Reuters Data Dive: The emotional cost of the 2016 election - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;51793724]I honestly thought that stuff was a fairly recent, fringe kind of thing mainly condensed on tumblr. I thought liberals [I]were[/I] classical liberals, with increasing support of a social democratic system. Am I totally off? [B]Is this PC, SJW Internet culture actually representative of 'the left' as a concept now? Does anyone have a good sum-up of what exactly right and left means in modern times?[/B] And also, being 'progressive' and 'open to ideas' does not mean you have to accept blatant sexism, homophobia, etc. You may associate those two words with SJWs now and therefore they feel like watered-down laughable terms, but they are still real things that actually exist and aren't acceptable. To me, being open to ideas means being open to reasoning and willing to discuss and change your mind when presented with logical arguments. When good reasons can't be presented, there's nothing left to do with that idea than to throw it out. And if it is being forced through anyway, then there's nothing left to do than oppose it.[/QUOTE] you answer your own question. if you let those morons become representative of what you believe then where do the proper ideals go?

[QUOTE=Crumpet;51793833]you answer your own question. if you let those morons become representative of what you believe then where do the proper ideals go?[/QUOTE] it's not my job or responsibility to police morons believing in my ideology and morons believing those morons are the only thing within that ideology if someone believes that then it's their own damn fault for not trying to take it easy and actually debate.

[QUOTE=Cructo;51791134]Also, Trump supports LGBT marriage[/QUOTE] "murder is bad, very bad. illegal for a reason!" i say as i unload a gun into a man's head

[QUOTE=mchapra;51793841]it's not my job or responsibility to police morons believing in my ideology and morons believing those morons are the only thing within that ideology if someone believes that then it's their own damn fault for not trying to take it easy and actually debate.[/QUOTE] I mean representative to you. The idiots can believe what they want. I'm talking about people leaving behind their beliefs and leaving to the other side of the spectrum simply because of 'what represents the left as a concept'. I think people who do this were never really committed to their ideals in the first place. The left is still the left, and it still contains all the ideologies it did before.

I've often wondered why I didn't unfriend my anti Trump facebook friends, given that they supported a candidate you would have started [B]literal nuclear war[/B]. They were basically supporting a candidate whose policies would have [B]literally resulted in my death, as well as their own.[/B] I guess the difference between myself and the anti-Trump people is I believe a vote for Clinton was a vote cast on ignorance, whereas the other side sees a vote for Trump as being based on malice. A big complaint about Trump voters is they failed to take into account the interests of minorities, LGBT, women etc... before casting their votes. As such a Trump voter either didn't give a shit about, or was actively hostile to those groups. The problem is it's unreasonable to expect anyone to vote with another groups interests taking priority over their own, it's just human nature. Being morally indignant is pointless because you can't expect anyone who is not gay, for example, to pause and ask themselves "but what will this mean for gay couples?" before they tick the box. I'm not upset that Clinton voters didn't vote with my best interests in mind, I'm upset because they [B]voted against their own best interests[/B]. I can't really see them a malicious or immoral because of that.

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51791268]it's a post with a blanket accusation about how leftist subs are all wait for it divisive do i need to spell out the irony[/QUOTE] also lefty subs generally encompass many leftist ideologies, so people will clash and on top of that, of course the left is going to be angry, what did you expect?, T_D can celebrate because they already won.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51793877] I'm not upset that Clinton voters didn't vote with my best interests in mind, I'm upset because they [B]voted against their own best interests[/B]. I can't really see them a malicious or immoral because of that.[/QUOTE] And Trump voters definitely haven't been voting against their own best interests, right?

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;51793884]And Trump voters definitely haven't been voting against their own best interests, right?[/QUOTE] Even if we assume that Trump has betrayed his supporters in his first few weeks in office, AND that those first weeks a portents of his entire presidency, there is no way you could have expected rural working class whites, as well as anti-PC whites in general to have voted for Clinton. Just because Trump may not have fulfilled everything on their wish list (yet) doesn't mean Hillary was the better candidate for them, even with the benefit of hindsight. Would you tell anti-war liberals that were disappointed by Obama's drone war = interventions that they would have been better of voting for McCain or Romney instead?

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51793903] Just because Trump may not have fulfilled everything on their wish list (yet) doesn't mean Hillary was the better candidate for them, even with the benefit of hindsight.[/QUOTE] I don't know, I think 'not repealing the ACA' might count as a pretty big argument. Especially since a good chunk of Trump's voters are on it. Funny you say that Clinton voters did it out of ignorance, considering how Trump fans fell for what is probably the most transparent, obvious con in history.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51793877]I've often wondered why I didn't unfriend my anti Trump facebook friends, given that they supported a candidate you would have started [B]literal nuclear war[/B]. They were basically supporting a candidate whose policies would have [B]literally resulted in my death, as well as their own.[/B] I guess the difference between myself and the anti-Trump people is I believe a vote for Clinton was a vote cast on ignorance, whereas the other side sees a vote for Trump as being based on malice. A big complaint about Trump voters is they failed to take into account the interests of minorities, LGBT, women etc... before casting their votes. As such a Trump voter either didn't give a shit about, or was actively hostile to those groups. The problem is it's unreasonable to expect anyone to vote with another groups interests taking priority over their own, it's just human nature. Being morally indignant is pointless because you can't expect anyone who is not gay, for example, to pause and ask themselves "but what will this mean for gay couples?" before they tick the box. I'm not upset that Clinton voters didn't vote with my best interests in mind, I'm upset because they [B]voted against their own best interests[/B]. I can't really see them a malicious or immoral because of that.[/QUOTE] got source on that nuclear war thing because the only thing i see is some russian media type blowhard talking out his ass

I find it funny that you would think Clinton supporters are bad people for supporting someone who would """"cause literal nuclear war"""" (I'd love to see your source for that - I've seen sources saying her no air zone in Syria was a bad idea but not something that would end the world) while we know for certain that Trump is going to cause horrendous climate change that if we don't stop will kill us.

So much for """""tolerant"""" left amirite guys? Maybe if I repeat that enough people will stop hating me for being a racist, homophobe and such!

[QUOTE=ImUnstoppable;51793938]So much for """""tolerant"""" left amirite guys? Maybe if I repeat that enough people will stop hating me for being a racist, homophobe and such![/QUOTE] Stop being intolerant to my bigotry! Why can't I be a racist, sexist wankstain without being called out for it?

[QUOTE=ImUnstoppable;51793938]So much for """""tolerant"""" left amirite guys? Maybe if I repeat that enough people will stop hating me for being a racist, homophobe and such![/QUOTE] you cant be intolerant of intolarance, thats retard logic

[QUOTE=bunguer;51793576]Oh really? Quoting Orwell is the icing on the cake. You can stop being friends with anyone you want, just don't pretend to be progressive and open to ideas when you clearly aren't. I hate to post a PragerU but this one is made by Dave Rubin which should be a known name for all the leftists. [/QUOTE] Complete bullshit literally a few seconds in as he engages in some dank dank collectivization that classical liberals are ~~totally against~~. The truth about Ruben is that he's not someone who should be particularly known to leftists. He's a libertarian in leftist clothing whose show mostly exists as a mouth piece for the right. May as well drop the pretense and read some reasonable classical liberal/libertarian philosophy instead. [QUOTE=Whoaly;51793877]I've often wondered why I didn't unfriend my anti Trump facebook friends, given that they supported a candidate you would have started [B]literal nuclear war[/B]. They were basically supporting a candidate whose policies would have [B]literally resulted in my death, as well as their own.[/B] I guess the difference between myself and the anti-Trump people is I believe a vote for Clinton was a vote cast on ignorance, whereas the other side sees a vote for Trump as being based on malice. A big complaint about Trump voters is they failed to take into account the interests of minorities, LGBT, women etc... before casting their votes. As such a Trump voter either didn't give a shit about, or was actively hostile to those groups. The problem is it's unreasonable to expect anyone to vote with another groups interests taking priority over their own, it's just human nature. Being morally indignant is pointless because you can't expect anyone who is not gay, for example, to pause and ask themselves "but what will this mean for gay couples?" before they tick the box. I'm not upset that Clinton voters didn't vote with my best interests in mind, I'm upset because they [B]voted against their own best interests[/B]. I can't really see them a malicious or immoral because of that.[/QUOTE] But I did vote in my own interests? A healthy US economy with free trade and relatively sane economic policy sounds much better to me than the alternative. Additionally I also like not having freedoms stripped away in the name of fighting ISLAAAAAAAAAM, net neutrality is also nice to have, etc.. A vote for Trump was typically based on ignorance and cognitive dissonance.

[QUOTE=ImUnstoppable;51793938]So much for """""tolerant"""" left amirite guys? Maybe if I repeat that enough people will stop hating me for being a racist, homophobe and such![/QUOTE] Well, maybe the left should start actually tolerating things they disagree with or stop calling themselves tolerant.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51793877]I've often wondered why I didn't unfriend my anti Trump facebook friends, given that they supported a candidate you would have started [B]literal nuclear war[/B].[/QUOTE] Please quit this, you can't defend this fear mongering stance and at the same time blankly deflect all the obvious destabilizing actions Trump have taken. We discussed this just a couple of days ago: [QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;51770954]Trump insults Iran, threatens Iran, bans citizens from 7 countries, threatens Mexico with trade war, destabilizes relations with China, government official says war with China is inevitable, Trump calls for a nuclear weapons race, Trump insults several leaders of foreign countries => Opponents are hypocrites who will morph to attack Trump. Clinton wants a no fly zone in Syria => She would 100% for certain have started a nuclear war with Russia. I don't think I can think of anyone with worse reasoning than you.[/QUOTE] You deflected these points with things like [URL=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1551166&p=51771039&viewfull=1#post51771039]"but others have done the same", "yes but that was their fault for overreacting", "it's part of his charm", and "ok I agree that one is concerning"[/URL]. If those points hold up, how about this response to your 'literal nuclear war': She would have negotiated it and compromised or backed down, "I would be surprised if anything horrible truly came of it."

[QUOTE=Sheer Visor;51791005]I can't tell if you're saying I'm racist, or you're joking about how crimes have been covered up because publishing them would be racist. If it's the first - you know what code 291 is right?[/QUOTE] Very nice of you to help propagate this information. I'm undoubtedly sure that you've spent a long time in both Germany and Sweden to give you the insight of the social climate over here.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51793975]Well, maybe the left should start actually tolerating things they disagree with or stop calling themselves tolerant.[/QUOTE] You can't be tolerant and deem bigoted opinions acceptable, see above.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51793975]Well, maybe the left should start actually tolerating things they disagree with or stop calling themselves tolerant.[/QUOTE] Sure, let me consider racism and homophobia as legitimate opinions that are worth considering and worth legitimizing. No wait, let's not.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51793975]Well, maybe the left should start actually tolerating things they disagree with or stop calling themselves tolerant.[/QUOTE] is calling someone racist, sexist or homophobic if they are racist, sexist or homophobic, intolerance?

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51793877]The problem is it's unreasonable to expect anyone to vote with another groups interests taking priority over their own, it's just human nature. Being morally indignant is pointless because you can't expect anyone who is not gay, for example, to pause and ask themselves "but what will this mean for gay couples?" before they tick the box.[/QUOTE] I actually completely disagree with that. You're applying logic that would apply to [I]"should I take this opportunity that I am justified in taking, or pass it to someone else because I'm compassionate?"[/I] - in that case you would be completely 100% justified in acting only for yourself. But in this case, we're talking about someone who promises you something you want, while at the same time hurting other people. Supporting someone who wants to please you but also to hurt others, is ethically wrong. It's the kind of selfish where you're not just looking out for yourself, but also willingly throwing others under the bus for your own gain. That said, I think the lines are blurry, and if this was taken as the all-important factor, it would become difficult to gauge who would 'hurt others' the most. So I don't think this is a strong argument against voting for Trump, I'm just saying the base idea of your argument is wrong. There were much better reasons not to vote for Trump.

[QUOTE=bunguer;51793576]Quoting Orwell is the icing on the cake. You can stop being friends with anyone you want, just don't pretend to be progressive and open to ideas when you clearly aren't.[/QUOTE] That's because it's a sensible and relevant quote to this situation. Again, there's no reason to support either Trump nor the Republicans after everything they've done in the last three weeks, never mind what they're planning on doing in the coming weeks and months. I don't know if you've been living under a rock or something as of late, but we've had Betsy DeVos confirmed as the Secretary of Education when she's not qualified at all for the job (which means they're going to try and sabotage the public education system and push for privatization, because money), we've had serious attempts to repeal the ACA with no replacement plan (which will result in close to 30 million Americans losing their health insurance coverage who were only able to get it thanks to the ACA, along with a host of other problems), there's now moves to abolish the Department of Education (again, they want to sabotage the public education system and force privatization) and the EPA, our national climate change and environmental policies are being overturned for no scientifically-valid reason by right-wing politicians who basically entered D.C. with the fossil fuel industry's cock lodged down their throats in the first place, the Keystone pipeline has been pushed through in spite of the fact it wasn't supposed to be, Trump keeps acting like an inflammatory asshole towards our allies and neighbors and is sabotaging diplomatic relationships that took decades to cultivate... etc. Logically, these people are not a good thing for our country, yet we have no shortage of idiots saying that they are. It's not even a matter of ~personal opinion~ anymore; objectively, these people [i]are ruining[/i] the United States. There is no reason to be tolerant or accept this kind of mass stupidity, not from the politicians themselves nor from the people who elected to put them there and who continue to support them. And if it isn't stupidity, then it has to have some element of maliciousness to it. Again, there's no way when you use actual logic and critical thinking skills to conclude that these people and what they're doing are good/will be good for our country-- unless you either don't actually understand what's going on and what's at stake, or you're a malicious person who stands to personally gain something from all this (or maybe you're just an asshole who wants to see the country degrade itself and doesn't care about the effects this will have). I'm a perfectly progressive and open-minded person. I'm just not so open-minded that I'm willing to let my fucking brains fall out, which is what people like you would want.

-snip-

[QUOTE=_Axel;51793996]You can't be tolerant and deem bigoted opinions acceptable, see above.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]tol·er·ance ˈtäl(ə)rəns noun 1. the ability or willingness to tolerate something, [B]in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.[/B][/QUOTE] It has nothing to do with deeming anything acceptable. You can deem something unacceptable, but still tolerate it. [QUOTE=Crumpet;51794007]is calling someone racist, sexist or homophobic if they are racist, sexist or homophobic, intolerance?[/QUOTE] No, that's just calling it like it is.

[QUOTE=bunguer;51794075]I find it laughable to see so many types of comments like this, it's not like repeating this insanity makes it more truthful. I have been on FP for many years, yet I rarely see any post that can be deemed homophobic, racist or sexist. In fact, the few times it happens, a lot of people are quick to call them off, people from all sides of the political spectrum. I understand and know that people like that do exist, especially outside of FP. Nonetheless, in what can only be described as a very hypocritical action, many of the righteous enjoy spouting this type of comment and generalize an entire group of people because of the actions of the few. Does an Hillary supporter shares all the viewpoints of her platform? I sure as hope not. Redirect your anger to Trump and the specific policies you do not agree with, protest them on the streets and demand better candidates from the DNC. Politics are not just identity politics, which seems to be all what people enjoy debating lately. Find better candidates and people will support them, there's a reason Trump got the least amount of approval rating. People who voted for him might also disagree with many of his decisions. Lastly, stop thinking all the decisions and personal beliefs can be encompassed through a vote in one of the worst election cycles ever.[/QUOTE] But people aren't talking about anyone on FP. They were responding to this: [QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51793975]Well, maybe the left should start actually tolerating things they disagree with or stop calling themselves tolerant.[/QUOTE] because of how that comment is [quote]a very hypocritical action, many of the righteous enjoy spouting this type of comment and generalize an entire group of people because of the actions of the few.[/quote]

[QUOTE=bunguer;51794075]Nonetheless, in what can only be described as a very hypocritical action, many of the righteous enjoy spouting this type of comment and generalize an entire group of people because of the actions of the few.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=bunguer;51794075]Politics are not just identity politics, which seems to be all what people enjoy debating lately.[/QUOTE] You should get off Tumblr, most people don't do this. You're the one generalizing here. The post you're quoting wasn't even calling anyone a homophobe, which you seem to be implying. I will say, calling Trump a homophobe and a sexist is probably the weakest critiques of him. I don't think he actually hates them, he just doesn't care about them. Because of that, those words in that context are buzzwords, when the real argument would be that his [I]actions[/I] are [I]harmful[/I] to homosexuals and women. Calling his supporters those things, I agree is wrong. But there's still many reasons to oppose their action to vote for Trump.

-snip-

[QUOTE=bunguer;51794146]Do entertain me, if a person who voted for Trump protests, for instance, this travel ban decision, does that cause a paradoxical situation? [/QUOTE] Unless they protested the fact that it managed to ban green card holders and failed to ban many important Muslim countries, I would certainly think it paradoxical for someone to protest their own candidate for doing something he loudly and repeatedly promised to do.

[QUOTE=bunguer;51794146]Are we now actually debating that Republican supporters constantly receive accusations of being homophobic, racist or sexist? If you truly are arguing that position, it seems trivial to refute it with a couple of searches, you don't even need to leave this thread. If you are not arguing that position then it also seems trivial to understand how hypocritical it is to assume that just because you voted for Trump you not only share [B]all[/B] of his viewpoints but that you are also bigoted. Do entertain me, if a person who voted for Trump protests, for instance, this travel ban decision, does that cause a paradoxical situation? Then why assume people are incapable disagreeing with multiple points of said platform? [/QUOTE] what are you talking about and how did you extrapolate any of that from my post? you quoted a bunch of posts that were in response to a dumb generalisation. [editline]8th February 2017[/editline] I think you're misunderstanding the points that people are trying to make. Apply what you are saying to 'the tolerant left should stop being intolerant'.