Trumpmageddon

Started by Stupot, Wed 09/11/2016 08:21:56

Previous topic - Next topic

Jack

Quote from: Stupot+ on Fri 11/11/2016 00:03:42
I personally don't, either. Could you please teach me?

I feel like an ass for being all suggestive now that you asked so nicely. I can't. Not now. It's just another theory anyway.

Ryan Timothy B

Quote from: Adeel on Thu 10/11/2016 22:55:07
Now, I wonder why would immigrants (Muslims or Non-Muslims) vote for Trump?
Because she's a woman.

LimpingFish

Quote from: Radiant on Thu 10/11/2016 16:17:29
Reality check: https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656

See, this is the bigger problem with electing Trump. It legitimizes this type of behavior in the minds of the brain-dead, racist, fuck-wit part of America. All the things they were told were wrong (racism, sexism, homophobia, violence) must actually be a-okay, if the president agrees with you. Similar "Day 1" reports surfaced during the aftermath of Brexit, with elements of white Britain becoming very vocal to those they took to be foreign interlopers. In their minds, when they voted for Brexit, it had nothing to do with EU rulings or self-governance. It was about getting the filthy darkies out of their nice, white country.

To anyone who voted for Trump: This is the America you voted for. You can legitimize your reasons for not voting for Clinton, but in the end you pledged your support to a racist bigot, and to an America that's openly hostile to non-whites, women, gay people, Muslims, etc. There's no way around it. This will be your legacy.

Frankly, Clinton could've been sending arms to IS, via a caravan of shoe-less, migrant children, and she still wouldn't have done as much damage as Trump will, regardless of his future actions.
Steam: LimpingFish
PSN: LFishRoller
XB: TheActualLimpingFish
Spotify: LimpingFish

Snarky

Quote from: Jack on Thu 10/11/2016 22:09:27It seems to be happening right now.

Civil war.

Yeah, keep making this prediction. Shows your grasp of US reality.

Take a look back at the sixties and early seventies, where you had the draft sending young people to die in a war they didn't want, civil rights marches, protests and riots, lynchings and other white supremacist violence often supported by state governments, the National Guard sent in to impose government decree that states refused, police riots at the Democratic convention, college occupations and killings of student protesters, explicitly revolutionary groups like the Black Panther Party and communist parties gaining considerable support, groups like the Weathermen conducting anti-government terror campaigns, a list of political assassinations including JFK, MLK, Malcolm X and RFK, and the president implicated in a massive illegal conspiracy and forced to resign. It makes current unrest pale by comparison, yet it'd be a massive stretch to claim the US was on the brink of civil war.

The only scenario in which a civil war is remotely plausible is some constitutional crisis where the legitimacy of the government is in serious question and factions split to take different sides. Admittedly such a scenario becomes orders of magnitude less far-fetched under a President Trump (it all involves Trump doing something that threatens the safety or freedom of the United States, e.g. suspending the Supreme Court or launching nukes, and other parts of government trying to stop him), but it's still immensely unlikely.

dactylopus

Quote from: Gurok on Fri 11/11/2016 01:09:25
I heard one reporter say they were voting against Hillary because she, unlike other women heads of state, wouldn't have got there on her own. They feel she'd have got there because she was Bill's wife. I can understand that you wouldn't want the rule to be "any woman can be president as long has her husband is first", but I don't know if it would set a precedent. I think it was also partly an anti-establishment vote. There is nothing special about women that precludes them distrusting the establishment.

True, but when your choice is to vote for either the establishment, experienced woman versus the anti-establishment, inexperienced misogynist, one would think there's a clear winner.  What's more important to these women?  I guess voting against the establishment is more important than their own rights as human beings.  I guess voting for a hateful rapist is more important than someone who can actually identify with you and the struggles of all American women.


Danvzare

A little off-topic here, but why was this thread called Trumpmageddon rather than Trumpocalypse?
I think the latter rolls off the tongue so much better.

Quote from: Ryan Timoothy on Fri 11/11/2016 02:02:05
Quote from: Adeel on Thu 10/11/2016 22:55:07
Now, I wonder why would immigrants (Muslims or Non-Muslims) vote for Trump?
Because she's a woman.
Ha ha ha! (laugh)
Oh this thread has given me so many laughs already.

Speaking of which, I wonder how everyone would have reacted if Clinton had been elected. Would there have been a Clintonmageddon thread? ???
I seriously wonder how the latest South Park episode would have gone as well.

Mandle

#87
On the topic of why women voted against Clinton:

I remember a survey from some time ago asking american women if they would vote for a female president and, suprisingly, about 60%-70% said they would not...

And the biggest reason given was that they would not trust a woman to run their country.

I remember comments like "I'm a woman and I know I often react emotionally rather than logically when I make many choices, and I would not trust someone doing that to run my country."

I don't know if this way of thinking still applies today amongst 60%-70% of american women, and I'm not saying either that the emotional vs logical thing they were saying is in any way correct...

I'm just quoting from memory of what the survey turned up in it's findings:

At the time of the survey it seemed that a majority of american women would rather place their trust in a male figure of authority...A father figure perhaps? I don't know...

And also:

Quote from: Jack on Fri 11/11/2016 11:20:24


Is it just me or:



Is that Sheldon and Leonard back in the '70's? Vampires confirmed?

Adeel

See, the problem with the 'intellectuals' here is that they are apparently too intelligent for the lesser intelligent, dumber people like me to even give a straight answer. Perhaps it's too much to ask the honest opinions of the both sides. Or perhaps I'm unable to convey my sincerity to listen to the opinions of the both sides.

What we know for sure is that many people still voted for the Trump, despite belonging to the the very group(s) which Trump targeted. What we don't know is why they did so. Such is almost always the case with the history: We don't debate on what happened, nor we debate on what people did; instead we debate on what were they thinking at the time when they did (or didn't do) something.

So please, spare me your lame jokes and snide remarks if you don't wish to contribute to the discussion. Not gonna mention the names here, they know who they are.

dactylopus

Quote from: Adeel on Fri 11/11/2016 16:50:36
See, the problem with the 'intellectuals' here is that they are apparently too intelligent for the lesser intelligent, dumber people like me to even give a straight answer. Perhaps it's too much to ask the honest opinions of the both sides. Or perhaps I'm unable to convey my sincerity to listen to the opinions of the both sides.

What we know for sure is that many people still voted for the Trump, despite belonging to the the very group(s) which Trump targeted. What we don't know is why they did so. Such is almost always the case with the history: We don't debate on what happened, nor we debate on what people did; instead we debate on what were they thinking at the time when they did (or didn't do) something.

So please, spare me your lame jokes and snide remarks if you don't wish to contribute to the discussion. Not gonna mention the names here, they know who they are.

I would personally love to know what misguided reasons Trump supporters had (those that weren't just like him, anyways).  I can't think of a valid reason, but I'd love to hear them.  I've heard some, and I can't fathom how those reasons make him any less of a terrible choice of the available candidates.  Then again, I admittedly see this in black & white.


RickJ


Cassiebsg

#92
Quote from: Danvzare on Fri 11/11/2016 11:45:52
A little off-topic here, but why was this thread called Trumpmageddon rather than Trumpocalypse?

Continuity of this topic: http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=53683.0
And funny enough, we're having the "exact" same discussion now than we did a couple months ago...

Quote from: Radiant
    Reality check: https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656
And that this was unfortunately something I was expecting to see (though hoping to be wrong). :~(


Quote from: Danvzare
I seriously wonder how the latest South Park episode would have gone as well.

Actually I checked the day before the election, and the episode that is now called "Oh Jeez" was called "The first first man" (or something to that effect, clearly indicating that even they were expecting Hillary to win...)
There are those who believe that life here began out there...


Cuiki

Yeah, I'm also kind of surprised at all the political correctness radiating from this thread.
Just for the record, I think the guy is a delusional jerk who should never end up becoming president, but what can you do.

Quote from: Ali on Thu 10/11/2016 04:00:35
I am disappointed to see people using the term SJW on these forums. On the internet, of all places.

Social JUSTICE Warrior. If that sounds like a bad thing to you, you should strongly reconsider.
'Social justice warrior' is a sarcastic expression. Arguing why anyone sees it as a bad thing is like arguing why 'smartass' isn't a compliment. I wanted to reply to this bit earlier, but I didn't want to be labeled as a "racist misogynist" who should strongly reconsider. :tongue:

I think this satirical sketch, or whatever it may be, could offer an interesting point of view to everyone who's completely baffled by Trump's supporters.
(Be warned though, it's really offensive and full of swearing.)
Hmm..it's kinda steep. But with a sled I can slide down the slope.

Scavenger

Quote from: Cuiki on Sat 12/11/2016 01:40:46
Yeah, I'm also kind of surprised at all the political correctness radiating from this thread.

"Political Correctness"? You realise that that phrase has overwhelmingly been used by the extreme/alt right to refer to "treating people like human beings with respect", right? Saying it is using an incredibly loaded term - you'll have to explain what exactly you mean by it. What exactly do you consider "politically correct" in this thread?

Quote from: Cuiki on Sat 12/11/2016 01:40:46
'Social justice warrior' is a sarcastic expression. Arguing why anyone sees it as a bad thing is like arguing why 'smartass' isn't a compliment. I wanted to reply to this bit earlier, but I didn't want to be labeled as a "racist misogynist" who should strongly reconsider. :tongue:

Again, "SJW" is used by the extreme/alt right to refer to "anyone left of me". It's also an incredibly loaded term - I've seen it refer to pretty much anyone who says "Hey, maybe we should be accepting of minorities". It's now connected with Social Justice in general, too. So people have been defanging it by just accepting and taking up the label in an ironic manner. Like I'm trying to protect marginalised folk from fascism, I'm clearly a PC SJW.

I've already explained why people would be so angry, to the point of protest, at Trump being elected, and how dangerous it would be to legitimise his presidency, so the original meaning of Social Justice Warrior - someone who uses social justice causes to pick fights, is not really what people mean when they use it anymore. And even then, you have to be careful - what you could consider as just "campaigning for no reason" might actually have a reason you haven't paid attention to.

So, considering the context in which these phrases are used in the current political climate, maybe it isn't too wise to bandy them about. They are INCREDIBLY politically charged, and wrapped up in so much... stuff... that it's difficult to discern what someone means when they use it. You just have to be clearer and not use the fancy catchphrases.

Cuiki

I'm sorry, Scavenger. I kind of wanted to specifically mention none of this was directed at you. I hope you're doing alright, wherever you are right now.

I agree it's a shame that political correctness and SJW came to mean what they mean today, and I probably shouldn't be using these terms so casually. It's just that I think it's hard for a number of people to keep track of what's okay to say and think and what isn't, and they can get frustrated to the point where they're altogether put off defending a cause they might have defended in the past.

What I meant by political correctness, personally, was things like Ali saying that Jack shouldn't use the word female when refering to Hillary being corrupt. I mean, I get it's a label, and her gender shouldn't have anything to do with being corrupt, but from a pragmatic point of view, someone who demonizes such labeling could do more harm than someone who casually uses it. Don't get me wrong Ali, I am definitely on your side in the bigger picture, but maybe it's not just people like me who should be more careful with their words.
Hmm..it's kinda steep. But with a sled I can slide down the slope.

RickJ

#97
Well here's a link that should explain some things.  He's got an English accent so what he says must be true :-D.  Have fun and hysteria watching.
https://youtu.be/1d9lm-T87AQ
[edit] and  here a comment from the above video
QuoteBigGScotland1 day ago
I was genuinely scared a few months back about a Donald Trump presidency and what it would mean for the world. That was until I thought to myself "Why the fuck am I scared, I have no idea what the guy stands for and haven't heard him speak other than what the media has shown me". So that night I started doing research and was blown away that he stood for many things I agreed with and that the media's golden girl was utterly corrupt. The media and Hollywood have obviously took over these people's minds with Trump hate and they are too stubborn to accept that he might actually be good for America. I know I'm Scottish so I shouldn't really comment but that's just my view of the situation.

Scavenger

Quote from: Cuiki on Sat 12/11/2016 02:59:00
I'm sorry, Scavenger. I kind of wanted to specifically mention none of this was directed at you. I hope you're doing alright, wherever you are right now.

It's fine, I just wanted to make sure you were making yourself clear, especially with something as delicate as this. I'm not angry at you or anything!

Quote from: RickJ on Sat 12/11/2016 03:09:39
Well here's a link that should explain some things.  He's got an English accent so what he says must be true :-D.  Have fun and hysteria watching.
https://youtu.be/1d9lm-T87AQ

Could we get why you voted in your own words, and why you thought that throwing all of us under the bus was worth it? I don't want to sit through yet another snide white british antifeminist ranter's meanderings. And honestly, it's not making your case to link to a guy who has like "CRAZY FEMINIST BLOWN THE FUCK OUT" and "THIS IS WHAT A SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIOR LOOKS LIKE" with a thumbnail of a fat lady as most of his videos. Like, joy, the use of stereotypes is alive and well in that guy.

Radiant

Quote from: Cuiki on Sat 12/11/2016 01:40:46I think this satirical sketch, or whatever it may be, could offer an interesting point of view to everyone who's completely baffled by Trump's supporters.
(Be warned though, it's really offensive and full of swearing.)

I endorse this video.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk