Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

How do you identify politically


How would you describe your political views?  

207 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

 

 

 

Seems several posters have taken offense to the use of the term 'mob'.  Mob psychology is a branch of social psychology which explains the ways in which the psychology of a crowd differs from and interacts with that of the individuals.  It is a word that is used by professionals who study the group behavior.  Now that word is offensive.  But other racially charged terms like 'white privilege' coined by far-left elitists, no one in here can understand how that could possibly be offensive.  Weird, but not weird.  

"White Privilege" is a psychological term as well and is studied a lot (I think it needs to be studied more though) by psychologists and sociologists.  You even linked to a study.  And you CONTINUE to throw out false narratives like the bold.  It's not weird at all...it's what you do.  

And to point out the obvious, none of the posters seem to be offended by your comments at all.  They are simply saying they don't believe your opinions to be true.  Again, a significant difference that you continue to conflate to fit your opinion of this place.  To what end?  I'll never know.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Captain Cranks said:

How would you rate the dismissiveness and condescension in this post relative to the examples you're always complaining about? 

About a 0 out of 10. It is not an enlargement dismissing your point of view, it is an argument about the lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy.   Now your post a half way up this page ranks much higher on the dismissiveness scale where you say.

Quote

 

We are in the age of Trumpism where four star generals and Intel briefings are to be ignored in favor of the gut instincts of an inexperienced president with no military background or expertise. 

One solution is for some of us to lower our standards of debate.  Normally I wouldn't value an opinion if it's not supported by logic, reason, or facts.  But perhaps I just need to accept "You just feel that way because you hate Trump" or "fake news" as a legitimate counterarguments. 

The board would get along better if it went something like this:

- Hey, I think it's disgusting that Trump retweeted a video of a man yelling, "White Power!"

- Oh, you're just crying because you hate Trump.  Everything he does is wrong in your eyes.

- Got me there.  Awesome counterpoint.  You win. Let's discuss something else now. 

 

Here you are implying Trump supporters are ignorant and racist and not worthy of having a discussion with.  That is dismissive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Commish said:

"White Privilege" is a psychological term as well and is studied a lot (I think it needs to be studied more though) by psychologists and sociologists.  You even linked to a study.  And you CONTINUE to throw out false narratives like the bold.  It's not weird at all...it's what you do.  

And to point out the obvious, none of the posters seem to be offended by your comments at all.  They are simply saying they don't believe your opinions to be true.  Again, a significant difference that you continue to conflate to fit your opinion of this place.  To what end?  I'll never know.

I think 'white privilege' needs to be thrown in the trash bin with other racist rhetoric.  As far as the bolded, you misspelled 'spot on'.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I think 'white privilege' needs to be thrown in the trash bin with other racist rhetoric.  As far as the bolded, you misspelled 'spot on'.  

It's factually false.  Perhaps you think this because you were introduced to it via politics.  I can't help what lens you choose to view this topic through.  You seem to think there is only one.  You've been lied to.  There are multiple.  There's legit discussion to be had if you choose to turn from the nonsense and go that route.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, The Commish said:

I'm not as optimistic as you guys.  I don't think it just "snaps back".  I mean, this place still can't let go of "but Obama" and he was just your average politician.....I'm pretty confident this place is going to be "but Trump" for a really long time...not to mention "anti-whichever politicians enabled him" for a long time.  From a moral perspective it's going to be a long road to hoe.  I DO think, should the GOP actually get back to legislating, that might give this place something to focus on rather than the individuals in office.  That's another large piece of this puzzle IMO.  When you give the collective legislation to focus on, there's generally pretty good discussion.  So far, the only thing provided in that area that impacts any of us directly was the tax bill which turned out exactly as we predicted it would.  

Oh the hypocrites that repeated for months and months that "obama isn't in office this is all on trump" are going to be the loudest "But trump" guys.  That's pretty much a given.

But I was talking more about almost any political discussion. Take guns, abortion or something similar.  The supposedly right leaning anti Trump guys here almost always side with the left in most of these discussions.  And that has nothing to do with Trump, Obama, Biden, or anyone else.  At least they will lose their "but trump" excuse in those discussions in January but I just don't see all these right leaning posters here.  The board skews way left not just anti-Trump.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

About a 0 out of 10. It is not an enlargement dismissing your point of view, it is an argument about the lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy.   Now your post a half way up this page ranks much higher on the dismissiveness scale where you say.

Here you are implying Trump supporters are ignorant and racist and not worthy of having a discussion with.  That is dismissive.

Sometimes I think you're teaching a psychology lesson on projection.  I mean, seriously, you and GB love to cry foul at the same stuff you constantly do yourselves.  Show some sort of introspection and humility.  I'm not perfect and know I'm not without sin on these boards, but never do I see you or others say, 'yeah, my bad there, I could have done better.'  It's the same posture you all have when it comes to Trump.  Rarely, if ever, is there an acceptance that what he did was wrong, incompetent, or unlawful.  

As far as your last sentence, you're either not getting my point or you're twisting it to fit your narrative.  I'm saying that we make a statement about something that should be universally agreed upon, but insteand the response is, "oh, you just feel that way because you hate Trump."  No, I feel that way because it should be universally accepted that tweeting a video of a man shouting "White Power" is a horrible thing for the president to have done.  So if someone can't agree to that pretty simple reaction and instead puts the blame on our apparent hatred of Trump, yeah, there's no conversation that needs to take place.     

 

  

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Captain Cranks said:

Sometimes I think you're teaching a psychology lesson on projection.  I mean, seriously, you and GB love to cry foul at the same stuff you constantly do yourselves.  Show some sort of introspection and humility.  I'm not perfect and know I'm not without sin on these boards, but never do I see you or others say, 'yeah, my bad there, I could have done better.'  It's the same posture you all have when it comes to Trump.  Rarely, if ever, is there an acceptance that what he did was wrong, incompetent, or unlawful.  

As far as your last sentence, you're either not getting my point or you're twisting it to fit your narrative.  I'm saying that we make a statement about something that should be universally agreed upon, but insteand the response is, "oh, you just feel that way because you hate Trump."  No, I feel that way because it should be universally accepted that tweeting a video of a man shouting "White Power" is a horrible thing for the president to have done.  So if someone can't agree to that pretty simple reaction and instead puts the blame on our apparent hatred of Trump, yeah, there's no conversation that needs to take place.     

Just FYI, i don't support Trump and am highly critical of him.  I might defend him from unsupported attacks like collusion with the Russians, but i find his rheoric and most his policies horrible.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

I guess to me "echo chamber" is more insidious than what goes around here.  To me that means you only seek out views that are the same as yours and only want to hear views that are the same as yours.   Just because these boards are majority liberal, that doesn't = echo chamber.  

Again. Disagree there. But that's cool. It's really a moot point as I don't envision this changing at all. That's how these things work. 

And for sure, everyone in this situation will naturally deny it. That too is just how it works. 

Edited by Joe Bryant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jon_mx said:

Just FYI, i don't support Trump and am highly critical of him.  I might defend him from unsupported attacks like collusion with the Russians, but i find his rheoric and most his policies horrible.  

I understand and I'm not thinking of you when using the "you just hate Trump" example.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

3.38% of the people polled said in this poll they were Pro Trump. That is exactly what I would have expected here. I'm not sure why this is in question. 

Are you saying posters are lying in the poll?

Absolutely posters are lying in the poll.  Only 6 answered "pro-Trump".  There are easily 20 posters on this forum that support every word that's ever come out of his mouth.  Granted, some of those may be aliases for when the primary account is suspended, but I assume we should count those too.

  • Thanks 3
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

Again. Disagree there. But that's cool. It's really a mute point as I don't envision this changing at all. That's how these things work. 

And for sure, everyone in this situation will naturally deny it. That too is just how it works. 

*moot

Sorry, English major.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Absolutely posters are lying in the poll.  Only 6 answered "pro-Trump".  There are easily 20 posters on this forum that support every word that's ever come out of his mouth.  Granted, some of those may be aliases for when the primary account is suspended, but I assume we should count those too.

Interesting. Thanks.

Do you have a theory or explanation on why you think posters would lie on an anonymous internet poll?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Commish said:

I'm not as optimistic as you guys.  I don't think it just "snaps back".  I mean, this place still can't let go of "but Obama" and he was just your average politician.....I'm pretty confident this place is going to be "but Trump" for a really long time...not to mention "anti-whichever politicians enabled him" for a long time.  From a moral perspective it's going to be a long road to hoe.  I DO think, should the GOP actually get back to legislating, that might give this place something to focus on rather than the individuals in office.  That's another large piece of this puzzle IMO.  When you give the collective legislation to focus on, there's generally pretty good discussion.  So far, the only thing provided in that area that impacts any of us directly was the tax bill which turned out exactly as we predicted it would.  

I'd agree. I don't expect it to bounce back at all. I think we're set with what we have for a while. :shrug: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jon_mx said:

 

 

 

Seems several posters have taken offense to the use of the term 'mob'.  Mob psychology is a branch of social psychology which explains the ways in which the psychology of a crowd differs from and interacts with that of the individuals.  It is a word that is used by professionals who study the group behavior.  Now that word is offensive.  But other racially charged terms like 'white privilege' coined by far-left elitists, no one in here can understand how that could possibly be offensive.  Weird, but not weird.  

I took no offense...I was not offended.  I just commented that talk like that is not what leads to anything productive.

Who is throwing around "white privilege" to talk about posters though?  Id guess its brought up less by the "left" on here, than it is by those on the right railing against it...and Im pretty sure few here are "far-left elitists"...yet more words that do nothing to lead to productive conversation.  Because the mob talk was being used to describe posters here...who here is the far left elitist?

Strange to try to compare the two really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Absolutely posters are lying in the poll.  Only 6 answered "pro-Trump".  There are easily 20 posters on this forum that support every word that's ever come out of his mouth.  Granted, some of those may be aliases for when the primary account is suspended, but I assume we should count those too.

Didn't you just chastise me for being saying something you considered a hyperbole (liberals exclusively are the ones who shout down people on campus)?  I kind of doubt there is a single poster who believes EVERY word out of Trump's mouth, let alone 20.  

  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Leroy Hoard said:

Polls are rarely accurate. That fact does not have an expiration date.

3.77% of the people who voted here said they were pro Trump. We're back up to rounding up to 4%. 

That feels right to me based on years of reading the forum.

But you seem to think that number is wrong for some reason. What's your opinion on what the real number is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Commish said:

I'm not as optimistic as you guys.  I don't think it just "snaps back".  I mean, this place still can't let go of "but Obama" and he was just your average politician.....I'm pretty confident this place is going to be "but Trump" for a really long time...not to mention "anti-whichever politicians enabled him" for a long time.  From a moral perspective it's going to be a long road to hoe.  I DO think, should the GOP actually get back to legislating, that might give this place something to focus on rather than the individuals in office.  That's another large piece of this puzzle IMO.  When you give the collective legislation to focus on, there's generally pretty good discussion.  So far, the only thing provided in that area that impacts any of us directly was the tax bill which turned out exactly as we predicted it would.  

Spot on here.  There is going to be a period of having to undo some of what was done.  It also is going to depend on how those on congress react (and where the senate sits after the election).  If the GOP holds the lead in the Senate still and proclaims they will do what they can to stop Biden...then the animosity will most certainly continue.  Its not just conservative vs. liberal.  Its how things are done that have mattered and will continue to matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

Spot on here.  There is going to be a period of having to undo some of what was done.  It also is going to depend on how those on congress react (and where the senate sits after the election).  If the GOP holds the lead in the Senate still and proclaims they will do what they can to stop Biden...then the animosity will most certainly continue.  Its not just conservative vs. liberal.  Its how things are done that have mattered and will continue to matter.

I don't mean that. I'm talking about the forum. If Biden wins as I expect him to (I'm voting for him), I expect the handful of Trump voters to be totally run out.

I'm afraid it will be ugly if the forum is still here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

Interesting. Thanks.

Do you have a theory or explanation on why you think posters would lie on an anonymous internet poll?

A few reasons.

I think that group relies on the "treated unfairly" label and needs it to be true.

I also think that group is, generally, not particularly capable of self-reflection and may honestly believe they are "independent" or "neither pro nor anti-Trump".  28 votes for neither pro nor anti?  That's not realistic, and I think you know that.

I get that you're trying to be fair to what you see as the minority here, but I think you've gone well past the point of bending over backwards to be fair.

  • Thanks 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

About a 0 out of 10. It is not an enlargement dismissing your point of view, it is an argument about the lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy.   Now your post a half way up this page ranks much higher on the dismissiveness scale where you say.

Here you are implying Trump supporters are ignorant and racist and not worthy of having a discussion with.  That is dismissive.

Literally nothing in that quote implied supporters were ignorant and racist.  Seriously...none of it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Didn't you just chastise me for being saying something you considered a hyperbole (liberals exclusively are the ones who shout down people on campus)?  I kind of doubt there is a single poster who believes EVERY word out of Trump's mouth, let alone 20.  

Fair enough.  The "every word" bit is an exaggeration.  The 20 posters is not.  I'd be happy to name 20 if specifics are required, but I think that might get me suspended.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

I took no offense...I was not offended.  I just commented that talk like that is not what leads to anything productive.

Who is throwing around "white privilege" to talk about posters though?  Id guess its brought up less by the "left" on here, than it is by those on the right railing against it...and Im pretty sure few here are "far-left elitists"...yet more words that do nothing to lead to productive conversation.  Because the mob talk was being used to describe posters here...who here is the far left elitist?

Strange to try to compare the two really.

Peggy McIntosh is the far-left elitist who brought the term into prominence.  Now you are offended by the word offended.  Whatever you want to call it, using terms like 'white privilege' only serves to widen division very similar to how you feel about my use of mob.  

Edited by jon_mx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I don't mean that. I'm talking about the forum. If Biden wins as I expect him to (I'm voting for him), I expect the handful of Trump voters to be totally run out.

I'm afraid it will be ugly if the forum is still here. 

I think quite a few Biden supporters will leave if Trump wins. One poster has already said that he will be "spiking the football" when Trump wins and doesn't care if he does get a timeout. Another poster has said he is keeping track of posts that he views as arrogant/over confident to quote when Trump wins. 

Unfortunately this is a no one win situation here. There is going to be an exodus of posters no matter who wins this November. 

Edited by msudaisy26
  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Literally nothing in that quote implied supporters were ignorant and racist.  Seriously...none of it.

The whole post was repulsive on what it implied.  I am not surprised you do not see that, nor will you ever.  

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

I think quite a few Biden supporters will leave if Trump wins. One poster has already said that he will be "spiking the football" when Trump wins and doesn't care if he does get a timeout. Another poster has said he is keeping track of posts that he views as arrogant/over confident to quote when Trump wins. 

Unfortunately this is a no one win situation here. There is going to be an exodus of posters no matter who wins this November. 

In fairness, this is always the case in a POTUS election year.  Activity in this forum ramps way up in general, then declines after.  Sure, Trump probably exacerbates that, but it's normal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Oh the hypocrites that repeated for months and months that "obama isn't in office this is all on trump" are going to be the loudest "But trump" guys.  That's pretty much a given.

But I was talking more about almost any political discussion. Take guns, abortion or something similar.  The supposedly right leaning anti Trump guys here almost always side with the left in most of these discussions.  And that has nothing to do with Trump, Obama, Biden, or anyone else.  At least they will lose their "but trump" excuse in those discussions in January but I just don't see all these right leaning posters here.  The board skews way left not just anti-Trump.

In my view, there is definitely a left tilt in terms of perceived morality.  As I said before, if we ever get back to a point where we actually discuss legislation from "the right" vs "the left" and not just feelings and emotions, I think we'll see a change.  Taking an example that you list here, guns.  I think it's a perfect example actually.  We have a country where over 80% agree there needs to be some reform.  On this forum, where we lack any actual legislative response to the Dem proposals, we are left with emotion and opinion only.  That's the problem IMO.  Dig in and see where compromise can be found in background checks, closing sales loopholes etc.  That's not what's happening at a federal level.  The Dems will propose legislation and the GOP simply says, "nope, we don't agree" and the conversation is over.  That behavior is the same you see here.  The same thing can be said about healthcare.  

So, if we aren't having discussions and negotiations on legislation, what's left?  The only thing left is the morality of it all.  The problem there is THAT discussion is even MORE personal.  That's another division and it allows for the "if you're not totally with me, you're totally against me" stuff to breed and spread.  I am no exception in this.  I've made it abundantly clear that I'd rather vote for someone I agree with morally and disagree with completely politically than a person I think is morally bankrupt who I agree with 100% politically.  So, yeah, I can see why there is a perceived slant.  Being completely honest, I have no interest defending anything Trump even if I agree with the 10,000 level goal he wants to accomplish.  The morality of it all comes first to me.  I have to be given at least a thinly veiled sense that it's for the good of the people and not the individual.  :lol:   A good example is immigration reform...

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I don't mean that. I'm talking about the forum. If Biden wins as I expect him to (I'm voting for him), I expect the handful of Trump voters to be totally run out.

I'm afraid it will be ugly if the forum is still here. 

I can understand that fear...I hope we would be better...and again I think it all depends on reaction by some.

I think people will earn some well deserved bannings if they push such a thing going after posters.  (and we have seen posters talking about bookmarking posts for if Trump wins that they want to throw it in the face of people against him as well).  We saw it for a while talking about liberal tears and how great it is watching videos from the 2016 election.  I think we are a very divided country and a large amount of people are going to get nasty.  Which side depends on which way the election goes.  I also feel here and even in my own personal life there are those that are vocal that are mostly a bit of schtick...liking to get under the skin of "liberals".  Those seem to be much less mean spirited with some of their stuff.  Others are all in...Donald is great, and are so against any liberal...liberal almost used as a slam to call someone (similar to people calling someone a Trumper or any other form of that).  Hope the forum is still there...I think if we can all be better and talk to each other better its good to learn...its good to see multiple sides of something (even in this "echo chamber" I see different sides of support for issues when they are discussed).

Definitely going to need people on their best behavior during that and leading up...I agree it would get ugly.  And probably (if there isn't already a tipping point before that) one that would easily lead to shutting it down.  Things seems to be building to that...Ive been posting a bit less as I see some of it build up and I have decided not to get in the middle of most of it anymore.  Don't think its good for anyone when it gets ugly...and its been happening a lot on FB as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Absolutely posters are lying in the poll.  Only 6 answered "pro-Trump".  There are easily 20 posters on this forum that support every word that's ever come out of his mouth.  Granted, some of those may be aliases for when the primary account is suspended, but I assume we should count those too.

Who are the 20 posters that support everything Trump says? 

Edited by John Blutarsky
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Peggy McIntosh is the far-left elitist who brought the term into prominence.  Now you are offended by the word offended.  Whatever you want to call it, using terms like 'white privilege' only serves to widen division very similar to how you feel about my use of mob.  

Im still not offended jon...can you please refrain from trying to claim what I am.

Also...Peggy McIntosh isn't here...you were using mob to describe people here.  When people disagreed that was not leading to good discussion, you compare it now to what the far left is doing out there.  Just not a very good comparison.  Its not apples to apples to excuse your own use of the word because some "far left elitist" out there says something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

The whole post was repulsive on what it implied.  I am not surprised you do not see that, nor will you ever.  

I don't think a post stating that it would be better if things could be agreed upon as bad (like retweeting a video proclaiming white power) rather than having to make some excuse or a whatboutism...I don't think that is repulsive no.

And I will refrain from going much further nor will I get as personal with you as you continue to do.  Probably best to walk away from that with you today.  Good day jon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

A few reasons.

I think that group relies on the "treated unfairly" label and needs it to be true.

I also think that group is, generally, not particularly capable of self-reflection and may honestly believe they are "independent" or "neither pro nor anti-Trump".  28 votes for neither pro nor anti?  That's not realistic, and I think you know that.

I get that you're trying to be fair to what you see as the minority here, but I think you've gone well past the point of bending over backwards to be fair.

Thanks. But I'm not "trying to be fair". I'm simply verbalizing what I see and recognizing we have a big vulnerability with such a lopsided majority. :shrug: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

I think quite a few Biden supporters will leave if Trump wins. One poster has already said that he will be "spiking the football" when Trump wins and doesn't care if he does get a timeout. Another poster has said he is keeping track of posts that he views as arrogant/over confident to quote when Trump wins. 

Unfortunately this is a no one win situation here. There is going to be an exodus of posters no matter who wins this November. 

I could see that if Biden were to win. But I don't expect that at all. So it will be the Pro-Trump people who wind up being run and that's just a handful of posters. Nowhere near enough to count as an exodus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I'd agree. I don't expect it to bounce back at all. I think we're set with what we have for a while. :shrug: 

As long as it's purely character driven, the divide will remain.  If people want to start talking about legislation/solutions again, it might come back a bit quicker.  I have plenty of things that I am not a fan of with respect to Biden policies...I have no problem talking about those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Absolutely posters are lying in the poll.  Only 6 answered "pro-Trump".  There are easily 20 posters on this forum that support every word that's ever come out of his mouth.  Granted, some of those may be aliases for when the primary account is suspended, but I assume we should count those too.

I honestly don't think you can come up with more than 3, if that, who have never said anything negative about Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

Thanks. But I'm not "trying to be fair". I'm simply verbalizing what I see and recognizing we have a big vulnerability with such a lopsided majority. :shrug: 

I disagree that it's a big vulnerability.  Sometimes things are supposed to be lopsided.  For example, say there was a forum where 90% of posters were pro-equality and 10% were espousing neo-Nazi, white-power sentiments.  Would you feel the same way about the lopsided majority?

That a viewpoint is lopsided does not, in and of itself, make it improper.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Joe Bryant said:

Thanks. But I'm not "trying to be fair". I'm simply verbalizing what I see and recognizing we have a big vulnerability with such a lopsided majority. :shrug: 

What's the vulnerability again?

That people will leave the board if Trump isn't reelected?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Skoo said:

What's the vulnerability again?

That people will leave the board if Trump isn't reelected?

That the discussion an echo chamber. If Trump loses and the Trump supporters are run, that's a non factor as it's a handful of people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am now beginning to see the issue a bit clearer.  Peggy McIntosh wasn't even born yet when psychologists and sociologist began studying privilege like this.  This has been a study of people's behavior for centuries.  This further solidifies my belief that perspective and understanding history is in dire need.  She IS responsible for being controversial and also bringing "male privilege" into the mix, but that was like in the 1980s (maybe 70s even?)  So yeah, if one is using her as a starting point or frame of reference, that's the disconnect...at least with me.  You aren't going back nearly far enough to understand the term IMO.  You're basically taking a very narrowed down version of the term used to sell books and philosophy and making it the norm for industry who see it in a much different light.  She basically hijacked the term to her benefit.

Edited by The Commish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Joe Bryant said:

That the discussion an echo chamber. If Trump loses and the Trump supporters are run, that's a non factor as it's a handful of people. 

I think I'm just missing the reason Trump supporters would be "run" off the board.

Liberals weren't run off the board when he was elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a big part of the equation that's missing is while we're focused on the political divide, there's tribal divide that goes beyond our ideological differences.  We're living in a world where wearing masks, something that the rest of the world seems to have done with ease and success, is a political battle.  We argue about the science.  We argue about the sources of our information.  We argue about who has our best interests at heart.  These aren't conservative vs liberal discussions.  They're our team vs. your team discussions.  When Trump leaves office, the red team isn't suddenly going to change their posture and be less defiant.  Posters who have been ignoring objective evidence for the last few years aren't going to suddenly be more accepting of it.  We're fractured beyond repair and social media and internet and cable news media aren't going to reverse course and start targeting the center., regardless of who wins in November.

This is going to get worse before it gets better, Trump in the WH or not.  It's depressing, but I don't see how it evolves into anything but a deeper division after the election.     

       

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

I disagree that it's a big vulnerability.  Sometimes things are supposed to be lopsided.  For example, say there was a forum where 90% of posters were pro-equality and 10% were espousing neo-Nazi, white-power sentiments.  Would you feel the same way about the lopsided majority?

That a viewpoint is lopsided does not, in and of itself, make it improper.

A forum where discussing Pro Equality people /  Neo Nazis as a relevant analogy to Trump voters /  Biden voters is exactly my point. 

That's why we'll remain a total bubble. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope Joe is wrong and most everyone sticks around. I think that’s what will happen, though I can’t be sure. 
 

But I ALSO really hope that if Trump loses political discussion will change, both in this forum and elsewhere, from pro-Trump vs anti-Trump to what it generally was before: liberalism vs conservatism. That’s a much healthier and constructive debate for all parties, IMO. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Captain Cranks said:

 

This is going to get worse before it gets better, Trump in the WH or not.  It's depressing, but I don't see how it evolves into anything but a deeper division after the election.     

       

That's my fear too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Joe Bryant said:

A forum where discussing Pro Equality people /  Neo Nazis as a relevant analogy to Trump voters /  Biden voters is exactly my point. 

That's why we'll remain a total bubble.

Whoa...  I was not equating the two, nor was it an analogy.  I was using that as an example of why the statement "majority <> improper or vulnerability" is accurate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

I don't think a post stating that it would be better if things could be agreed upon as bad (like retweeting a video proclaiming white power) rather than having to make some excuse or a whatboutism...I don't think that is repulsive no.

And I will refrain from going much further nor will I get as personal with you as you continue to do.  Probably best to walk away from that with you today.  Good day jon.

Simply ridiculous.  Here was the post in question.

Quote

 

We are in the age of Trumpism where four star generals and Intel briefings are to be ignored in favor of the gut instincts of an inexperienced president with no military background or expertise. 

One solution is for some of us to lower our standards of debate.  Normally I wouldn't value an opinion if it's not supported by logic, reason, or facts.  But perhaps I just need to accept "You just feel that way because you hate Trump" or "fake news" as a legitimate counterarguments. 

The board would get along better if it went something like this:

- Hey, I think it's disgusting that Trump retweeted a video of a man yelling, "White Power!"

- Oh, you're just crying because you hate Trump.  Everything he does is wrong in your eyes.

- Got me there.  Awesome counterpoint.  You win. Let's discuss something else now. 

 

 

What you see is "a post stating that it would be better if things could be agreed upon as bad".

What I see is a post which starts out mocking Trumpism of a bunch of people who ignore facts.  Then it moves to characterizing supporters as lacking 'logic, reason, or facts'.  And then it suggests the left are being the good guys and ignoring how terrible the right's arguments are.  And then it moves to suggesting Trump supporters will accept or at least ignore racist comments.  

The reason people left this forum is because of post like the above.  Now if you get offended when I point out you are being oblivious to how terrible that kind of posting is, sorry but you are.  Your characterization of what the post said is interesting more about how much crap you overlooked than what you got out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...