Trump

[Mike]

I said it, because I believe it. Many Trump supporters I know ARE indeed racist. But the majority are not. However, you've outlined a definition that says that voting for Trump makes you racist, so by that definition, yeah... all Trump voters are racist. Obviously.

Your suggestion that I'm lying about my beliefs to further some other end comes off as patronizing, however I'm not offended by it. Potentially you and I have different experiences and interpretations. For you and for me, such open bigotry disqualifies a person for office. And you seem to have a problem with the idea that that somehow isn't true for everyone unless they are racist themselves. But also, I have the luxury of being left-leaning already, so in this particular election, I didn't have to make a choice between vote-for-a-racist and vote-for-a-candidate-that-stands-for-every-policy-I-hate. I could comfortably vote against the racist AND choose a candidate that generally supports my own beliefs.

[Phoebe]

[Phoebe]

[Kyle]

Ouch. I'm confused why you attacked Ron. So is Phoebe the new name for Elle?

[Ronster]

LOL, I had that coming, Kyle, I poked her in the eye with my emoticon and albeit weak wit...which I should not have done...I was childish, but I was also trying to defend Mike...casualties on all sides here.

[Ronster]

I didn't know that Phoebe was Lucy/Elle until you made the connection. I just thought it was a new listener going off on Mike.

[Elle]

[Ronster]

[Elle]

And how did you know I was wearing a pussy bow blouse today in honor of our future First Lady? You have it nailed right here.

[Kyle]

[Mike]

Correction: "The majority of people whom I have spoken to who voted for Trump." That certainly implies some heavy selection bias.

Was "lying" too strong a word? You suggested that I was mischaracterizing or skewing my statements of my beliefs for some broader intent at playing nice.

Despite being on the same side of the aisle here, we're clearly not going to see eye-to-eye here. All I can say is that I think party affiliation trumps a lot of things. There's a lot of talk about people being inside their own echo chambers. And almost all people are convinced that the news sources in their particular echo chamber are the reliable ones, and everyone else is deluding themselves. I'm guilty of that as well, but I console myself by telling myself that I'm the only one that's actually right on that point. So people are aware of the flaws in their candidate, but find ways to stand by their party anyway, because the alternative seems so distasteful. And I point out again that you had the luxury of having a candidate that is generally on the side of everything you've always believed in AND who didn't say/support very distasteful things during the campaign. Clinton had lots of issues as a candidate--you yourself commented during the primaries that you had lots of issues with lots of things about her, as did I. But once she was the party's choice, I (and you) were willing to overlook all that, because the alternative was so much worse. People on the other side felt exactly the same way.

And now you interject with, "Yeah, but Trump was truly and objectively evil and there's no way of soft-selling or denying that, while Clinton was only mildly horrible as an establishment tool. There's no comparison." Yeah, I agree with you. But I also understand how other people could see things differently.

[Phoebe]

[Phoebe]

[Kyle]

[Phoebe]

That was an explanation, not an attack. I honestly don't know why it reads like an attack. I have for many years grasped that we have a friendship of enjoyment going on around here, so I don't ever require much less expect that anyone has my wellbeing at heart. But for fuck's sake, I cannot understand why people have such a fucking hostile reaction to my perfectly understandable desire to change my name so as not to be constantly reminded of grotesque "art" founded on violent rape every time I log in. Do you even KNOW me, bro? Does anyone here read a fucking word I write? I have reasons, damn it. I have reasons not to want a name that for the next year will put everyone in mind of real shit I know something about.

[Kyle]

[Mike]

[Mike]

This Slate author takes it one further. "There is no such thing as a good Trump voter." They supported evil and therefore they ARE evil (essentially). But to take it to the next level, anyone saying that we should hear them out and try to empathize with their viewpoint is almost as bad.

He's telling me that if I argue with him on this, I'm a racist too.

[Phoebe]

Okay, I'm changing my comment now that I've had a chance to read the full article in question. He is definitely not saying we shouldn't try to understand Trump voters! That is one meaning sometimes given to the word 'empathy', but it's not at all the meaning he has in mind and that's quite clear throughout the article. If all you want to do is try to hear what these voters are saying and understand where they are coming from, it doesn't sound like he disagrees with you. But do you really want more than this?

Why should we feel sorry for them? Why should we be concerned about their feelings of offense and frustration at being called racist, as if that's more important than the actual harms of racism? Why should I have to be nice to these people, except perhaps to convert them or as part of a larger political tent-building strategy? Sometimes you have to take responsibility for your decisions, and that means people are going to be pissed at you because, via your vote, you are asking for (non-white) parents and children to be torn asunder via deportations, or for children to be deported even when they have lived here all their lives, for Muslims to be denied entry to our country based on a religious test, and so on. If these voters were not asking for all that, the burden is certainly on them to say why not. "I was thinking only of the unborn at the time!" "I can't stand Hillary!" It doesn't have to be a reason I prefer, but it does have to be a reason.

[Phoebe]