The_Donald - politics = fatpeoplehate

[HamburgerBoy]

Did you not even bother to read the article? It took the most active subreddit for Trump, Sanders, and Clinton, so saying it 'makes no attempt to show the other side' just shows you didn't read it or didn't understand it. Also, nothing in the article or in any post said that it was only republicans, whites, or Trump fans. Saying that makes you sound silly and ignorant. You're also transparently exposing your agenda. Go back and read the stupid article next time or at least learn how to hide the fact that you didn't better.

For someone who critiques other people's posts you sure make a lot of shitty ones yourself.

Unless I'm blind, the article doesn't appear to explicitly state that the sub-reddits they looked at relative to Sanders' and Clinton's were the top 5, unlike the one for Trump's, nor whether or not they were included along the same criteria (e.g. /r/k*ketown is at the top in the pyramid image but not in the top 5 for /r/The_Donald when arranged by correlation). fwiw I don't expect the results to change much, however.

fatpeoplehate specifically is basically coontown/kiketown with a different demo for the images. I suppose in a sense it differs because something can be done about fatness but it does appeal to the same crowd.

Dunno, for example the "lolcows" community is disproportionately made up of women from what I've heard, which is basically dedicated to documenting/harassing mentally ill people on the internet. The "People of Walmart" is essentially a way of mocking unkempt poor people as well, and I doubt there's a particular right-wing bent to those that submit images to that site.

 

[agent00f]

Dunno, for example the "lolcows" community is disproportionately made up of women from what I've heard, which is basically dedicated to documenting/harassing mentally ill people on the internet. The "People of Walmart" is essentially a way of mocking unkempt poor people as well, and I doubt there's a particular right-wing bent to those that submit images to that site.

I'm not saying that all hatred of obesity stems from trumpsters, just that sub apparently given it was the same folks flipping out as over r/coontown when it banned (urging folks to migrate to voat, etc).

 

[crashtech]

The endless analyses are kind of amusing, what it comes down to, is this is what the political establishment gets for not fielding an acceptable candidate on either side. Democrats are particularly culpable and also the most prickly in this regard, failing to accept even the tiniest bit of blame. Hopefully we will move forward being more circumspect in our choice of candidates; just because it's someone's "turn" shouldn't really mean anything at all. We are in desperate need of quality leaders, yet in today's climate, you almost have to be insane to want the job.

 

[shortylickens]

Its like saying not everyone in Germany was a Hitler supporter and while that was certainly true there were more than enough cowards standing by that kinda made them enablers.
A hundred years from now i dont wanna be labeled an enabler. Or racist or sexist.
Or dumber than a toddler.

 

[MajinCry]

The endless analyses are kind of amusing, what it comes down to, is this is what the political establishment gets for not fielding an acceptable candidate on either side. Democrats are particularly culpable and also the most prickly in this regard, failing to accept even the tiniest bit of blame. Hopefully we will move forward being more circumspect in our choice of candidates; just because it's someone's "turn" shouldn't really mean anything at all. We are in desperate need of quality leaders, yet in today's climate, you almost have to be insane to want the job.

So the Democrats put forward Trump as their nominee, is what you're saying? Or are you blaming the least-worst party, for Americans voting for the absolute-worst candidate, from the absolute-worst party?

 

[crashtech]

So the Democrats put forward Trump as their nominee, is what you're saying? Or are you blaming the least-worst party, for Americans voting for the absolute-worst candidate, from the absolute-worst party?

Thanks for your reply, unfortunately it looks like you accept too many opinions as self-evident truths for me to be able to give you an answer you could understand.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Its like saying not everyone in Germany was a Hitler supporter and while that was certainly true there were more than enough cowards standing by that kinda made them enablers.
A hundred years from now i dont wanna be labeled an enabler. Or racist or sexist.
Or dumber than a toddler.

The vast majority of Germans knew nothing of the Holocaust, and if Hitler had been assassinated prior to Kristallnacht, he could have been considered a great leader that improved their economy and ended back-breaking reparations to France (depending on how other things played out after said hypothetical assassination, of course).

So the Democrats put forward Trump as their nominee, is what you're saying?

Not far from the truth, see the "Pied Piper" memo.

 

[Ackmed]

Is there any other reddit analogous to the_donald that supports a candidate on the left (or any other politician at all!).

We don't even have to look there. There are plenty such posters and tactics right here. One of the most bigoted, racist, and insulting poster heavily leans left. Most of what he does is race bait, troll and insult people who don't agree with him. I rarely read his posts and made it a point to just scroll past, still some sneak in if quoted. The point I was making, is most media, and people here, act as if there are people like this on one side. That Trump won because of racists, only whites can be racists, only Trump supporters or Repubs are "deplorable". When that is far from the truth. Media rarely goes against the grain, such as with the alleged Rape in Maryland. Heard a peep on MSM? Not from the left, by far mostly ignored. Nobody here posted it. Attacking the victim? Thats ok, because of the circumstances. Wonder why that is? Not hard to imagine. Reporting it doesnt support their agenda, same as those here. A leftist talk show host who earlier tweeted a racist remark about Ivanka, just now tweeted an insult to an unborn child of the Trumps. And yet is too stupid to realize the difference between jeans and genes, or that genes are passed to male and female babies alike. This forum loves to report on every tweet that makes the Trumps look bad (they do make it easy sometimes because they post really dumb stuff) but not a peep about this tweet. Again, wonder why that is. You can bet if it went the other way, it would have been all over the news and these forums. But its not, because its apparently ok to hate against Trumps no matter what.

The article does take an interesting and unorthodox approach looking at things. I appreciate looking outside the box. If the article was the other way around, you can be assured that the OP would never have posted it. That is a fact. As I said, there are plenty of people who make truly disgusting remarks who are left and right leaning. Yet we usually only hear one way. Reading these forums for a few days will show plenty here do the same. Its not a one sided problem, no matter how much the attempts are made to make it look that way.

 

[WelshBloke]

We don't even have to look there. There are plenty such posters and tactics right here. One of the most bigoted, racist, and insulting poster heavily leans left. Most of what he does is race bait, troll and insult people who don't agree with him. I rarely read his posts and made it a point to just scroll past, still some sneak in if quoted. The point I was making, is most media, and people here, act as if there are people like this on one side. That Trump won because of racists, only whites can be racists, only Trump supporters or Repubs are "deplorable". When that is far from the truth. Media rarely goes against the grain, such as with the alleged Rape in Maryland. Heard a peep on MSM? Not from the left, by far mostly ignored. Nobody here posted it. Attacking the victim? Thats ok, because of the circumstances. Wonder why that is? Not hard to imagine. Reporting it doesnt support their agenda, same as those here. A leftist talk show host who earlier tweeted a racist remark about Ivanka, just now tweeted an insult to an unborn child of the Trumps. And yet is too stupid to realize the difference between jeans and genes, or that genes are passed to male and female babies alike. This forum loves to report on every tweet that makes the Trumps look bad (they do make it easy sometimes because they post really dumb stuff) but not a peep about this tweet. Again, wonder why that is. You can bet if it went the other way, it would have been all over the news and these forums. But its not, because its apparently ok to hate against Trumps no matter what.

The article does take an interesting and unorthodox approach looking at things. I appreciate looking outside the box. If the article was the other way around, you can be assured that the OP would never have posted it. That is a fact. As I said, there are plenty of people who make truly disgusting remarks who are left and right leaning. Yet we usually only hear one way. Reading these forums for a few days will show plenty here do the same. Its not a one sided problem, no matter how much the attempts are made to make it look that way.

Thats quite a long way of saying no!

 

[momeNt]

So the Democrats put forward Trump as their nominee, is what you're saying? Or are you blaming the least-worst party, for Americans voting for the absolute-worst candidate, from the absolute-worst party?

Technically yes, they worked with the media to prop him up as their "pied piper" the memo from the DNC is available for anybody to read once it was leaked.

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the...ed-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

 

[Sunburn74]

While Trump is clearly awful for the vast majority of the country, I don't really think his voters truly understand (especially the conservative cohort) what sort of damage he will do long-term to the right, especially when these virulently ignorant rejects are left to fester like a boil on the populace. The ongoing/inevitable disastrous results to the country and to their credibility over the long-term should be self-evident by now, and the left will easily be able to quite credibly paint the right as Trumpkins for years to come to win elections. Trump will truly end up being quite the trojan horse. It'll probably start today when they fail to nut up with an ACA repeal/replace, though either way that'll die in the Senate, and continue with failed tax and failed financial reform later this spring/summer/fall.

I remember reading an article ( on 538 i think) asking is it more likely that Trumps presidency is the beginning of a new age for Republican era or the end of the Republican party entirely? The conclusion was that he will do lasting damage to the party, alienate dramatically everyone (and their kids in upcoming generations) who didn't vote for them, and result in the GOP splintering into various parties. I think there is a lot of precedent for extremists being voted into positions of power and that being the end of their party.

 

[First]

Not far from the truth, see the "Pied Piper" memo.

Technically yes, they worked with the media to prop him up as their "pied piper" the memo from the DNC is available for anybody to read once it was leaked.

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the...ed-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

Haha, in no reality were Dems responsible for Trump, sorry. He won the nomination easily over Cruz, Dems had no impact on the outcome of the primary. Republicans were entirely to blame and no amount of "pied piper" nonsense can erase that irrefutable statistical fact; Dems didn't vote for Trump, Republicans did.

 

[crashtech]

...Dems didn't vote for Trump, Republicans did.

Dems nominated Hillary, which means that at worst, Trump can only be the second-worst nominee in our history.

 

[First]

Dems nominated Hillary, which means that at worst, Trump can only be the second-worst nominee in our history.

lol, keep telling yourself that kiddo.

 

[crashtech]

lol, keep telling yourself that kiddo.

Cogent argument there, son.

 

[First]

Cogent argument there, son.

Uh, says the kid who didn't make one at all.

 

[crashtech]

Uh, says the kid who didn't make one at all.

It's obvious your comprehension is impaired, perhaps because you were one of the culpable ones who helped nominate possibly the worst candidate in history. I can't blame you for not wanting to own up to that, it's a rather pitiable position to be in.

 

[First]

It's obvious your comprehension is impaired, perhaps because you were one of the culpable ones who helped nominate possibly the worst candidate in history. I can't blame you for not wanting to own up to that, it's a rather pitiable position to be in.

You wrote a lot of words and none of them are convincing, as they don't back up your original nonsense claim. HRC's qualifications and history were quite well known and above average for the position she was seeking, entirely unlike Trump. You must know you're outmatched against virtually anyone on this board, so man up and move on.

 

[crashtech]

You wrote a lot of words and none of them are convincing, as they don't back up your original nonsense claim. HRC's qualifications and history were quite well known and above average for the position she was seeking, entirely unlike Trump. You must know you're outmatched against virtually anyone on this board, so man up and move on.

From what you say, she ought to have been a shoo-in, so it's still incomprehensible to those like you how this catastrophe happened. On the outside looking in, it's glaringly easy to see the lack of introspection on your part. Would that you had giving the undecideds someone to vote for, someone who could get discouraged Dems off the couch and into the voting booth! This should have never happened.

As to your continued belittlement, well, I will agree that I am outmatched AND vastly outnumbered in that particular skill set, but usually I can hold my own fairly well, if I care to. It's just that I don't anymore, as a rule.

 

[First]

From what you say, she ought to have been a shoo-in, so it's still incomprehensible to those like you how this catastrophe happened.

Haha. The American people are not necessarily always the best arbiters of reality.

On the outside looking in, it's glaringly easy to see the lack of introspection on your part. Would that you had giving the undecideds someone to vote for, someone who could get discouraged Dems off the couch and into the voting booth! This should have never happened.

The fact that a few too many Americans were duped (barely, as he won by less than 1% in rust belt) does not say anything about Clinton's qualfications, it says a lot more about her (lack) of personality and (mostly) trumped up nonsense about her emails. You're confusing a popularity contest with qualifications. Keep up.

As to your continued belittlement, well, I will agree that I am outmatched AND vastly outnumbered in that particular skill set, but usually I can hold my own fairly well, if I care to. It's just that I don't anymore, as a rule.

Good call, it's best to give up when you have nothing of value to add. Thanks.

 

[crashtech]

...it says a lot more about her (lack) of personality...

Yeah, that's valid. I think that's a sliver of objective truth that we can both agree upon.

At that, I think I will refrain from engaging you further, seeing as you possess the same kind of pretentious, arrogant attitude that's so often seen deployed here against those who don't toe the leftist line. I wonder, do you treat people who disagree with you irl this way? I can't imagine you are really that kind of asshole, but who knows?

 

[First]

Yeah, that's valid. I think that's a sliver of objective truth that we can both agree upon.

Indeed.

At that, I think I will refrain from engaging you further, seeing as you possess the same kind of pretentious, arrogant attitude that's so often seen deployed here against those who don't toe the leftist line. I wonder, do you treat people who disagree with you irl this way? I can't imagine you are really that kind of asshole, but who knows?

You can't be offended at me for being an asshole while being an asshole yourself. But it's cool, I don't think you're that bad. It's just objective reality that HRC was qualified and normal as a candidate for POTUS from that (most important) perspective. Her not being electable because of her personality flaws and made-up email controversies is a different, separate matter that ultimately cost her.

 

[jackstar7]

It's obvious your comprehension is impaired, perhaps because you were one of the culpable ones who helped nominate possibly the worst candidate in history. I can't blame you for not wanting to own up to that, it's a rather pitiable position to be in.

Never let go of this lie.

Never.

 

[ivwshane]

From what you say, she ought to have been a shoo-in, so it's still incomprehensible to those like you how this catastrophe happened. On the outside looking in, it's glaringly easy to see the lack of introspection on your part. Would that you had giving the undecideds someone to vote for, someone who could get discouraged Dems off the couch and into the voting booth! This should have never happened.

As to your continued belittlement, well, I will agree that I am outmatched AND vastly outnumbered in that particular skill set, but usually I can hold my own fairly well, if I care to. It's just that I don't anymore, as a rule.

Qualifications doesn't guarantee a presidency and I don't know how you came to equate the two. Her campaign strategy was ok but trumps was better. That says nothing about the candidate themselves.

 

[Victorian Gray]

We don't even have to look there. There are plenty such posters and tactics right here. One of the most bigoted, racist, and insulting poster heavily leans left. Most of what he does is race bait, troll and insult people who don't agree with him. I rarely read his posts and made it a point to just scroll past, still some sneak in if quoted. The point I was making, is most media, and people here, act as if there are people like this on one side. That Trump won because of racists, only whites can be racists, only Trump supporters or Repubs are "deplorable". When that is far from the truth. Media rarely goes against the grain, such as with the alleged Rape in Maryland. Heard a peep on MSM? Not from the left, by far mostly ignored. Nobody here posted it. Attacking the victim? Thats ok, because of the circumstances. Wonder why that is? Not hard to imagine. Reporting it doesnt support their agenda, same as those here. A leftist talk show host who earlier tweeted a racist remark about Ivanka, just now tweeted an insult to an unborn child of the Trumps. And yet is too stupid to realize the difference between jeans and genes, or that genes are passed to male and female babies alike. This forum loves to report on every tweet that makes the Trumps look bad (they do make it easy sometimes because they post really dumb stuff) but not a peep about this tweet. Again, wonder why that is. You can bet if it went the other way, it would have been all over the news and these forums. But its not, because its apparently ok to hate against Trumps no matter what.

The article does take an interesting and unorthodox approach looking at things. I appreciate looking outside the box. If the article was the other way around, you can be assured that the OP would never have posted it. That is a fact. As I said, there are plenty of people who make truly disgusting remarks who are left and right leaning. Yet we usually only hear one way. Reading these forums for a few days will show plenty here do the same. Its not a one sided problem, no matter how much the attempts are made to make it look that way.

You know, if you can't answer someone's question you could simply say so.