Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The smug style in American liberalism

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 435 posts

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#141

Post by foldr »

Nursie wrote: post #104
gadders wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A similar thing happened with Brexit, and the last UK General Election. Right-leaning voters just can't be bothered to identify themselves and get involved in debates about it. They just vote.

The thing about the UK situation that most worries me is the smug left trying to grasp at any way they can to overturn the referendum result or undermine subsequent action. There seems to be the idea that of we just keep ignoring and denigrating hard enough then the morons will be safely put back in their box and we can go on as before. It never occurs to them that that would just make everything even worse in the lo…

The thing is that the only alternative to putting the morons back in their box appears to be letting the morons run the country. Sometimes public opinion really is just wrong, and there is no easy way forward when that happens.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#142

Post by jessaustin »

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #131
scarmig wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full disclosure: I'm a Hillary voter, after much internal fretting about voting third party or writing in Obama. Looking at the reactions on my Facebook feed, the large majority of people seem to be taking from this experience the learning that Trump voters are all disgusting misogynistic racist pigs, and America deserves to be damned for its sins against the pro-Clinton media orthodoxy. It's tiring, because in terms…

I've yet to meet a Trump voter who didn't meet that criteria. Just because people don't like to be described in a certain way doesn't mean that it doesn't describe them. Trump didn't win because of any sort of liberal catechism. He won because the media has done a bang up job of scaring the crap out of the average citizen about immigration and terrorism while pimping his brand because he's a perverse curiosity in a s…

This says more about you than about the American public in general. My brother and his wife, and many of the people with whom I work, are not "disgusting misogynistic racist pigs". Actually I know many more Trump voters than disgusting racist pigs.

The media really couldn't help it, however. Every president from here on out will be a reality show star. Look for Chris Christie to get a show as soon as he gets booted out of the cabinet for another ethical lapse. Chelsea and Ivanka will both start new shows (perhaps together?) in about a decade.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#143

Post by foldr »

xupybd wrote: post #70
ant6n wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Huffpost did a round-up: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-exam... For example there were proposals to not allow Muslims to immigrate to the US. There was calling Mexicans 'criminals' and 'rapists'. Beating of black people at Trump rallies (which he endorsed). This shows up this night on my twitter feed: "I am at a Trump rally in Manhattan, and thousands are chanting 'We hate Muslims, we hat…

Fair enough if the stuff with Trump Management Corporation and his action at the casino are correct I'd say it's a fair call he's probably a bit racist. Not allowing Muslims in could be seen as racist, but I don't know that was at the core of what he was trying to do. Don't get me wrong I don't think it's a good idea. But 100% of radical Islamic terrorist are Muslim so banning them would have made people less afraid…

>It's dumb and unfairly treats good honest safe people, but racist is a stretch.

That's all racism is. Dumb thoughtless prejudice. It doesn't have horns and a tail.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#144

Post by judahmeek »

lintiness wrote: post #136
jacobolus wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be interested to read http://www.salon.com/2015/12/28/behind_the_ronald_reagan_myt...

not the least bit interested in partisan "journalism". i was alive then.

And what metrics are you basing your statements on?

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#145

Post by jacobolus »

lintiness wrote: post #136
jacobolus wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be interested to read http://www.salon.com/2015/12/28/behind_the_ronald_reagan_myt...

not the least bit interested in partisan "journalism". i was alive then.

This is an excerpt from a mass-market history/biography book by a renowned historian at UNC Chapel Hill (emeritus), a foremost scholar of FDR’s life and work. It’s not journalism per se (with or without scare quotes) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0195176162/

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#146

Post by esja »

lintiness wrote: post #130
mrow84 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no expert on US politics, but wasn't he hidebound by a Republican house and senate?

he controlled both houses when he took office. he rammed through ideological policy aca with zero opposition party input or support; he quickly lost his majorities.

He also did this at a time when he should have been focused on finishing the job with banking reform.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#147

Post by arethuza »

jacobolus wrote: post #134
lintiness wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"He's the best we've had in living memory." uh, WOW. you must have a short memory because reagan, bush sr, and clinton were all superior in almost every way, and none will eat a terrible policy failure like the aca.

You might be interested to read http://www.salon.com/2015/12/28/behind_the_ronald_reagan_myt...

Somewhat surprisingly for a leftish Scot I am a fan of Reagan - for one very important reason. He understood that the standard US view of the Soviets was actually wrong and it was the Soviet leadership who were utterly afraid of the US (perhaps for good reasons) and he changed his approach.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#148

Post by cafard »

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #131
scarmig wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full disclosure: I'm a Hillary voter, after much internal fretting about voting third party or writing in Obama. Looking at the reactions on my Facebook feed, the large majority of people seem to be taking from this experience the learning that Trump voters are all disgusting misogynistic racist pigs, and America deserves to be damned for its sins against the pro-Clinton media orthodoxy. It's tiring, because in terms…

I've yet to meet a Trump voter who didn't meet that criteria. Just because people don't like to be described in a certain way doesn't mean that it doesn't describe them. Trump didn't win because of any sort of liberal catechism. He won because the media has done a bang up job of scaring the crap out of the average citizen about immigration and terrorism while pimping his brand because he's a perverse curiosity in a s…

Out of curiosity, how many have you met? I have relatives and in-laws I assume to have voted for Trump. I have friends and acquaintances I assume to have voted for neither major party candidate. But I don't know many Trump voters. Nor, I think, would be I be likely to: Clinton took 94% of my precinct, Trump 2.5%, barely ahead of Stein at 2%.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#149

Post by snsr »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #46
ant6n wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding the difference between polls and election results: maybe many people are racist, sexist xenophobes and if they tell the preference in public, they get rightfully derided for it. But with the secrecy of the ballot, they can give into their deep desire to kick out the Muslims and the Blacks, kick the females back into the kitchen and make America white again.

There are other reasons to support Trump. Being an unorthodox person who they perceived as nonjudgemental, quite a few people have confided in me that they like him. Only one of these people was white, several were female, and none are particularly racist. Reasons I've been told include: - A "fuck you" to the establishment and orthodoxy. - A belief that Hillary is corrupt. - Entertainment value. One Trump voter I kno…

I realize you think you're being creatively reductive, but Romney is a fucking racist. And so are you apparently.

Re: The smug style in American liberalism

#150

Post by k__ »

hueving wrote: post #20
codeonfire wrote: post #6

Well tens of millions of "stupid hicks" are about to lose their health insurance. How is that for a "good fact"? Sorry for being smug.

They effectively lost it with the implementation of Obamacare. The premiums and deductibles are so high that the plans only really protect against catastrophic loss for an obscene monthly cost.

> the plans only really protect against catastrophic loss

Isn't that the idea of insurance?

Post reply on HN