Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Trump campaign speaker excitedly calls for "civil war" if Republicans lose the election

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by orangeblue_coop, Jul 23, 2024.

  1. tilly

    tilly Superhero Mod. Fast witted. Bulletproof posts. Moderator VIP Member

    Very well said.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  2. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,776
    2,033
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    See, this gives the entire game away here. Hillary Clinton's statement explicitly restricts the classification of "deplorables" and calls for understanding towards the others. Here is the quote:


    Now, you extend this out to all of his voters even though the quote explicitly excludes half of his voters. So there are a couple of options:

    1. You are being disingenuous and trying to make sure people not listed under those ideologies are offended. This comes with the added bonus of making it morally acceptable or even correct to associate with racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes, Islamaphobes, etc.
    2. You actually think that the average Trump voter could be labeled under those ideologies and that Clinton was wrong to exclude half of his voters.

    You can feel free to pick which is more on point. Either way, the Republican Party has now shown that the stool that holds up their party is not three-legged as Reagan was fond of claiming but four, with social status conservatives (people who want the stratification of society by race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) making up the fourth leg.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  3. ursidman

    ursidman VIP Member

    13,952
    22,579
    3,348
    Sep 27, 2007
    Bug Tussle NC
    I’m not certain of what year i came to know what about Clinton but i do know that the corruption and sleaze was too much for me in 92 and i could not vote for him. He did a very acceptable job as President though imo.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. gatorjo

    gatorjo GC Hall of Fame

    1,700
    315
    213
    Feb 24, 2024
    You're silly. And you can't even comprehend the point being made. Which is why you add so much irrelevant verbage.

    Bottom line : a vote for Clinton in 96 was NOTHING like a vote for Trump. Ever.

    The general public knew he'd admitted to GF in 92. It was definitely uncertain about the credibility of PJ. And that was the SUM known to the general public.


    Look, I can understand your desire to create a false equivalence between the two, to rationalize the fact that both you and so many you know cast votes for the grotesquery Trump.

    However, the equivalence is false. Sorry.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. phatGator

    phatGator GC Hall of Fame

    5,565
    5,239
    2,213
    Dec 3, 2007
    Dayton, Ohio
    I vote none of the above.

    I wasn’t particularly thinking of Clinton‘s comments. Rather, I was thinking of Democrats in general and especially the comments from people here. How many people on too hot who use “deplorable” to describe Trump voters, apply the qualification that Clinton did?

    How many people on too hot abide by this thinking:

    She said the other half of Trump’s supporters “feel that the government has let them down” and are “desperate for change.” “Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well,” she said.

    I see no attempt by most liberals, progressives, or Democrats on TH to try to understand Trump voters. It’s just universal condemnation with some serious name calling.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. tilly

    tilly Superhero Mod. Fast witted. Bulletproof posts. Moderator VIP Member

    Aha. Moving the goal posts. No one said there was an equivalence. I actually said the opposite.

    ALL I said was people view them all as cheating lowlifes and vote on issues (party lines) and ignore the personal faults.

    That has been my very clearly articulated point.

    You drug us into some semantically irrelevant point on numbers.

    Most voters knew or at least assumed Clinton was a dirtbag of a husband (multiple times over). It was public long before 1996. They voted for him. Not because they liked his personal character.
    They liked his policy.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. gatorjo

    gatorjo GC Hall of Fame

    1,700
    315
    213
    Feb 24, 2024
    No, in 1996 not really. They knew he'd had an affair, which sadly is similar to about half the US married population, I believe.

    They also knew a single woman accused him of misdeeds.

    So to drag you back to my original point: in 1996 Clinton was NOT credibly considered a "serial adulterer."

    Conversation should end there. With the facts. Why you're insistent on continuing this is baffling. Guilt over having knowingly voted for a clearly probable sex offender? Covering for so many in your circle who continue to do so?

    Who knows. Who cares. Why is this conversation continuing? One of us voted for an obvious sex offender. The other for a guy who, as far as anyone then knew, cheated on his spouse.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  8. swampbabe

    swampbabe GC Hall of Fame

    3,676
    918
    2,643
    Apr 8, 2007
    Viera, FL
    A party that espouses rounding people up in camps is never on the right side of history.

    In addition, I think that people that support his “policies” don’t really understand the potential impacts of those policies, whether it’s tariffs or billionaire tax cuts.

    As far as giving them “respect”, are they really? Or do they think their followers are too dumb to understand the ramifications of those policies?

    “I love the poorly educated” was not a compliment.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 2
  9. gatorjo

    gatorjo GC Hall of Fame

    1,700
    315
    213
    Feb 24, 2024
    As it SHOULD BE!

    People willing to vote for a person who enacted a criminal conspiracy to overturn an election deserve no......."understanding." To say nothing of all his other crimes, hate-mongering and grotesquery.

    And the understanding is PERFECTLY CLEAR: they're either conned by his lies, or activated by his racist tribalism and afraid of becoming the out group.

    It's sad and deplorable. They should be better than to fall for the 100s of years old racist immigration tropes he throws out.

    Zero apologies for being unsympathetic to that stuff....which is understood well.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2024
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  10. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    5,452
    478
    363
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    I pray they put their money where their mouth is. But you and I know they won't, because deep inside they're just big kittycats.
     
  11. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    5,452
    478
    363
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    I voted for Clinton twice and actually was fooled into thinking he was a good POTUS, and I have no idea how anyone with a pair of eyes could deny this. In that respect, he and Trump are very similar.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,190
    13,194
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    Plus there is that false dichotomy they like to push: if you don't support Trump, you are an America hating radical communist. WTF would I want to relate to or understand someone with that mentality? ____ em and the horse they rode in on.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. phatGator

    phatGator GC Hall of Fame

    5,565
    5,239
    2,213
    Dec 3, 2007
    Dayton, Ohio
    Your first paragraph could just as easily be reworded to say “a party that espouses destroying millions of unborn children is never on the right side of history.” I think we would all be surprised how future people will look back on these times.

    I think your second paragraph is mostly right for both sides. Most people don’t understand the implications of a party’s policies.

    In your third paragraph, are you saying you think Trump supporters are dumb, or are too dumb to know that the politicians don’t respect them? Are you saying Trump supporters are so dumb that they don’t know that the politicians think they’re dumb? It wasn’t clear.
     
  14. phatGator

    phatGator GC Hall of Fame

    5,565
    5,239
    2,213
    Dec 3, 2007
    Dayton, Ohio
    Thanks for proving my point. :D
     
  15. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    5,452
    478
    363
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    I disagree on the good POTUS thing. I think, like Trump in his first term, he was lucky to land in a good epoch economically, benefitting primarily from the first tech boom. He also received the benefit of George Bush's tax increase, which the CBO estimates contributed up to 60-70% of his vaunted surplus.

    That said, if you're a Reagan fan you should LOVE Clinton as he took Reagan's neoliberal trend and made it concrete. The amount of deregulation his henchmen Rubin and Summers implemented would have made the Reagan team blush and clearly laid the foundation for 2008.
     
  16. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    5,452
    478
    363
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    How about going full Code Pink and parroting Chomsky on Ukraine? That's how you know the entire movement is an intellectual fraud.
     
  17. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,190
    13,194
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    Except " that party" does not espouse destroying millions of babies. They just want women to have the right to make a decision. At least TRY to be honest and not put words into other peoples mouths.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  18. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    5,452
    478
    363
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    So genius. What would you do about it (abortion)? Spare me the rhetoric and usual baying at the moon, I want real answers, real policies that can be implemented (by the GOVERNMENT no less) and will work.

    Oh, that's right, you're a Pro-Lifer, which means you have no answers whatsoever and have probably never given it two seconds of thought. Yeah, just keep baying at the moon like the rest of your friends. LOL! Trump just gave up on you after using you for three elections and now that it's gone to the states, it looks like it's going to be locked in just about everywhere outside of Alabama and Mississippi.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. phatGator

    phatGator GC Hall of Fame

    5,565
    5,239
    2,213
    Dec 3, 2007
    Dayton, Ohio
    As an aside, that was a favorite expression of a former Secretary of the Treasury, but at this point I don’t remember which one. However, his portrait hanging in the Treasury building shows a book with the title The Horses They Rode In On. He was able to work his expression into his official portrait.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    5,452
    478
    363
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    There's really no point in attempting a logic based argument with a person who eschews logic in every aspect of life. They have no real position or policy outside of baying at the moon. The fact they see their usual enemy for all things - the government - as the answer to this tells you everything you need to know about them.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Dislike Dislike x 1