Whitney and Zach Bates - Part 3

[crazysnark]

12 minutes ago, singsingsing said:

(I'll respond to this, and then move on.)

You're gullible and ignorant for supporting Trump. I thought that was fairly self-explanatory. Trump supporters are either gullible and ignorant or malicious, and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you're the former.

 

You completely misunderstood my point. I wasn't claiming that (all) Trump voters believe such things. I very clearly said that it was no mystery how someone who did believe such things (i.e. Gothardites) could make the mental and emotional leap to supporting Trump. 

 

Oh, okay, so you weren't calling me a liberal, just accusing me of being as bad as one.  By the way, who does "No substance, only emotions, and eventually degrading the opposition" sound like? I'll let you guess. He's an orange lunatic. Hmmm... it's at the tip of my tongue...!

 

You're right, I was inferring it given that you specifically criticized me for not living up to the phrase "when they go low, we go high", which was one of Hillary Clinton's slogans during the campaign.

 

That's right. But it's not because I'm trying to screw with you. It's because I'm literally not trying to have a discussion about whether Donald Trump is good or bad. I'm trying to point out how the same thought processes that lead people to embrace fundamentalist religion can also lead people to embrace Donald Trump.

 

I think you've been civil despite the fact that you're insulted by what I've said. I think you have every right to stand up for yourself and to argue your point. I think it is absolutely disgusting that a single person voted for Donald Trump or continues to support him. I have no qualms about saying that, and I think it's vitally important to take a stand against any justification of Trump support, so I will not equivocate or apologize for that.

I am not gullible, ignorant or malicious. I voted for Trump on policy and facts. If you don't agree with said facts that's fine but just because you don't agree doesn't mean I am ignorant. I am also glad you admit to putting words in my mouth oh and the when they go low we go high quote wasn't Clinton, it was Michelle Obama. If you aren't trying to have a discussion with me then you should have moved on a while ago. If you were trying to make an example of my ignorance you should have showed exactly where I was wrong. I'm glad you think I have been civil as it is not my intention to offend anyone on purpose or just because. I have a right to be insulted by your comments because it is very unfair to say someone is horrible for voting for Trump just like it would be wrong of me to say everyone who voted for Hillary is evil. Any logical person knows that. I hope you have a nice evening. If you need other pointers on how to make an example out of someone more effectively you can PM me. 

[SilverBeach]

24 minutes ago, crazysnark said:

I do agree I don't think he is a great person. It's sad to say but some of the best leaders were unstable and/or not so great people. I think part of what has gone wrong in elections is we elect to much on likeability not necessarily who will do the job the best. You can thank televised debates for that one. ha

Actually my opinion is fine regardless of what color I am, as I believe in equality of all races. 

Uh, Trump was and is anything but likeable.

No, it is not fine to tell another race to chill out about something that may be offensive to them. Not fine.

[Destiny]

26 minutes ago, crazysnark said:

Actually my opinion is fine regardless of what color I am, as I believe in equality of all races. 

It most definitely is NOT. You do NOT get to tell a POC how to feel about slavery. NOT COOL. 

[singsingsing]

13 minutes ago, crazysnark said:

If you need other pointers on how to make an example out of someone more effectively you can PM me. 

No need, you're doing a fantastic job of that all on your own.

[crazysnark]

5 minutes ago, Destiny said:

It most definitely is NOT. You do NOT get to tell a POC how to feel about slavery. NOT COOL. 

I never told them how to feel about slavery. We probably feel the same about slavery. It's awful and the most horrible thing we have done as a country. I do however feel that just because I am not black doesn't mean I can say people freaking out about an ALTERNATE history show before they have ever seen it is dumb and they need to chill out. I also remember  saying that if this show tries to make having slavery  today look appealing then that's not ok. 

[Carm_88]

I think Confederacy is dealing with an issue that we have trouble dealing with. Slavery, it happened; it's a black mark on the history of the world and the US especially. Maybe if a tv show can make people open to talking abut something that makes them uncomfortable, it's a good thing. I find that we spend too much time trying to sweep the dirty parts of history under the rug. 

I am white, so I can't imagine how a POC would feel about this. It would obviously be something very, very personal and that is perfectly fine. If it is not something that you want to consider watching, that is completely fine. I would never think to assume how that must feel because I cannot. 

[SilverBeach]

12 minutes ago, crazysnark said:

I never told them how to feel about slavery. We probably feel the same about slavery. It's awful and the most horrible thing we have done as a country. I do however feel that just because I am not black doesn't mean I can say people freaking out about an ALTERNATE history show before they have ever seen it is dumb and they need to chill out. I also remember  saying that if this show tries to make having slavery  today look appealing then that's not ok. 

Saying the person of another race is dumb is even worse. How about not judging how they feel at all? Insensitive much? I see why you felt OK about voting for Drumpf.

FWIW, I cannot fathom how chattel slavery of the type practiced in the American south could ever be made appealing, unless it is totally misrepresented like in Gone With the Wind.

[crazysnark]

Just now, SilverBeach said:

Saying the person of another race is dumb is even worse. How about not judging how they feel at all? Insensitive much? I see why you felt OK about voting for Drumpf.

FWIW, I cannot fathom how chattel slavery of the type practiced in the American south could ever be made appealing, unless it is totally misrepresented like in Gone With the Wind.

I never said you were dumb and I apologize i you thought that's what I was saying. I think the idea that someone can't have an opinion because of their race is dumb. I am just as disgusted with slavery as any other person. And your example of Gone with the wind is what I am talking about it if it goes in the wrong direction. If it goes that way then people can freak out and I won't think they need to chill out. But I think that it is premature to be so offended when nobody has anything to be offended about yet. 

[dawbs]

General 2c (clearly not wearing mod hat) from me:
Passive voice apologies are inflammatory and should be treated as an insult, because they essentially say "you were to dumb to understand what I meant" instead of a real apology that says "I'm sorry, I said that poorly.  I meant...."

[nausicaa]

2 hours ago, Snarkle Motion said:

So much of what this election has demonstrated is the cultural divide between urban and rural America. Trump capitalized on anger in rural America at feeling overlooked, disrespected, misunderstood, and that they are downright struggling...

To dismiss every Trump voter is 1) dismissing 62 million people and making assumptions that they are all the same; and 2) providing further evidence that liberals and "elites" don't care to get to know them or understand their perspectives...

I also think to fault Whitney for voting Trump is misguided on a couple levels. It ignores the fact that their county overwhelmingly voted Trump. She's voting consistent with cultural and regional trends.

Here's my issue with this argument--it's actually quite condescending. 

Yes he capitalized on rural anger by exploiting people's feelings over their logic. By those rural people are adults the same as you or me. No one made them do anything or turn their critical thinking skills off. They aren't some separate species from those with graduate degrees.

These people are still adults, they have the capacity to think critically, and they have access to libraries and vetted sources and articles online. They aren't actually as stupid as you think. Therefore, they need to be held responsible for their decisions. Your argument comes off a bit as "Well, the trailer park trash is so ignorant and incapable, we, the educated and well off, have to pity them and take care of them."

It remind me of benevolent racism. 

Who cares if Whitney voted the same as her county? She is an individual and an adult human, not an automaton wholly created by regional and religious trends. She still has a brain, the ability to access sources, and free will. Acting as if you have exclusive access to some larger picture that she couldn't possibly see is incredibly condescending on your part.

When we treat liberals as independent individuals but Trump voters as people who are predestined by outside forces to do certain things, it's dehumanizing to the latter. 

I don't think the 62 million people who voted for Trump are the same. But I do think they all made the same horrible, stupid, bigoted choice that reveals a large flaw in both their thinking and their maturity. And like all adults, they are responsible for their actions.

[nausicaa]

1 hour ago, crazysnark said:

 I voted for Trump on policy and facts. 

Could you please outline what policy and what facts you supported of his? Even many die hard conservatives (Ben Shapiro, Rick Wilson, Bill Kristol) were incredibly critical of Trump's lack of any sort of actual policy during his campaign.

The few things he did say:

He said he would build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.  Despite Mexico being a sovereign nation that cannot be forced to pay for anything. He never explained how the wall would be built or how it would decrease illegal immigration since the vast majority of illegal immigrants enter via travel visas and then overstay.

He said he would demolish and destroy ISIS. He never gave a single military strategy for this or outlined how this would be done.

He said he would ban all Muslims; never explaining how this could be done constitutionally (spoiler: it can't).

He claimed crime was up in New York City. It is not; it is down. He claimed Ford is leaving the U.S. and cutting jobs. It is opening a plant in Mexico but has no plans to cut any U.S. jobs.

These things aren't just matters of opinion. These are things that are quantifiably false. I realize it's difficult when you feel piled on by people, but I really strongly urge you to revise your approach to vetting political claims. It is one of the most important reasoning skills in the Internet age. 

 

[crazysnark]

1 hour ago, dawbs said:

General 2c (clearly not wearing mod hat) from me:
Passive voice apologies are inflammatory and should be treated as an insult, because they essentially say "you were to dumb to understand what I meant" instead of a real apology that says "I'm sorry, I said that poorly.  I meant...."

At this point I think anything I say is going to be twisted into making me sound like an asshole. I apologized and reiterated that thinking an idea is dumb doesn't mean I was saying said person was dumb. Also the person I was addressing told my that I don't have a right to have an opinion because of my race. Let that sink in. 

[DaisyD]

4 hours ago, crazysnark said:

It gets people excited and he put it on red caps which instantly make people (at least veterans) think of the Marines.Trump understands that people gravitate towards repetition and familiarity so he would say "we lose here, we lose there but we will make it great again". This gave the average person an understanding of what was wrong and how he would "fix it" and it would be engrained in his/her head.

*snip*

 

Knowingly leaking thousands of classified emails... I don't think it compares. 

*Help meet hat off, because I cannot let this stand*

 

To the bolded, there's no fucking way this made any vet that I've ever known (myself included) think of the fucking Marines. If that was his goal, fuck him for trying to associate himself with an organization that he (5 TIMES!) dodged joining. Seriously?!? 

To the second part, wtf are you even talking about leaking emails? I'm pretty sure that leaking and deleting are the opposite of each other.

I say all of the above as both a veteran and someone who is married to, and very much loves, someone who voted for Trump.

This is my response from page 14. I'll keep reading now.

[Destiny]

5 minutes ago, crazysnark said:

Also the person I was addressing told my that I don't have a right to have an opinion because of my race. Let that sink in. 

You don't have a right to tell POC to chill on topics that relate to racism and slavery, because you don't understand and never can understand the experience of being black in america. (neither do I, for the record, because I'm the whitest possible white person). 

To use an analogy, to me, it's no different than a man telling women to chill about feminist issues. They don't understand the experience of being a woman, so they don't get to tell me, as a woman, to chill about the various problems I have had due to sexism. 

Also, no one ever said you couldn't have an opinion, you were told that the expression of chill related to people's feelings on racial issues was insensitive, which it absolutely is, given that you have never walked any miles in those shoes. 

[dawbs]

5 minutes ago, crazysnark said:

At this point I think anything I say is going to be twisted into making me sound like an asshole. I apologized and reiterated that thinking an idea is dumb doesn't mean I was saying said person was dumb. Also the person I was addressing told my that I don't have a right to have an opinion because of my race. Let that sink in. 

You can call it twisting, but, passive voice non-apologies are not someone 'twisting' what you say, the're just an asshole thing that's kinda well recognized as bullshit.

And if you're INSISTING on twisting, you weren't told you didn't have the right to an opinion, you were told that you likely get a "back the hell up and listen instead of flapping your gums" when you're talking about a situation where another group is the victim.
^Kinda like the maxim we've been working on w/ my kid at home..."when you're in trouble, talk less, listen more".
When you're failing to communicate, maybe it's NOT a group reading comprehension problem, maybe you should listen to what's being said and maybe you need to re-read what yo're writing.
But that's just my 2c, and it's a nickles worth of free advice that you didn't ask for, and it's worth exactly what you paid for it.

[crazysnark]

49 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

Could you please outline what policy and what facts you supported of his? Even many die hard conservatives (Ben Shapiro, Rick Wilson, Bill Kristol) were incredibly critical of Trump's lack of any sort of actual policy during his campaign.

The few things he did say:

He said he would build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.  Despite Mexico being a sovereign nation that cannot be forced to pay for anything. He never explained how the wall would be built or how it would decrease illegal immigration since the vast majority of illegal immigrants enter via travel visas and then overstay.

He said he would demolish and destroy ISIS. He never gave a single military strategy for this or outlined how this would be done.

He said he would ban all Muslims; never explaining how this could be done constitutionally (spoiler: it can't).

He claimed crime was up in New York City. It is not; it is down. He claimed Ford is leaving the U.S. and cutting jobs. It is opening a plant in Mexico but has no plans to cut any U.S. jobs.

These things aren't just matters of opinion. These are things that are quantifiably false. I realize it's difficult when you feel piled on by people, but I really strongly urge you to revise your approach to vetting political claims. It is one of the most important reasoning skills in the Internet age. 

 

I don't think there is a thing that Ben Shapiro and I do not agree on so if you want to know a background of where I stand on the issues he is the best example. I just didn't bring him up because I did not know if anyone would know who I was talking about. Again Trump was NOT my first choice at all. In the end I felt I had to vote for him over Hillary. But I feel like I am beating a dead horse with that one. 

 

On Mexico. Yes Trump can not force Mexico to pay for the wall but he can do other things to encourage it like cutting back on trade etc. Also he might mean "pay for it" in other ways not necessarily monetary like mass deportations of illegals etc. Of course right now he is not going to come out and say exactly how because that would not be smart to let the President of Mexico in on your plan. I'll get to the travel visas later. 

 

Demolishing and destroying ISIS is no easy feat that can be accomplished in 6 months and I don't think anyone will ever be able to completely get rid of them. However, we can make it a lot harder for them entering our country. No he never gave a military strategy to the public, again that is not smart for obvious reasons. What he did do was the travel ban and he never said he would ban all Muslims. What he did do was a travel ban. He did this because a lot of terrorists groups were coming from. If it were a true Muslim ban or if he said all Muslims will be banned the Supreme court would not have held his decision. Also A LOT more countries like Saudia Arabia and Afghanistan would be on the list if it were a Muslim ban. 

I don't know about the crime in New York thing you're talking about and I don't feel comfortable doing a quick google search and making an informed argument on that. 

As for Ford cutting jobs, I'll just leave this here. http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/17/news/companies/ford-job-cuts/index.html

I don't think I said anything in my earlier posts that were false. If so nobody has been so kind as to correct me, only call me ignorant and gullible. All of that being said do I agree with everything Trump has done? NO! Do I think he is doing or trying to do what he ran on? Yes! I also think we are much better off with him as President than Clinton considering her track record in office. 

My approach? I stated my views way more kindly than a lot of posters here do. If someone gets snippy with me I'll get snippy back. I believe Shapiro calls it "matching intensity".  Thank you for your kindly worded questions though. It is a breath of fresh air. 

 

 

24 minutes ago, DaisyD said:

*Help meet hat off, because I cannot let this stand*

 

To the bolded, there's no fucking way this made any vet that I've ever known (myself included) think of the fucking Marines. If that was his goal, fuck him for trying to associate himself with an organization that he (5 TIMES!) dodged joining. Seriously?!? 

To the second part, wtf are you even talking about leaking emails? I'm pretty sure that leaking and deleting are the opposite of each other.

I say all of the above as both a veteran and someone who is married to, and very much loves, someone who voted for Trump.

This is my response from page 14. I'll keep reading now.

Oops deleting emails NOT leaking. When I was thinking emails I was thinking how they were leaked and typed the wrong word. The only reason I said that about the red hat thing was my husband is a former marine and said that's exactly what it reminded him of. A lot of his friend who were.are marines reiterated that same sentiment. I think it makes sense. He wanted to appeal to the vets/ blue collar type people. Again I am not sure that's what he was doing I just speculate that it could have been a marketing strategy. 

Also I never said "Black people need to chill" I said people who are offended by something they haven't seen yet need to chill. I don't care if you are white, black, brown, yellow, whatever. 

[Snarkle Motion]

3 hours ago, infooverload said:

Speaking of their perspective regarding the confederacy do you think any of the adults living on their own will check out the upcoming HBO series Confederate?

But there might be female nudity!!!! 

[Jinder Roles]

3 hours ago, crazysnark said:

 

Actually my opinion is fine regardless of what color I am, as I believe in equality of all races. 

You're cognitive dissonance is astounding. 

The HBO show is unnecessary IMO. In a lot of ways, the Confederacy did win. Police brutality, wage-inequality, prison industrial system etc. Literal neo-Nazis are protesting and violently attacking counter-protesters by the thousands today in Virginia. 

I don't paint Trump supporters with a broad brush but I do hold them accountable for their complaceny in white supremacy and racism, among other things.

You voted  for a man who has repeatedly perpetuated violent language against several minority's groups. 

So while you think you believe in racial equality, you actually don't. 

Also, on certain subjects not all opinions are created equal. I strongly suggest you take a step back, listen to what people are saying and do some research social privilege.

Sorry FJ mods, I had to chime in. 

 

Edited to say: I hit my limit on downvoted in the span of 45 mins. 

[Snarkle Motion]

2 hours ago, nausicaa said:

Here's my issue with this argument--it's actually quite condescending. 

Yes he capitalized on rural anger by exploiting people's feelings over their logic. By those rural people are adults the same as you or me. No one made them do anything or turn their critical thinking skills off. They aren't some separate species from those with graduate degrees.

These people are still adults, they have the capacity to think critically, and they have access to libraries and vetted sources and articles online. They aren't actually as stupid as you think. Therefore, they need to be held responsible for their decisions. Your argument comes off a bit as "Well, the trailer park trash is so ignorant and incapable, we, the educated and well off, have to pity them and take care of them."

It remind me of benevolent racism. 

Who cares if Whitney voted the same as her county? She is an individual and an adult human, not an automaton wholly created by regional and religious trends. She still has a brain, the ability to access sources, and free will. Acting as if you have exclusive access to some larger picture that she couldn't possibly see is incredibly condescending on your part.

When we treat liberals as independent individuals but Trump voters as people who are predestined by outside forces to do certain things, it's dehumanizing to the latter. 

I don't think the 62 million people who voted for Trump are the same. But I do think they all made the same horrible, stupid, bigoted choice that reveals a large flaw in both their thinking and their maturity. And like all adults, they are responsible for their actions.

Thank you for your perspective and I recognize that my argument may have come of as condescending. I never meant to imply rural Trump voters are stupid, ignorant, or need taking care of. In fact just the opposite. My point was that all Trump voters are not the same and many are not ignorant or uneducated. My own father is a doctor and voted Trump (ug, we could discuss that but I'd need more time). My point was the opposite - that assuming they are all stupid/uneducated/uniformed is misguided. But why did rural America overwhelming turn out for trump, even in regions that went for obama and had previously been democratic (e.g. areas of West Virginia). There is something inherently regional going on and democrats have failed to address it or take it seriously until now. We should be listening instead of lecturing. Not because we agree but because that's how we can start to see their perspectives to better change opinions.

In regards to your points about access to library, media, and ability to make rational decisions - this election was remarkably different because of "fake news." The evidence is coming out that Russia implemented a KGB style propaganda campaign to influence and confuse voters making it harder to know which sources are legitimate to the point people either trust sources that further cement their beliefs or get them to stop trying to discern truth. It's the fire hose technique. Everyone was subjected to it but conservative leaning voters received much heavier doses of propoganda via Facebook and other social media.

My point about Whitney was that why would we expect her to vote different than the statistics of her region?  It seems unfair to be mad at her for voting the way that thousands of her neighbors also did, why fault her personally? I don't like the idea of the Bates using their fame to endorse their politics but her election post seemed like a pretty general post I'd expect to see on many people's social media. 

It's ironic, if any of my real life friends/family knew I was defending Trump voters they'd have a heart attack. I'm the first to say Trump is Hitler (but less intelligent and orange). But Trump voters are not the same as Trump himself. Instead of attacking and demeaning voters - which has the effect to further solidify or even intensifying their views, I seek to treat them respectfully, listen, and help them to see my perspective. Or at least I try.

@crazysnark I'm sorry that people have been automatically dismissive of your perspectives. Voting is deeply personal and reflects some of our most important values and opinions. May I ask a follow up question regarding Hilary's deleted emails? I'm  wondering if you were as outraged about the 5 million emails deleted by Bush in 2007? I have trouble understanding why there was not a lot of outrage from the right at that time me why Hilary is held to a different standard.

[Jinder Roles]

7 minutes ago, Snarkle Motion said:

I have trouble understanding why there was not a lot of outrage from the right at that time me why Hilary is held to a different standard.

Because she has an XX chromosome and was seen as the successor to Obama. 

[JordynDarby5]

Has anyone read this article on HBO's Confederacy? 

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/08/no-confederate/535512/

Its a really good article. 

[VelociRapture]

7 hours ago, Snarkle Motion said:

 I don't support whitneys beliefs or Trump (yuck) but close to half the country voted for him, including several in my extended family. That's hardly a reason in itself to hate on her. Now voicing support for trumps policies is when it starts to become more reasonable but Ive not seen her do that publicly.

I'll try to be clear here. Apologies if I'm not - it's late and I'm pretty exhausted at the moment. I'll do my best though:

At no point did I say I hate Whitney or Zach. I hate their beliefs, yes, and I certainly hate that they want legislation passed that will harm me and my loved ones (because Jesus.) But I never stated that I hate either of them personally (other posters may have - I tried to read everything, but I may have missed something.) This in comparison to Derick Dillard who I do hate (not because he shares the Bateses hateful beliefs and also supports Trump, but because he's an openly bigoted asshole.)

I do 100% stand by my prior statement that Whit's vote lets me know everything I need to know about her though. She has chosen to live a very public life via reality television and because of that we know more about her and her beliefs than we know about most average, run of the mill Trump supporters. So when I make judgements about her it's not the same as if I were casting judgement on every Trump supporter.

Whether people like it or not, who you support for President does tell others certain things about you (and that's true for supporters of any candidate.) When it comes to the Bateses specifically, their support of Trump tells me they are hypocrites of the highest order. They are willing to support a man who is the exact opposite of everything they claim to believe simply because he may try to save the unborn babies. None of them have spoken out against what Trump has said or done thus far - as such I don't think it's unfair to assume they're still supportive of him. 

So yes. Whitney's support of Trump tells me everything I need to know about her because it confirms what we already know. I'm not going to waste my time or energy hating her, but I'm also not going to let those glossy Instagram posts fool me into thinking she's harmless. She isn't.

(And I wrote this as if you were speaking of me specifically in your post - even if you weren't - simply to offer an explanation for why people may feel that way. For the record, I have very close family members and former friends that voted Trump. I can honestly say it made me really question the values they claim to hold and it made me really question one person's support for their LGBTQ+ son. I try to be an open minded person under normal circumstances, but this is not a normal Presidency by any means and their support for Trump has made it very difficult for us to coexist civilly at times.)

[Destiny]

4 minutes ago, JordynDarby5 said:

Has anyone read this article on HBO's Confederacy? 

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/08/no-confederate/535512/

Its a really good article. 

This is a truly great piece and made me think, and I probably will be thinking about it for the next several hours. Thank you for sharing it. 

[Snarkle Motion]

@VelociRapture my comment wasn't directed toward you or anyone in particular! So sorry if I made it come off that way. I'm a very passionate person and I'm learning that I tend to be blunt and forceful in my arguments. But this also backfires for me (also most women in general).

The field I work in involves empirical methods to convince others or change beliefs. There is whole therapy around this derived for addicts/alcoholics but now applied to many other things. Making the person feel listened to, respected, and that we understand their perspective (even if we don't agree or support it) is the first step toward change. Next we can point out inconsistencies in ones argument in a gentle way but still with respect and compassion.

It was amazing watching Meghan phelps' ted talk as she basically explained all the tenents of mi (the therapy for changing opinions/behaviors) likely without  recognizing it.

[VelociRapture]

@Snarkle MotionNo worries at all! Being passionate about things that are important is a really good thing. I just wanted to offer an explanation for why people may say what I wrote.

20 minutes ago, JordynDarby5 said:

Has anyone read this article on HBO's Confederacy? 

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/08/no-confederate/535512/

Its a really good article. 

Thank you for sharing that! It was a pretty interesting article. I had some reservations about the show when I first heard about it. This article did an excellent job at breaking down why I felt that way when why I didn't feel that ah about Man in the High Castle (which is a fantastic and really well done show.)