Why the left hates Trump so intensely

[Jhhnn]

Yes, more people wanted Clinton to win. The problem is they were in the wrong states and our system only looks at the votes per state vs the country as a whole.

Which justifies a hard right turn & slap the pedal to the metal in what way, exactly?

Yeh, sure, Trump & the Repubs have the power to do that. The notion that most people really want it is very mistaken.

 

[nageov3t]

it seems worth mentioning that after GWB lost the popular vote but won thanks to the Electoral College/Supreme Court, one of his first priorities was working on a bipartisan education reform bill with Ted Kennedy... he sure as hell didn't go on a red state victory tour and trash talk on Democrats.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

I was talking about election fraud in general...not in-person voter fraud specifically. Nice job of dishonest framing though....you never disappoint.

He thinks that having 2 Democrats running for California's Senate seat was a fair and equitable arrangement and had nothing to do with voter turnout. Since President-elect Trump didn't care about the popular vote he only made fundraising stops in the that State.

 

[fskimospy]

He thinks that having 2 Democrats running for California's Senate seat was a fair and equitable arrangement and had nothing to do with voter turnout. Since President-elect Trump didn't care about the popular vote he only made fundraising stops in the that State.

So to be clear you believe that a more fair and equitable arrangement would have been to put the person who got the third most votes in the primary on the general election ballot instead of the person with the second most votes because the person with the third most votes had a different letter next to their name?

I love how conservatives have become so used to getting special extra electoral privileges that when you DON'T have them you think you're being unfairly discriminated against.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Which justifies a hard right turn & slap the pedal to the metal in what way, exactly?

Yeh, sure, Trump & the Repubs have the power to do that. The notion that most people really want it is very mistaken.

What the hell are you blathering on about?

 

[Jhhnn]

What the hell are you blathering on about?

Is the water too deep for you or are you being deliberately obtuse?

 

[Jhhnn]

So to be clear you believe that a more fair and equitable arrangement would have been to put the person who got the third most votes in the primary on the general election ballot instead of the person with the second most votes because the person with the third most votes had a different letter next to their name?

I love how conservatives have become so used to getting special extra electoral privileges that when you DON'T have them you think you're being unfairly discriminated against.

He's duh-verting as usual. He seems to think that Repubs should have a reserved spot on the general election ballot.

 

[agent00f]

That is not what he said. He first said this.

I listed her flaws, I just don't think they are flaws to me personally because I don't view a politician from a superficial viewpoint. That doesn't mean no one else does (most people do), so yes, they are flaws.

He is saying others see flaws but only because they don't see things as deeply as he does. He is clearly saying he personally does not think those are actual flaws. A strange reply to my question of flaws he thinks she has. That's like me asking what your favorite color is and you telling me others like blue.

The reason I ask is because the left is starting do go down the dogmatic path the right did long ago. Pretending your flaws are not really flaws has led their side to some dumb shit. Thinking the Bible written by horrible humans during a horrible time, establishes morality is stupid, but to them it's fine because criticisms are superficial.

We are losing our counter balance to the Right.

Rather simple to figure that appearing flawed to the lowest common denominator is a flaw, ie. look "uncool" to kids. Notice I also mentioned this, but nobody has ever mistaken you for a reader much less thinker.

You specifically said that her flaws were only flaws if seen from a flawed perspective. That literally means she has no flaws at all.

I know words are hard, but come on.

Just as heads up that agreeing with realibrad on anything is a good sign you're embarrassingly wrong.

 

[realibrad]

Rather simple to figure that appearing flawed to the lowest common denominator is a flaw, ie. look "uncool" to kids. Notice I also mentioned this, but nobody has ever mistaken you for a reader much less thinker.




Just as heads up that agreeing with realibrad on anything is a good sign you're embarrassingly wrong.

So her only flaw is not being as "cool" as Obama. Got it.

 

[jackstar7]

So her only flaw is not being as "cool" as Obama. Got it.

What do you see as her flaws? Did you already post your position on the topic? I'll take a link.

 

[agent00f]

So her only flaw is not being as "cool" as Obama. Got it.

You're the perfect illustration of this divergence in rube opinion despite basically the same policy/outlook. The level of rube who evidently lacks the faculties to ever understand the importance of popularity in a popularity contest.

 

[realibrad]

What do you see as her flaws? Did you already post your position on the topic? I'll take a link.

Yep I did.

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...mp-so-intensely.2497029/page-14#post-38687464

I also ended that post with this comment that I think keeps things in perspective.

"None of those issues make her worse than Trump, but I at least can admit she has flaws."

I then followed up my post with this post.

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...mp-so-intensely.2497029/page-16#post-38688185

In that one, I explained why her flaws were more than superficial and could easily lead to actual problems insofar as what I thought was reasonable.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Is the water too deep for you or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Your blathering had zero to what was contained in my post. Then again I'm beginning to see that you read far too much into other's posts.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

it seems worth mentioning that after GWB lost the popular vote but won thanks to the Electoral College/Supreme Court, one of his first priorities was working on a bipartisan education reform bill with Ted Kennedy... he sure as hell didn't go on a red state victory tour and trash talk on Democrats.

Until President Trump showed up George W. Bush was the most hated person to Democrats and some assholes on the left still want him prosecuted for "war crimes". So what the hell did it get him to work with the scum of the left?

 

[realibrad]

You're the perfect illustration of this divergence in rube opinion despite basically the same policy/outlook. The level of rube who evidently lacks the faculties to ever understand the importance of popularity in a popularity contest.

You are totally right. I have been looking at this only from a popularity contest, and now how her "flaws" might influence her decisions. I mean, my criticism of Trump and his flaws influencing his decisions is rational, but Clinton's is just me eating propaganda from the Right.

 

[agent00f]

You are totally right. I have been looking at this only from a popularity contest, and now how her "flaws" might influence her decisions. I mean, my criticism of Trump and his flaws influencing his decisions is rational, but Clinton's is just me eating propaganda from the Right.

You were told why they're superficial, just as you were told clinton is a witch, and between the two it's hardly a surprise that rubes always follow folks who say they have a very good brain.

 

[realibrad]

You were told why they're superficial, just as you were told clinton is a witch, and between the two it's hardly a surprise that rubes always follow folks who say they have a very good brain.

I see, so that is why I think Clinton is better, because I'm a Trump supporter. How very interesting.

 

[agent00f]

I see, so that is why I think Clinton is better, because I'm a Trump supporter. How very interesting.

To make the performance of said brain evident, notice you were accused of overlooking the importance of social charisma in the eyes of dimwits, the exact opposite of "been looking at this only from a popularity contest", but again nobody would ever accuse you of understanding sentences.

Also, is figuring out that Clinton might be better at the job than Trump despite being some kind of witch supposed to contradict the fact that rubes falls for "both sides" every time?

 

[realibrad]

To make the performance of said brain evident, notice you were accused of overlooking the importance of social charisma in the eyes of dimwits, the exact opposite of "been looking at this only from a popularity contest", but again nobody would ever accuse you of understanding sentences.

Also, is figuring out that Clinton might be better at the job than Trump despite being some kind of witch supposed to contradict the fact that rubes falls for "both sides" every time?

No, I pointed out that saying others see it as a flaw, but he does not means he does not see it as a flaw. You jumping in and shitting all over the place does not change what happened.

Also, you have done your same shtick. You come in on a conversation, accuse someone of something that someone is not. If the person defends himself, its seen as the, "im not a racist because of x" which is widely dismissed. It is impossible for me to disagree with you, because it would require me to prove im not a racist, sexist, ect. Any evidence is just a guise to hide what my true beliefs are.

 

[ivwshane]

And the buckshatting continues.

 

[agent00f]

No, I pointed out that saying others see it as a flaw, but he does not means he does not see it as a flaw. You jumping in and shitting all over the place does not change what happened.

It's pretty obvious susceptibility to negative dimwit opinions is a flaw as you've been generously demonstrating, even if dimwits can't exactly figure this out themselves.

Also, you have done your same shtick. You come in on a conversation, accuse someone of something that someone is not. If the person defends himself, its seen as the, "im not a racist because of x" which is widely dismissed. It is impossible for me to disagree with you, because it would require me to prove im not a racist, sexist, ect. Any evidence is just a guise to hide what my true beliefs are.

Nobody would really accuse dimwits of particularly clever guises, just predicatively rationalizing their opinions, as mentioned previously and the dimwit still hasn't figure out. Literally the agitprop with clinton is her magical witch flaws, with innuendo to that end trickled out through the campaign. A centrist changing their position with the prevailing winds, the absolute horror. As to the dimwittedness, it's admittedly pretty hard to disprove by now.

 

[realibrad]

And the buckshatting continues.

Yep, but it brings up an interesting question.

It is buckshatting because I am unable/unwilling to understand, or is it because you have said mutually exclusive things while shifting the goalpost all while never answering direct questions. The wonders of the universe.

What is a flaw of hers?

Others would say X and Y are flaws, but I think those are not flaws to me!

Okay, so what are some flaws you think she has?

I already told you.

Lol.

 

[agent00f]

Yep, but it brings up an interesting question.

It is buckshatting because I am unable/unwilling to understand, or is it because you have said mutually exclusive things while shifting the goalpost all while never answering direct questions. The wonders of the universe.

What is a flaw of hers?

Others would say X and Y are flaws, but I think those are not flaws to me!

Okay, so what are some flaws you think she has?

I already told you.

Lol.

I'm genuinely curious. Can you literary not grasp why you're the perfect illustration of that flaw or is this actual buckshitting ie playing dumb?

 

[realibrad]

It's pretty obvious susceptibility to negative dimwit opinions is a flaw as you've been generously demonstrating, even if dimwits can't exactly figure this out themselves.

So her flaw are dumb people believing things. So really not her fault, but just circumstance of being surrounded by dumb people. Got it.

Nobody would really accuse dimwits of particularly clever guises, just predicatively rationalizing their opinions, as mentioned previously and the dimwit still hasn't figure out. Literally the agitprop with clinton is her magical witch flaws, with innuendo to that end trickled out through the campaign. A centrist changing their position with the prevailing winds, the absolute horror. As to the dimwittedness, it's admittedly pretty hard to disprove by now.

Lol, now you look to be the one rationalizing. Sanders and other Dems start to go against the TPP, and she changes. That is just her changing her mind on something as she gains more facts, and not her fear of taking an unpopular stance on something she things is the right thing to do. Got it.

 

[ivwshane]

I'm genuinely curious. Can you literary not grasp why you're the perfect illustration of that flaw or is this actual buckshitting ie playing dumb?

I hope he's playing dumb because this is ridiculous.