Raheem
Well-Known Member
Maybe he's acquiesced to a briefing on "What are nuclear weapons?" I take it as a good sign.
The Trump presidency
- Thread starter brogdale
- Start date
- Status
Maybe he's acquiesced to a briefing on "What are nuclear weapons?" I take it as a good sign.
bimble
floofy
Have a look at Siyanda Mohutsiwa's research. She noticed how young men going online for tips on how to find a girlfriend get recruited to the 'alt right' white nationalist cause. It is a thing.
CrabbedOne
Walking sideways snippily
It's always there but I don't think this was mainly racist. They believe in Obamas un-Americaness as much as US liberals believe transgender bathrooms are an inevitable advance of civilisation.
A lot of this is purely partisan. Obama was a modestly liberal Democrat and therefore instantly illegitimate. Even the rather right wing Clintons were subject to similarly widely shared theories of illegitimacy from day one. Of course this was reflected in the howls of outrage over Bush and the Democrat response to the far more extreme affront of Trump. It all clouds a drift towards authoritarianism well underway under Bush and Obama.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I've often wondered if one of the ways to 'fix' the internet, is to do away with anonymity.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
That comparison doesn't really work. Obama's place of birth is a checkable fact, not an opinion about whether or not a particular thing is good or bad.
I agree totally with CRI, but it's not just because he's black. It's because his mother was a white academic who had a child with a black man, and an African at that, then he grew up in Hawaii, which is barely America, surrounded by academic types. He's a mixed-race intellectual with a funny name and a foreign father. He's already under suspicion - his place of birth is but the detail that confirms it.
CrabbedOne
Walking sideways snippily
A President wanting a reset with Russia isn't new but such things are very complicated. Trump has been unusually supine about it and as you'd expect sensing weakness Putin is currently jabbing him in the chest with missile deployments and an escalation in Ukraine. He's acquired too many Putin fanciers in his team and thought he'd have similar latitude to Putin as President. This isn't like being CEO of a family business, his staff are also inadequate and he's far out of his comfort zone. The Washington Consensus blob ain't having it and here they probably are right.
Trump is an open book: he's terrified. What is he doing threatening to blow up Russian shipping? Because he's not really as impotent as he looks and he sure could, you betcha! But he doesn't want to. There is mounting pressure he stand up to Putin which with a man this frail that could go badly wrong. A trusted advisor has already fallen on his sword for pandering to Moscow. Trump could overreact. He's already made crazed statements that are easy to misinterpret. This whole silly pro-Russian tilt can collapse into conflict as it is basically an oafish playboy's dinner party bragging coming into contact with reality. He'd have been far better off being cagey as he has been with China if he wanted detente. But he had to strike an anti-establishment pose. It looks like he is now is slowly backing down. This is just shit for brains diplomacy; he looks like a bloody fool.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
For some people's versions of "fix", particularly governments, that works well. It doesn't fit any version of "fix" that most people here would support though.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
It was totally racist, reflected in the fact that the majority of the proponents of birtherism where white Southerners.
CrabbedOne
Walking sideways snippily
No you don't get it.
These truthy truths are articles of faith. No contact with academic reality corrects them. And that goes for many GOP chaps with a science PHD as well. It's not an opinion it's a required belief. To even display doubt has become heresy.
No mere piece of paper can change it. It's like a expecting a devout Christian to be convinced that the universe is indifferent by a gibbering Stephen Fry. And if you are watching Fox New or reading Breitbart your fait is constantly reaffirmed.
CRI
Registered Chooser
Yes, I don't think you can compare the two (and imo, any measure that affords basic human rights to those who've been denied them does represent an advance of civilisation.)
It's important not to underestimate how endemic white supremacy is in many quarters in the US. Not that much time has passed since overt segregation was legally enforced (not just the No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs version in Britain,) and the desire among some to return to that "golden age" where black, brown, red and yellow people people (and women, and gays, and disabled people) knew their place and didn't complain. Most know logically that their bigotry is irrational, so they seek out and cling to pseudoscience, way-out theories, factoids and/or religious faith in hopes of creating some plausibility for their views.
So, the argument would go something like this. You can't have a Black president, because Black people are lazy, dishonest, immoral, greedy, volatile, stupid and threatening. When someone like Obama comes along, who defies all those stereotypes, it blows their minds, because it completely undermines everything they believe about the "right ordering" of the world. That's why they've gone to extreme lengths and embraced preposterous arguments to try and delegitimise his presidency. Even his actions or policies that benefited them (e.g. Affordable Care Act) made no difference to their views.
May sound far fetched, but I think some were still so furious at having had to "endure" a Black president, they threw their support behind Trump, who's effectively a poster boy for laziness, dishonesty, immorality, greed, instability, stupidity and threats cause hell, at least he's a white guy. They've nailed their colours to his mast so even as he leads the nation down the swanny and the world quite possibly to war, they're still backing him, even if that means their self-destruction. They really are that furious.
And of course some among them are praying for the rapture, and the more incompetent his leadership, the more likely that will happen, and soon.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Ok, so these truthers would think any birth certificate produced a forgery, for instance, a product of the conspiracy that got Obama elected in the first place? The idea that it's an article of faith does ring true - climate change denial would be another such article. But I would still stand by what I said about the underlying reasons why they have this particular entrenched belief about this particular person.
CRI
Registered Chooser
I caught bits of the "press conference," but I'm no sure I could stomach the whole thing without hella stiff drink. The thing about shooting the Russian ship - he kept saying something like "that's what some people want me to do," but I'm not going to do that. 
At the risk of overusing the word when describing President Trump, it was surreal. Whether he's acting or that really is the real him, he comes across like a bad-tempered kindergartner. I keep waiting for someone to point out this emperor has no clothes.
At the risk of overusing the word when describing President Trump, it was surreal. Whether he's acting or that really is the real him, he comes across like a bad-tempered kindergartner. I keep waiting for someone to point out this emperor has no clothes.
CrabbedOne
Walking sideways snippily
He's had several and he still he still talks about these things like an easily confused eight year old.
Watching Newsnight atm, that Sebastian Gorka being interviewed... Holy fuck. Terrifying.
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
So Harward has turned down the chance to serve as Flynn's successor. What's the real story, doesn't he think it will be an honour?
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I got the idea from the CBC [Canadian Broadcasting Corporation] website policy. Anyone wanting to post a comment following an article has to use their name, not a pseudonym. The tenor of the comments is much changed from sites where there's anonymity.
Also, I wonder if vis a vis governments, there is any real anonymity for internet users? Given what we know about the NSA etc. it would seem anonymity only exists as between users; not with respect to government oversight.
CrabbedOne
Walking sideways snippily
I think it wasn't as simple as that. My sample were mostly coastal Southern Californian.
They did go a bit mental but if Obama had been a tax cutting anti-abortion Republican they'd have supported him. There are limits to racism. I recall the GOP folk I knew being seriously keen on self publicising pizza magnate Herman Cain and his flat tax. It was always taxes that moved them. A shit for brains choice for President but as with Trumpski it did not seem to matter. They were finally reluctant Romney voters.
It's carrying poor folks they really had a problem with not elite black guys like Obama. I've lost touch though I assume they went Trump despite hating really hating Yankees and New Yorker's in particular.
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
No, there's precious little anonymity from government. Interpersonal anonymity is very important though for people who are vulnerable for one reason or another. There are some examples on these very forums. As for newspapers or any other forum, they can make their own rules.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
That's true. I suppose there's no simple answer to some of the problems of the internet. I'm thinking that without anonymity to hide behind, the bullying that exists on the net, ranging in intensity from merely annoying to suicide-inducing, might be less likely if people's real names were attached to their comments. Also with respect to the things we've been considering in this thread: false news etc. Would people be as interested in making things up and putting it on the internet, just to get a reaction or to be amused at the result, if they were using their real names?
The answer may be, that there is no solution for some of these things.
coley
Well-Known Member
Even his most ardent supporters must had at least one 'WTF' moment by now
coley
Well-Known Member
And increasingly what most would call the 'responsible media' (OK, I know I'm stretching it a bit, but by"responsible" I mean not Fox, Briefart etc)
coley
Well-Known Member
True enough, but how much weirder can it get? Makes you ( nearly) nostalgic for the Bush era
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
You'd think so, but I've just seen a FB post to the effect that the reaction to it all is so overheated he must be a shoo-in for 2020.Even his most ardent supporters must had at least one 'WTF' moment by now
coley
Well-Known Member
He's just realised calling a press conference saves his little fingers the bother of tweeting
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
That rally down in Florida is going to be fun. What does he need a rally for? To speak directly to the people, thus bypassing the dishonest media, of course.
CRI
Registered Chooser
I actually think it's the opposite. Back in the day of anonymous message boards, even when things got heated, it never felt "threatening" as such because unless you revealed a lot of personal info, no one knew who you were or where you were. You could dismiss the flamers and trolls as just random jerks.
I don't like Facebook because they push you to use your actual name, and most people put heaps of personal stuff on their accounts. It makes it easy for anyone who wants to mess with your head to do that. I don't "do" social media discussions because it often gets personal (yes, more than here) and I think folks engage with others based on who they are (e.g. age, gender, location) more than what they say.
- Status
Similar threads
