By "they" I meant the Trump voters, whose primary concern in life is beating "libtards" at any cost.
Yes, the people with that mentality do make up a large portion of Trump voters.
However, Jon Stewart addressed the fact that
all Trump voters are being "defined by the worst of his rhetoric." He said he has friends who are not afraid of minorities, but are afraid of their insurance premiums. That seemed to be the tone of several Trump voters at the Bernie Sanders town hall recently. Their concerns stemmed over social security, government spending, and jobs. Some of them even denounced Trump's rhetoric against Muslims and immigrants. The sad fact is Trump did a better job campaigning to protect social safety nets and American jobs.
I didn't buy into it because I know that Trump is a con man. However, I can understand how some people believed him. Like Stewart, I hate to see Trump voters treated as a monolith. I'm a liberal, but I don't want to be defined by the leftists who promote "safe spaces," are against free speech, and use identity politics to bash straight, white, cis gendered men. Hillary Clinton has been in favor of anti-gay marriage laws, the Iraq War, mass incarceration, and the Patriot Act, yet I don't believe everybody who voted for her are in favor of neocon policies.
As for the DNC, yes - I do believe they're ultimately better for the country, despite having their own selfish agenda.
Marginally, perhaps, but the amount of neocon policies supported by Obama and Hillary is staggering.
The Democrats refuse to clean house, and Nancy Pelosi said she doesn't believe the voters want a change in direction. So as long as they keep telling themselves that everything is fine, I don't see much changing.
I don't find the contents of the disclosed emails remotely upsetting as the fact Russia and its thug of a leader - not just a foreign power, but the arch enemy of the US - meddled in the democratic process in the US.
I for one find the content of the emails very upsetting. A major political party was working to undermine the non-establishment candidate by plotting to bury the debates, attack his religion, and portray his supporters as violent. In the Podesta emails, Hillary revealed she has both a "public and private" stance on the issues. All of that is troubling to me. That obviously doesn't excuse Russia's hacking, but it did expose the DNC's biased scheming.
Of course, if it was revealed that Russia had tampered with voting machines and ballots, I would be much more outraged than I am right now. I don't condone what they did, but I appreciate the transparency it provided.
Also, as I've previously noted in other threads, Hillary wanted to undermine the Palestinian election in 2006.
I get the persistent bitterness over Bernie, but it's counter-productive. The Trump/Pence menace and their cabinet of horrors needed to be prevented from entering the White House. Even after Bernie got the shaft.
Hillary needed to give the voters a reason to vote for her, other than saying Trump is deplorable. It was a campaign based on the ugliness of her opponent, not on the actual reasons why people should vote for her. She talked down to millennials and Bernie supporters during the primaries, then grudgingly sought their support at the convention. She didn't think she needed to campaign in the Democratic stronghold of the rust belt, and lost because of it.
Trump/Pence are awful. But when Trump says he's against the TPP, and does a better job campaigning to protect Social Security, Medicare, and jobs, you're doing something wrong as a Democrat. The voters wanted a populist.
I'd never put my hand in fire for Hillary Clinton, but I'm absolutely positive she wouldn't have so blatantly and brazenly reneged on core campaign promises several weeks before the actual inauguration. The arrogance of Donald Trump and his con-happy supporters is unprecedented. "Unpresidented", too. The semi-literate buffoon.
Yes, I agree with that.
Again, I was referring to the voters. And I see no equation between Trump and Clinton supporters. One look at what was behind each candidate at their respective rallies (or what that adulation-hungry clown continued to have on his self-indulgent "thank-you tour") is sufficient to spot the gaping difference. The Clinton supporters can live in a bubble, yes, but I'll take that any day over the rancid ugliness of the Trumpster ilk.
The "rancid ugliness" of any staunch, myopic voter is appalling. And while I will concede that that kind of behavior is more likely to come from a Trump supporter, I still refuse to believe they're all like that.
On the flip side, there are Hillary supporters like Laci Green. Before the election, she said we need to "mend, heal, and restore the U in USA" regardless of the outcome. After the election, she said "F*** you, white America. F*** you, you racist, misogynist pieces of shit." So much for her empty platitudes of mending our broken nation. That's just one example. Let's heal, but only if my candidate wins. If Trump wins, you're part of an evil monolith.
Hillary herself only labeled half of Trump supporters "deplorable," and said the rest felt that the government and the economy let them down. She also said they were afraid of losing their jobs, and were desperate for change because they believed nobody cared about their lives and futures. She hit the nail on the hit perfectly, yet never managed to connect with their needs in a meaningful way. Things like supporting the TPP didn't help either. The fact that she was grudgingly pushed to the left made even the best of her policies come off as just lip service.
