that decision. It, literally, tells their stories, brings them into view. Stupid doesn't.

 

[kabbes]

Now you seem to want me to explain the argument I don't understand before you will explain it to me.

Now you’ve got it. A standard technique in conflict resolution. You can’t get anywhere if you don’t even understand what the other side are saying.

 

[Rompipalle]

If there was ever a moment (on this thread) for people who are pushing the 'they are stupid' line, to explain what that means, it would be now. What are the 'stupid' people thinking? How does the decision to vote Trump arise from their experience of life? Where do their negative attitude to the Dems come from?

Because otherwise 'they are stupid' becomes an end of story, a condition, something about them as a sealed off entity with no context. And it's surely not that, is it?

Believing the inane ramblings of a known serial liar, sex offender and convicted criminal whose sole objective has been staying out of jail, is not indicative of much that's clever, well-informed or of having a towering intellect.

 

[lazythursday]

Believing the inane ramblings of a known serial liar, sex offender and convicted criminal whose sole objective has been staying out of jail, is not indicative of much that's clever, well-informed or of having a towering intellect.

You don't have to believe Trump's ramblings to vote for him.

 

[Yossarian]

Any negotiation facilitator will tell you that the first step towards resolution is first to be able to represent the other side’s perspective in your own words. If you can’t do that, you aren’t taking their perspective and any attempt to build bridges will fail.

It is of course possible to articulate an alternative representation to your own. I’m not asking you to agree with it, just to be able to restate it without altering the meaning or caricaturing it in the process.

"Both parties have failed to improve conditions in the Youngstown, Ohio area and with little hope of that changing, I will choose the candidate whose attitudes on issues like immigration and transgender rights most closely resemble my own"

 

[Rompipalle]

You don't have to believe Trump's ramblings to vote for him.

So they would be just as well voting for his opponent then, if they don't wish or need to have any confidence in what they say.

As I say, believing anything that ludicrous creosoted dollop has to say is not particularly wise, so I can only assume that there are people more than happy to be lied to, as long as they get a chance to hoot and holler like maniacs at an orange narcissist on tour.

 

[lazythursday]

So they would be just as well voting for his opponent then, if they don't wish or need to have any confidence in what they say.

As I say, believing anything that ludicrous creosoted dollop has to say is not particularly wise, so I can only assume that there are people more than happy to be lied to, as long as they get a chance to hoot and holler like maniacs at an orange narcissist on tour.

When did you last have full confidence in the person / party you voted for? Clearly if you voted for any of our previous governments you were lied to at some point.

Just because you decide on balance Trump might be the better choice in America's ludicrously limited democracy doesn't mean you are hooting and hollering for him.

And give it a rest with the orange narcissist stuff. What's the point? We all hate Trump here. Insulting him is just yelling into the void.

 

[Rompipalle]

When did you last have full confidence in the person / party you voted for? Clearly if you voted for any of our previous governments you were lied to at some point.

Just because you decide on balance Trump might be the better choice in America's ludicrously limited democracy doesn't mean you are hooting and hollering for him.

And give it a rest with the orange narcissist stuff. What's the point? We all hate Trump here. Insulting him is just yelling into the void.

If you mean Conservative or Labour - no, I have not voted for either party in any election for the past 30+ years.

I'll call Trump what I please, withing the parameters of the forum. He is a self-serving, ignorant oaf who has no interest in anybody or anything that is not directly associated with benefitting himself or his family. He cares not one jot for anyone in the US and will chop and change his stance on any issue on a whim and he will trot out any old shite if he thinks a few people will believe him.

I cannot see why anyone is taken in by him... but they have free will, so I hope they are happy with the failure and disappointment that he will inevitably bring to them.

 

[brogdale]

I cannot see why anyone is taken in by him... but they have free will, so I hope they are happy with the failure and disappointment that he will inevitably bring to them.

I suspect one key reason "why anyone is taken in by him" is because so many of them have, in the past, been taken in by the alternative.

 

[Wilf]

Believing the inane ramblings of a known serial liar, sex offender and convicted criminal whose sole objective has been staying out of jail, is not indicative of much that's clever, well-informed or of having a towering intellect.

Yeah, Trump is a racist, a rapist and plenty of other things. But where does that take us? He's all that, so people who voted for him must be stupid ... and round we go. What comes out of this conversation? What do we understand about US populism? What lessons do the Dems learn?

Oh, and what should all those working class Trump voters think? That they are the deplorables, the stupids?

 

[Elpenor]

I can’t say I think much of the Anti-Trump lot either they’re pretty stupid too

 

[Wilf]

I'll call Trump what I please, withing the parameters of the forum. He is a self-serving, ignorant oaf who has no interest in anybody or anything that is not directly associated with benefitting himself or his family. He cares not one jot for anyone in the US and will chop and change his stance on any issue on a whim and he will trot out any old shite if he thinks a few people will believe him.

I'm not naive enough to think anything done on these boards 'matters" that much, but even so, what's the point of repeated posts saying 'stupid people... orange turd' ?

 

[Rompipalle]

Yeah, Trump is a racist, a rapist and plenty of other things. But where does that take us? He's all that, so people who voted for him must be stupid ... and round we go. What comes out of this conversation? What do we understand about US populism? What lessons do the Dems learn?

Oh, and what should all those working class Trump voters think? That they are the deplorables, the stupids?

Well, I'm not about to praise or congratulate anyone who voted that idiotic clown back into the White House and nor am I likely to change my mind about what he is and what he is likely to fail to deliver to those who voted for him.

Hell, I genrally wouldn't care that much, if it was not the case that what goes on in the US always influences what happens here and in the rest of the world. If it were not for that, I'd say stuff the lot of them - they deserve him.

What I am confident of, however, is that this coming term of office will be just as chaotic, shambolic and ineffectual as his last was.

 

[Rompipalle]

I'm not naive enough to think anything done on these boards 'matters" that much, but even so, what's the point of repeated posts saying 'stupid people... orange turd' ?

Not everything in life always has a point or a purpose.

Sometimes it's just how things come across or a reflection of how one feels.

 

[lazythursday]

If you mean Conservative or Labour - no, I have not voted for either party in any election for the past 30+ years.

I'll call Trump what I please, withing the parameters of the forum. He is a self-serving, ignorant oaf who has no interest in anybody or anything that is not directly associated with benefitting himself or his family. He cares not one jot for anyone in the US and will chop and change his stance on any issue on a whim and he will trot out any old shite if he thinks a few people will believe him.

I cannot see why anyone is taken in by him... but they have free will, so I hope they are happy with the failure and disappointment that he will inevitably bring to them.

Do you think that everyone who voted for Starmer bought into his platform? Clearly not - there will be all sorts of reasons why individuals voted Labour. Often it will have been a negative vote - keeping the Tories out - rather than enthusiasm.

Why can't you see that there will be similar dynamics with Trump's vote? Some passionate supporters, some single issue voters, some voting to shake things up, etc etc. They weren't all 'taken in'

 

[brogdale]

What I am confident of, however, is that this coming term of office will be just as chaotic, shambolic and ineffectual as his last was.

Given the different context of the GoP, the Governing trifecta and the bottomless pit of Musk's money, I don't see quite what your confidence is based on.

 

[kabbes]

Sure, rational is a relative term, most of the worse we have a loaded in some way.

It’s not just a “relative term”, nor is it about the term being “loaded”. Rationality is simply not just one thing. Any given rationality is dependent on starting assumptions. Change the assumptions and you change what is rational. The same argument can thus be rational to one person and irrational to another, purely because they have different starting points.

"Both parties have failed to improve conditions in the Youngstown, Ohio area and with little hope of that changing, I will choose the candidate whose attitudes on issues like immigration and transgender rights most closely resemble my own"

I honestly don’t think that’s it at all. I think that if you think that is their argument then it’s not a surprise that you would think them stupid. I think you need to look at it again with the attempt to really take their perspective rather than your assumptions about what their perspective should or might be.

 

[Elpenor]

I just want to say that I think Trump - the Clementine Ceausescu, the Tropicana Tosspot - is really bad and no one else is clever as me, especially not anyone who voted for him

 

[stavros]

He's now referring to the governor of California as "Gavin Newscum".

This man will soon have access to the world's biggest nuclear arsenal.

 

[Rompipalle]

Do you think that everyone who voted for Starmer bought into his platform? Clearly not - there will be all sorts of reasons why individuals voted Labour. Often it will have been a negative vote - keeping the Tories out - rather than enthusiasm.

Why can't you see that there will be similar dynamics with Trump's vote? Some passionate supporters, some single issue voters, some voting to shake things up, etc etc. They weren't all 'taken in'

I'd have voted for a raccoon if it was the opposition to Trump. I'd be no less disappointed by the outcome.

I do get it that American society has a whole different outlook to here and to many other countries when it comes to choosing a leader but in no realm of comprehension can I grasp why anyone would vote for him. He has no concept whatsoever of the reality of ordinary people's lives because it has never, ever touched him.

Just because he pretends to hear what working class Americans need and want, does not mean that he cares or proposes to do anything about the issues that matter to them. He is a known liar - a very obvious liar, come to that - and I'm afraid that I have a pathological hatred of liars and I cannot see beyond that. I accept that sometimes, campaign promises are not always achievable in the end and these may be later perceived or interpreted as lies... but I will not listen to ludicrous, pie-in-the sky lies and take them seriously.

Trump has his own agenda and he will follow that, and only that. Everything else is just fluff and he will ignore what happens to suit him.

Mark my words.

 

[lazythursday]

I'd have voted for a raccoon if it was the opposition to Trump. I'd be no less disappointed by the outcome.

I do get it that American society has a whole different outlook to here and to many other countries when it comes to choosing a leader but in no realm of comprehension can I grasp why anyone would vote for him. He has no concept whatsoever of the reality of ordinary people's lives because it has never, ever touched him.

Just because he pretends to hear what working class Americans need and want, does not mean that he cares or proposes to do anything about the issues that matter to them. He is a known liar - a very obvious liar, come to that - and I'm afraid that I have a pathological hatred of liars and I cannot see beyond that. I accept that sometimes, campaign promises are not always achievable in the end and these may be later perceived or interpreted as lies... but I will not listen to ludicrous, pie-in-the sky lies and take them seriously.

Trump has his own agenda and he will follow that, and only that. Everything else is just fluff and he will ignore what happens to suit him.

Mark my words.

Yes, we know you despise Trump, I get that. I'm just puzzled by your complete lack of empathy/ understanding / curiosity about Trump's voters. About his appeal. I think it's important to understand what's going on, not just fulminate about how terrible it is. That doesn't get us anywhere.

 

[BigMoaner]

He had a a far clearer message than the dems: tight borders, deporting crims, lower taxes, “ prioritising American needs”. All horseshit of course but a clear message it kind of was. A clear message of difference to what was the “status quo”. The campaign by the dems was pathetic and it my view no wonder the monster walked back in.

 

[emanymton]

I'm not naive enough to think anything done on these boards 'matters" that much, but even so, what's the point of repeated posts saying 'stupid people... orange turd' ?

Hang on a minute.

This conversation started because people where going on about how great an article was at countering that argument. So it doesn't seem fair to accuse people of making repeated posts saying the same stuff when nobody was.

 

[Wilf]

It’s not just a “relative term”, nor is it about the term being “loaded”. Rationality is simply not just one thing. Any given rationality is dependent on starting assumptions. Change the assumptions and you change what is rational. The same argument can thus be rational to one person and irrational to another, purely because they have different starting points.

Absolutely. Rationality all too easily becomes something owned by those with power, with cultural capital, seeking to patronise or just failing to understand. 'Oh, why do all those poor people still smoke'?