What Now?

[RoseWilder]

Yesterday, I posted that I saw this on social media: 

Today I was out running errands, and I saw two more signs like that. It's nice to see a few signs of hope in this darkness. 

[ALM7]

This is one of the many issues that I find concerning.   The media must not turn the next four years in to a side-show spectacle.  They need to remember the roots of their profession, investigative journalism.

These news media outlets have the resources and profits to blow the lid off the status-quo.  The American public doesn't have the extensive resources necessary to find out about a Flint Michigan situation, until it's a disaster.  Many Americans don't know the details  of potentially dangerous bills working their way through committee as we speak.  

The media needs to do their damn job, expose our elected officials, so we may hold them accountable.  I wonder if "protected" congressional district holders would survive, if their constituency actually knew they were being thrown bones, while the congresspersons enjoyed the feast.  

Local news outlets are just as bad. How many stories must we hear about weather-proofing (we got it the first 12 times, it's 20 degrees, wrap your damn pipes, got it! ), hot-dog eating contests (you still haven't reported WHY someone would shove 100 hot-dogs in their mouth in 20 min. THAT is what inquiring minds want to know).  I have a novel idea, how about filling us in on what our elected local, state and federal politicians are doing.  I just betcha' we're intelligent enough to comprehend!

End of rant, I'm so angry and disappointed...

https://medium.com/@anildash/forget-why-its-time-to-get-to-work-c49ac5f0da20#.h8qd9lspd

[excerpt]

2. Make stopping Trump a regular habit.

There are a few key steps we’ll all need to follow to prevent the gradual acceptance of Trump’s extreme and dangerous rhetoric.

Fight normalization in media. We’ll start to see the morning shows doing fluffy profiles of Melania and Ivanka almost immediately, along with “humanizing” articles and profiles of Trump following closely behind. These will be part of a concerted effort to make it seem as if Trump fits into a normal pattern of political practice in this country. We need to steadfastly, aggressively call out this threat by reminding media of his outrageous behavior and holding them accountable.

[FakePigtails]

I thought this post on facebook was a well-written way of addressing Trump supporters we may know. I shared it and who knows if it'll make a difference but it's a hell of a lot better than I could have written.

Quote

 

"If you're a Trump voter who is tired of being called a bigot, if you say you voted for him based on gun rights or economic issues, or because you think Hillary really was that awful, and in spite of his rhetoric, rather than because of it, I believe you. If you're in my life, I clearly don't think you're a vile hateful person. But if you're now watching protests across the country and you don't understand why, or think they are just being sore losers, let me break something down for you. These people aren't just angry or sad that someone they didn't support won the election, they're scared.

They're black Americans who hear talk of law and order and remember a racially charged stop and frisk program, or see an emboldened KKK holding a celebratory parade.

They're Muslim Americans who worry that spitting in their face is now okay and violations of their rights to assemble and their rights to privacy are about to come.

They're LGBT Americans who fear not just of the loss of marriage rights or restaurants gaining the right not to serve them, but of an administration that thinks it's more important to research electrocuting the gay out of them than AIDS.

They're Hispanic and Latino Americans who are scared their children will be bullied in schools, and their families ripped apart while their culture is mocked.

They're women who are wondering if we've normalized groping, and if their career endeavors will be judged by their face and body, and not their minds

I believe you when you say you didn't vote for any of these things. Most of America wasn't thrilled with the choices we had in this election. But If you didn't know that this is why they're protesting, if you think it's really just about free tuition or more government giveaways, then you, like the elite liberals you love to castigate, have also not been listening. If you're tired of being called a bigot, then you need to use the same voice you used on Tuesday and speak out against these things fully and clearly. It's not enough that you didn't say them yourself. You need to reassure your friends and family members who feel like they no longer have a seat at the table that you still stand with them, even if your priorities were different on Tuesday. If you aren't willing to do that, then you have no right to call for unity." - Michael Rex

 

As much as I have less-than-charitable thoughts about people voting for Trump while knowing about his problems and want to scream at them, the best bet going forward IMO is to assume the best of people and explain these issues as well as we can, at least in the day-to-day interpersonal realm.

On that issue, Slate posted an article today explaining how people's different definitions of racism affected perceptions of what Trump said during the campaign. I still think that even by that lens what was said should have been inexcusable but again, I think we're in a case of needing to meet people where they are (or at least, closer to where they are) and go by "when they go low, we go high" even when it's difficult. *Someone* needs to reach a hand out and I think it'll have to be us if anything's going to change.

[Mercer]

On 11/11/2016 at 4:45 PM, Snarkylark said:

...Now that that's out of the way, back along the lines of anti-choicers, pro-lifers, and how to educate them. They believe that life begins at conception and that abortion is murder. How do you respond when they say that it's illegal to kill someone so why is it ok to kill the unborn? Using the argument that it is the mother's right to choose because it's her body and the fetus depends on her doesn't work because, really, all infants and children require someone else to be able to survive. 

My very favorite analogy is this one:

You're in a burning building that's about to collapse, and you only have the time to run in one direction or the other. You can turn left and save the life of a two year old child. Or you can turn right and save a cooler with two hundred frozen embryos in it.

Is any rational person - no matter how conservative and/or religious - really and truly going to leave one actual child to die for the sake of saving a cooler full of hundreds of "people"? I highly doubt it. Because when push comes to shove, it's not the same, and we all instinctively know that.

[FlamingFundie]

I saw that post today too, @FakePigtails and felt it was very diplomatic and seems to echo the sentiments I see around my area. People hated that Hillary lied and put security at risk, and they wanted to keep their gun rights/get rid of expensive ObamaCare (because most around here are farmers)/shake up the white collars in Washington/etc. Not saying they're right, just sharing how it seems things are around where I live. The people I know that voted Trump aren't racists or bigots, but they really felt like Trump listened to them and felt connected to him in a way that they didn't feel connected to a career politician. I have seen over the past few days just how sheltered I am, living in this rural area. The only Hillary sign I saw in 100 square miles of my house was one calling for her to be in prison. Honestly, without places like FJ and FB, I might not even know that so many people are so upset by Trump's election or more importantly WHY. Everyone around here is just mum on the subject.

Anyway, I am trying to say that the FB post FakePigtails shared is what I think will get people to really re-think. I know it's glaringly obvious to many people what an attrocious person Trump is, but it's not so in this part of the country. I am not defending the people who are saying nasty things to Muslims/POC/Hispanics/LGBTQ, I am not defending people who are physically assaulting others--anyone can see those people are WRONGWRONGWRONG to do so. But the few who really did vote for other reasons NEED to hear the things in that FB post, because calling them all bigots and racists is only going to increase the divide. In the meantime, I will wear a pin and try to reach out to any people around me that feel suppressed or unsafe, as well as see about helping organizations that assist those people in some way.

[Toothfairy]

On Friday, November 11, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Audrey2 said:

So, I have this fantasy, because I know it will never be a reality. I wish these abstinence only advocators, who don't think birth control should be covered by insurance and that people should have to pay for their own birth control, would get a taste of their own medicine. I'd love to see their wives (for the ones who are married- the others are celibate as we know) refuse to have sex with them unless they are willing to welcome a child. Birth control isn't only for single people, as they'd love for us to believe. How are married couples supposed to avoid having eleventy children. Most conservatives don't have 6+ kids.

Yep. I saw a comment from someone that said women should keep their legs closed. I said I'm willing to but I'm married. I gotta check with my husband. I told my husband we can't have sex anymore. We should be abstinence. My husband looked at me like I was crazy. 

On Friday, November 11, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Snarkylark said:

Even as a #nevertrumper, I don't think that messing with the electoral college voters is a good idea. Now that that's out of the way, back along the lines of anti-choicers, pro-lifers, and how to educate them. They believe that life begins at conception and that abortion is murder. How do you respond when they say that it's illegal to kill someone so why is it ok to kill the unborn? Using the argument that it is the mother's right to choose because it's her body and the fetus depends on her doesn't work because, really, all infants and children require someone else to be able to survive. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fertility-clinics-destroy-embryos-all-the-time-why-arent-conservatives-after-them/2015/08/13/be06e852-4128-11e5-8e7d-9c033e6745d8_story.html

 

 

Ivf destroy life too. If antichoicers cared so much about the fetus how come they don't care about the miscarried fetus? 

 

 

Both babies may have died at the same gestation — one by choice, the other by chance. But the value attached to each child completely depended on how that child died.

 

An aborted baby deserves to be grieved. A miscarried one deserves to be gotten over. And quickly. 

 

An aborted baby could have been the next Einstein or Bach or Mother Theresa. A miscarried baby was probably damaged goods.

 

An aborted baby was killed against God’s design. A miscarried baby fulfilled God’s plans.

 

An aborted baby was a real person, and should have the rights as such. A miscarried baby was not a real child — naming them really is kinda weird. Speaking of weird . . . counting them in the line-up of your children? THAT’S weird!

 

An aborted baby should always be missed in this world. God had created them for a purpose, no matter what health issues they may have had. A miscarried baby was meant for heaven — and we moms should just be so thankful we have a baby in heaven, and should not grieve the loss of their place on earth. After all, they never TRULY had a place on earth, did they?

 

An aborted baby is a tragedy. A miscarried baby is slight bump on the road of life. 

 

An aborted baby could never be replaced. A miscarried baby can always be replaced — “Oh, don’t worry, hon — your time will come again. You’ll have more. Just relax and trust God. You’ll see.”

 

An aborted baby’s mom should know exactly what she’s missing out on if she has living children. A miscarried baby’s mom should not grieve that loss, but instead, should just be thankful for the lives of her living children.

[VelociRapture]

25 minutes ago, Toothfairy said:

Yep. I saw a comment from someone that said women should keep their legs closed. I said I'm willing to but I'm married. I gotta check with my husband. I told my husband we can't have sex anymore. We should be abstinence. My husband looked at me like I was crazy. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fertility-clinics-destroy-embryos-all-the-time-why-arent-conservatives-after-them/2015/08/13/be06e852-4128-11e5-8e7d-9c033e6745d8_story.html

 

 

Ivf destroy life too. If antichoicers cared so much about the fetus how come they don't care about the miscarried fetus? 

 

 

Both babies may have died at the same gestation — one by choice, the other by chance. But the value attached to each child completely depended on how that child died.

 

An aborted baby deserves to be grieved. A miscarried one deserves to be gotten over. And quickly. 

 

An aborted baby could have been the next Einstein or Bach or Mother Theresa. A miscarried baby was probably damaged goods.

 

An aborted baby was killed against God’s design. A miscarried baby fulfilled God’s plans.

 

An aborted baby was a real person, and should have the rights as such. A miscarried baby was not a real child — naming them really is kinda weird. Speaking of weird . . . counting them in the line-up of your children? THAT’S weird!

 

An aborted baby should always be missed in this world. God had created them for a purpose, no matter what health issues they may have had. A miscarried baby was meant for heaven — and we moms should just be so thankful we have a baby in heaven, and should not grieve the loss of their place on earth. After all, they never TRULY had a place on earth, did they?

 

An aborted baby is a tragedy. A miscarried baby is slight bump on the road of life. 

 

An aborted baby could never be replaced. A miscarried baby can always be replaced — “Oh, don’t worry, hon — your time will come again. You’ll have more. Just relax and trust God. You’ll see.”

 

An aborted baby’s mom should know exactly what she’s missing out on if she has living children. A miscarried baby’s mom should not grieve that loss, but instead, should just be thankful for the lives of her living children.

I totally get your point here. I miscarried in February and that still stung a lot to read through. I really wish the people who honestly think the way you describe above would just stop. It causes so much unnecessary pain for women who suffer miscarriages and to women who have abortions. If they were honestly interested in helping, they would support common sense laws on abortion and birth control and they would stop minimizing the emotional toll a miscarriage can take. 

[RoseWilder]

A list of pro-women, pro-immigrant, pro-earth, anti-bigotry organizations that need your help: 

http://jezebel.com/a-list-of-pro-women-pro-immigrant-pro-earth-anti-big-1788752078?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=Jezebel_twitter

[Toothfairy]

1 hour ago, VelociRapture said:

I totally get your point here. I miscarried in February and that still stung a lot to read through. I really wish the people who honestly think the way you describe above would just stop. It causes so much unnecessary pain for women who suffer miscarriages and to women who have abortions. If they were honestly interested in helping, they would support common sense laws on abortion and birth control and they would stop minimizing the emotional toll a miscarriage can take. 

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to upset you. 

 

It also upsets me when the anti-choicersuse a woman's miscarriage and stillbirth in propaganda. 

[VelociRapture]

13 minutes ago, Toothfairy said:

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to upset you. 

 

It also upsets me when the anti-choicersuse a woman's miscarriage and stillbirth in propaganda. 

Don't be sorry! You made a really excellent and valid point. It bothers me way more that there are people who honestly think that way. Or who use it as propaganda like you said. They're the ones who should be sorry, not you.

[Snarkylark]

On 11/12/2016 at 11:06 AM, SilverBeach said:

I think it is a great idea. The EC was created to prevent the unfit from taking office. I posted about this somewhere else on FJ. Who could be more unfit than this abomination?  May as well use the EC for the purpose it was created while it still exists. 

That said, its time for the EC to go the way of the horse and buggy. The electorate is far more educated and sophisticated than it was 240 years ago, current election notwithstanding. That is twice now in this millennium that the will of the people has been circumvented (Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000). How is this a democracy?

 

I have called my congressional offices many times over the years and they have been very responsive. I would call and write, fuck it. 

I see your point. I just think that if you WANT a Civil war then that's the way to do it!! The electoral college was set up to prevent a few heavily populated areas from deciding for the whole country. If you look at the counties and states Trump won as opposed to the ones Clinton won, it's not even close. Now I can't stand Trump but until he does something illegal or starts taking rights away....I'm not positive on this but so far he has a woman, a gay man, and a black man as possible appointments. He also has hired many women in positions of power. He may say a lot of stupid shit, does he believe it? Idk how to take him just yet. 

[QuiverDance]

On 11/10/2016 at 3:48 PM, Destiny said:

39 minutes ago, Snarkylark said:

I see your point. I just think that if you WANT a Civil war then that's the way to do it!! The electoral college was set up to prevent a few heavily populated areas from deciding for the whole country. If you look at the counties and states Trump won as opposed to the ones Clinton won, it's not even close. Now I can't stand Trump but until he does something illegal or starts taking rights away....I'm not positive on this but so far he has a woman, a gay man, and a black man as possible appointments. He also has hired many women in positions of power. He may say a lot of stupid shit, does he believe it? Idk how to take him just yet. 

Agree that an Elecoral defection would result in violence! I am not impressed with the "token" candidates for cabinet.  

[SilverBeach]

40 minutes ago, Snarkylark said:

I see your point. I just think that if you WANT a Civil war then that's the way to do it!! The electoral college was set up to prevent a few heavily populated areas from deciding for the whole country. If you look at the counties and states Trump won as opposed to the ones Clinton won, it's not even close. Now I can't stand Trump but until he does something illegal or starts taking rights away....I'm not positive on this but so far he has a woman, a gay man, and a black man as possible appointments. He also has hired many women in positions of power. He may say a lot of stupid shit, does he believe it? Idk how to take him just yet. 

More populous states have more clout in a presidential election whether it is one person one vote or the EC. Think about it. Research Alexander Hamilton and the EC. The EC was created as a fail safe in the event the electorate went batshit crazy. 

No body wants civil war but to cave into bullies out of fear is not acceptable. Besides, we are already there.

Theres saying stupid shit, and then there is saying grab em by the pussy. It doesn't matter what group his appointees belong to if they think like him. Uncle Toms who work at odds with the best interest of their own group for selfish benefit.

The miltary has fitness for duty requirements, and many professions have standards of conduct that if violated can get you ejected from the profession. How can the highest office in the land have no standards whatsoever?

No, nope, he just is not fit, should not have got the nomination, and the fact that he did says a lot right there. Its like saying my spouse abuses me, but they are a good provider. Fuck that noise. No matter what he does, good, bad, or indifferent, (well, bad or indifferent), its immaterial. He shouldn't be in the WH period.

I ranted at church today about this, so imma take a break.

 

Let the haters cave into us because they fear our wrath, instead of it always being the other way around. Fuck them.

[Snarkylark]

@QuiverDance I'm not saying you have to be impressed with his picks. Just that they happen to fall into categories that Trump is supposedly "against."

@SilverBeach the pussy comment was a long time ago. I'm not saying it's right or he should get a pass on it but come on. How many people watch porn that objectifies and degrades women? 

I agree that Trump is unqualified. But the truth is, only 50 something percent of eligible voters showed up. Take issue with that! I honestly don't know how Trump got the nomination, either. He didn't win in my state. I think that looking at that process is a better place to start than by upsetting the electoral college process. Truth is, neither side was overly impressed with their candidate and that showed in the voter turnout. But I think that you can take from that that 50% of the country is not racist, or bigoted. I honestly think that people wanted change, a departure from the traditional political establishment and they saw that in DT. 

[QuiverDance]

@Snarkylark, there are always collaborators. 

[SilverBeach]

Apathy always has been and will always be with us. 

I don't think 2005 was a long time, and the sentiments expressed in that reprehensible remark have been confirmed up to and including the present day. He is a woman-attacking pig. People can watch whatever the fuck they want in their own homes that is not the same as normalizing sexual assault.

Of course there are many good and decent people, I just don't include Trump supporters among them. What change did they see? Change at what cost? A classless buffoon representating this nation on the world stage? The presidency is an important symbolic role and right now it is symbolizing nothing good.

Using the EC for the purpose it waa intended is not upsetting the process.

No Trump voter apoligetics for me, sorry.

 

[Snarkylark]

4 minutes ago, SilverBeach said:

Apathy always has been and will always be with us. 

I don't think 2005 was a long time, and the sentiments expressed in that reprehensible remark have been confirmed up to and including the present day. He is a woman-attacking pig. People can watch whatever the fuck they want in their own homes that is not the same as normalizing sexual assault.

Of course there are many good and decent people, I just don't include Trump supporters among them. What change did they see? Change at what cost? A classless buffoon representating this nation on the world stage? The presidency is an important symbolic role and right now it is symbolizing nothing good.

Using the EC for the purpose it waa intended is not upsetting the process.

No Trump voter apoligetics for me, sorry.

 

I don't get it, either. Again not sure how he ever received the nomination. And as I've said before, many republicans just voted the platform instead of the person representing it- SC picks and all. Had democrats done the same, he likely wouldn't have won the presidency. 

[formergothardite]

34 minutes ago, Snarkylark said:

the pussy comment was a long time ago. I'm not saying it's right or he should get a pass on it but come on. How many people watch porn that objectifies and degrades women? 

Downplaying what he said is one of the problems of this year. Watching porn isn't the same as bragging about sexually assaulting women. We have a president who bragged about how he sexually assaulted women and could get away with it because of his position of power and then we have tons of people acting like it isn't a massively huge deal. Combine what he said with his recent comments trying to shame women and there should be no "but come on." about it. The man is an open sexual predator. 

[Snarkylark]

No, it is a big deal. No, watching porn in your own home is not the same as sexual assault. But the industry as a whole and the men who expect women to act like porn stars is demeaning to women. Let's face it, the majority of porn is geared towards men and what they enjoy and how they want women to act in the bedroom. 

[SilverBeach]

40 minutes ago, Snarkylark said:

I don't get it, either. Again not sure how he ever received the nomination. And as I've said before, many republicans just voted the platform instead of the person representing it- SC picks and all. Had democrats done the same, he likely wouldn't have won the presidency. 

What platform? I never heard no stinkin platform. I think a lot of Trump supporters voted sound bites. Lots of reasons the dems fucked this up, yeah too many got hung up on HC not being Bernie. Hell, I voted for Bernie in the primary, but hell le lost. Now that I took well. 

[Ali]

I have seen many claim on facebook that they were voting for the Republican platform or voting for the candidate who supports life.

 

[VelociRapture]

@Snarkylark- Peter Thiel is the gay man working with Trump. He has NEVER been a good or strong advocate for the LGBTQ community. Please see the following article for more information on him:

http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2016/07/peter-thiels-socioeconomic-class-trumps-sexual-orientation/

Trump has previously supported North Carolina's HB2 law. He has spoken in favor of FADA (First Amendment Defense Act), which would allow businesses and government employees (like Kim Davis) to use religion to discriminate against LGBTQ people.

He chose Mile Pence as his Vice President and just put him in charge of his Transition Team, which means he has huge influence over who gets hired or nominated to positions of power. Pence is one of the most anti-LGBTQ politicians to ever be elected to Congress. This is a man who says being gay is a choice, that opposing marriage equality is right because Jesus, and who is a very strong supporter of conversion therapy - something that one of my brother's good friends was forced to endure off and on for five whole years, starting in High School.

Newt Ginsburg, who has attacked LGBTQ Rights, and Ben Carson, who has compared homosexuality to incest and pedophilia, are both working with Trump too. Same with Ken Blackwell, former Ohio Secretary of State, who thinks being gay is a compulsion like arson or kleptomania.

I appreciate your tone and civil responses in this thread. I honestly do. But please, don't buy into the token picks Trump has made. Having a gay man (who doesn't seem to care much about his community) on staff means shit when you have an entire team of LGBTQ hating politicians working for you too.

https://www.google.com/amp/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58275a17e4b02d21bbc8ff9b/amp?client=safari

My brother is LGBTQ. So are some of our friends. None of us are feeling good about this Transition Team or the future Administration. We are worried and scared and we have every reason to be at this point because none of these men have ever said or done anything to earn our trust.

[Snarkylark]

36 minutes ago, Ali said:

38 minutes ago, Ali said:

I have seen many claim on facebook that they were voting for the Republican platform or voting for the candidate who supports life.

 

Ali, that's what I meant and has been what I've seen as well. 

8 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

@Snarkylark- Peter Thiel is the gay man working with Trump. He has NEVER been a good or strong advocate for the LGBTQ community. Please see the following article for more information on him:

http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2016/07/peter-thiels-socioeconomic-class-trumps-sexual-orientation/

Trump has previously supported North Carolina's HB2 law. He has spoken in favor of FADA (First Amendment Defense Act), which would allow businesses and government employees (like Kim Davis) to use religion to discriminate against LGBTQ people.

He chose Mile Pence as his Vice President and just put him in charge of his Transition Team, which means he has huge influence over who gets hired or nominated to positions of power. Pence is one of the most anti-LGBTQ politicians to ever be elected to Congress. This is a man who says being gay is a choice, that opposing marriage equality is right because Jesus, and who is a very strong supporter of conversion therapy - something that one of my brother's good friends was forced to endure off and on for five whole years, starting in High School.

Newt Ginsburg, who has attacked LGBTQ Rights, and Ben Carson, who has compared homosexuality to incest and pedophilia, are both working with Trump too. Same with Ken Blackwell, former Ohio Secretary of State, who thinks being gay is a compulsion like arson or kleptomania.

I appreciate your tone and civil responses in this thread. I honestly do. But please, don't buy into the token picks Trump has made. Having a gay man (who doesn't seem to care much about his community) on staff means shit when you have an entire team of LGBTQ hating politicians working for you too.

https://www.google.com/amp/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58275a17e4b02d21bbc8ff9b/amp?client=safari

My brother is LGBTQ. So are some of our friends. None of us are feeling good about this Transition Team or the future Administration. We are worried and scared and we have every reason to be at this point because none of these men have ever said or done anything to earn our trust.

I don't support trump or his picks. I was just saying that he has appointed people whom others say he is prejudiced against. That's all. 

[QuiverDance]

8 minutes ago, Snarkylark said:

I don't support trump or his picks. I was just saying that he has appointed people whom others say he is prejudiced against. That's all. 

She is simply trying to explain to you that they are puppets.  Kellyanne Conway is a white supremacist, Carson doesn't believe in Evoution. Thiel... he's just crazy. Those three choices are no indication if inclusiveness. 

[VelociRapture]

1 hour ago, QuiverDance said:

She is simply trying to explain to you that they are puppets.  Kellyanne Conway is a white supremacist, Carson doesn't believe in Evoution. Thiel... he's just crazy. Those three choices are no indication if inclusiveness. 

Exactly.

@SnarkylarkI know you said you don't support Trump or what he stands for. I wasn't trying to accuse you of that and if I gave the wrong impression, then I'm sorry.

I am trying to explain that his decision to include Thiel means nothing though because Thiel is not the type of person who is going to try and fight for the LGBTQ community. And even if he was, the inclusion of Gingrich (NOT Ginsburg!), Carson, Pence, and Blackwell pretty much cancels out any positive influence he could have had.