Really, calling attention to attention-grabbing things like pink pussy hats and vagina insults is consistent with attention-grabbing things that worked. Thanks for letting us know it worked, guys.

His supporters understand him. That's why they voted for him.

You're just some randos on the internet shouting "immediately, immediately, immediately!!". If that's your argument, get bent.

The point is - if he does stuff you don't like, get a better candidate elected. That's how this whole process works.

When Trump does things to anger his supporters, I'll let you know. And I'll also let you know how much it affects our support for him.


Let me put it to you this way - would you have rather have had Romney because Obama didn't close Gitmo? I doubt it.

Jiggy if you and Daddy are so ****ing good at persuasion how come his approval is in the 30s and you've retreated to the offshoot politics subforum where you still get dunked on constantly.


Consider the alternative. This is a poker site, so what I'm about to do is the cardinal ****ing sin of the game:

You're a mark, son. You buy self help books from hucksters, voted for a conman, and get tricked into believing the most horse**** conspiracy theories, all in service of people much richer and more powerful than you keeping their privileged positions in society.

Wear whatever the **** you want. Just don't try to tell me you look intelligent.

Hahahaha! A leftist talking about keeping privileged people in their place in society. I don't think enough paint exists to huff in order to rot my brain out to your levels of stupidity.

I guess it falls to me to point out that neither people who lean left or lean right necessarily have privilege.

Again I don't want most of this stuff done so the fact it hasn't gotten done "immediately" is good from my point of view.

I will ask though:
Fine, I accept "immediately" is hyperbole, gotta give him some time, whatever.
How long is "immediately"? One year? One term? I'm asking because, as you said, you understand him.

Well, right, I'm not planning to vote for him. But in the intervening four years could I also, maybe... criticize him on the internet?


No, but again you are inserting this to where it's not relevant.

Like, if someone asks me "How is your steak?" I'm going to respond with something about the steak, not "I'd rather have this than Wendy's."

Similarly, if I ask you about Trump, I just want an answer about Trump. I don't want him compared to Hillary or Obama or Tiger Woods or puppies or whatever.

Obviously, once a new election with new candidates begins, then a comparison of Trump to <whoever the Dem candidate is> will once again become relevant.

Umm that was a dig on the "serious" conversation. I'm disappointed in you, Well Named. I thought you were the serious face of social justice here, but you're beginning to sound like Wookie, comically unable to defend your assertions. Don't get me wrong, there is plenty to gain from the ideas you promote, but you seem to have zero idea on how to effectively promote them, and neither does anyone else here.

You won't discuss Evergreen, dismissing every other example I've posted of the social justice movement going off the rails, doing just what you were so offended anyone would accuse it of. You can't admit that the ideas you champion are being run over in the real world and empowering the right because their most numerous and vocal proponents are just terrible at promoting them, instead abusing terms like white privilege, whitesplaining, white supremacist, and that's just on the racial side.

You have no answer to critics like Haidt and DeBoer, so you simply stick up your nose, and ignore them. Well that's a shame, because if even you can't admit there's a problem, then it's probably only going to get worse.

FoldnDark, if you would just explain, in your own words or by linking a single article from a reasonable source, what Evergreen is and what is happening there, I'm sure people will be willing to discuss it with you.

foldn, it's like holding sand in one hand. There is no control other folk's forgiveness. Grinding innocent people up for social justice is a dandy. Like outsiders showing up, interject some stereotypes because folks aren't perfect. Speculating about nebulous college student behavior driven by the left is not a new undertone.

As opposed to the serious posters like FoldnDark, who post blatantly dishonest sources they didn't bother to understand before slinking away and pretending it never happened

lol

When I search for "Evergreen" on Google, all the results are like The Blaze or wnd or other sketchball sites.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/u...-protests.html

I haven't read this yet.

Ok I read it. Alright Foldn, what's your point?

This situation the social justice movement is in today seems a bit analogous to the place fiscal conservativism was decades ago. That’s the idealism I was brought up on. I read Atlas Shrugged when I was 12, because my dad had it under the coffee table and it had a cool cover. It all made so much sense at the time, and much of it still does.

I’ll spare you the advocacy, but one argument just stuck out to me. The poor today live better than the kings of centuries ago, driving motor vehicles (used and beat-up, perhaps), living in air conditioned homes (if often trailers), watching television, eating fast food and worrying more about obesity than starvation, and this is clearly due to free market systems. Two things about that simple argument though: 1) it’s not entirely true, of course, there are still really, really poor and hungry, and there are plenty of other ways to deconstruct that point of view, 2) even if it were entirely true, it wouldn’t matter, because human nature is going to make a lot of people who feel “poor” want what the “rich” have, so inequality will always be something to face.

This, along with many other similar arguments I’ve softened on considerably over the years to the point my father thinks of me as a bleeding heart liberal (even though he’s softened a bit too, actually), and I think of myself as a centrist more than a fiscal conservative anymore. The country also changed politically within that period, the left winning many of the culture war arguments and the right winning much of that economic policy free market argument, with lots of compromising throughout.

Today, I think social justice is in a similar place because those who get it, who “woke”, they reallllly get it (this is many of you in case it wasn’t clear). But they simply cannot figure out why so much of the rest of the country doesn’t… well, they think they do: it’s because white supremacy, male patriarchy, privilege, yada, yada, concepts with plenty of truth behind them, but like the free market arguments above, there are plenty of ways to deconstruct that point of view, and there are plenty of holes yet to fill. And ultimately, there is a bit of human nature that is being ignored, or perhaps people still think they can change it, we’ll see.

I figure many of the ideas driving the social justice movement will eventually win out, I hope so, but after a lot of wringing of hands and political turmoil, and it won’t happen until most of those “woke” folk get over themselves, learn to compromise a bit, and stop being so god damn snooty and out of touch with their advocacy. FFS you’re like my damn religious aunt, the lot of you!

Round about here.

First you suggest that Foldn's view is 'common and sincere', as if Foldn occupies some reasonable part of the political spectrum, which he doesn't, and then you agree with him that, because idiots post idiot stuff on YouTube, the universe is about to end, the whole place will self-destruct in five minutes and we've all got to panic-dash for the escape pod before Blofeld gets there and hogs it.

It's all just derp. None of it matters. Foldn is going into meltdown because... some women wore some pink knitted hats.

Here's an article about the pink knitted hats. It's headed by a photo of British-Danish comedy panel-show host Sandi Toksvig wearing one in London. Not Lenin, not Charles Manson, not Osama bin Laden. Sandi flipping Toksvig. And that's why Foldn is (metaphorically, I hope) stocking up on canned food and bottled water and assault weapons.

https://www.bustle.com/p/what-do-the...-message-32088

I mean, technically, he has until the end of his term(s). I don't know if there's anything so pressing that I care as long as progress gets made. I also believe that once someone enters the Whitehouse, the office changes the rhetoric - see Gitmo.

As long as he doesn't screw up the economy and hopefully fixes Obamacare, I'm not worried that his Presidency will be a failure.

I don't care about his hyperbole, only what he gets done. He's done a lot of good things so far, and he hasn't done a whole lot of bad.

You can criticize him. You can even make fun of him. When you get into the racist, bigot, Nazi stuff though....or that he's dumb, expect to be rebutted. The media is also doing the Leftists a disservice by focusing on the Russia narrative. Let it go. Judge Trump on his merits.


But that's the point - Trump supporters got steak instead of Wendy's. Hey, we wanted Lobster, but we'll take steak. The other side is saying, man, even we didn't want Wendy's.

Everything is comparative in a sense. Is Trump doing a better job than Obama did? Is Trump implementing policies that Hillary wouldn't have or vice verse? He doesn't exist in a vacuum. Prager said it best - the election was between definitely a man eating tiger and possibly a man eating tiger. Gotta take your chances. And I do think people were and are VERY fed up with the establishment. It wasn't time to play a game, it was time to upend the table. Some of us are just more comfortable with risk.

That also supposes you're asking an honest question about Trump. It's ok if you're say "I don't agree with Sessions on civil forfeiture. And look, Rand Paul agrees with me." If you want to say "Sessions is **** and he's a racist white supremacist", then the equally childish response is "Neener neener, Hillary belongs in jail."

lol

I feel like everyone involved in this story is a colossal pussy. I mean

It's hilarious anyone thinks I'm worried about pink hats. I was mocking them as the "serious" movement Well Named must think exists somewhere. This is what continues to confirm my believes. Literally nobody here will answer the arguments I've been actually presenting, mostly from guys like Haidt and DeBoer, FIRE, etc, to be fair, not really "my" arguments, but they'll continually show they have no clue by nit picking on silly misunderstandings, easily corrected.

What in the everloving **** does this mean?

Tell you what FoldnDark. Post the best article that you think lays out your critique of the left and I'll respond to it.

It's one of the numerous examples of social justice activists doing precisely what Well Named is so offended anyone will claim they are doing, misusing and abusing terms like white privilege, white supremacy, etc., "attempting to justify their position on discrimination on the basis of their race." And even if you think they aren't "serious", which is a good position to take, imo, it's these examples and many more like it that are the face of social justice advocacy in this country, because they are the loudest, most numerous, and most echoed. They simply drown out the serious voices, wherever they may be.

There are so many, and none are complete, but if you're willing please respond to Freddie.

https://medium.com/@freddiedeboer/th...t-735da96f61d3

You can't rot whats is already disintegrated.