Make America Hate Again • Hacker News Board

Re: Make America Hate Again

#311

Post by pitt1980 » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 6:13 PM UTC

josefresco wrote: post #43

soneca wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People become sick of this, and vote Trump just to fuck with everyone." This is extremely superficial, arrogant, even offensive to people who voted for Trump. And that is the reason why Trump won IMO. Opposition couldnt understand (not even recognize) the legitimate and valid thoughtful reasons people had to vote for Trump.

Anecdotally, the people I know personally who voted for Trump did so because they "didn't like Hillary" which I translate as "just to fuck with everyone". They knew who they were "supposed" to vote for, and rejected that. They didn't once repeat any of Trumps proposed policies or justify their choice based on public positions. They were given a choice between two flavors of politicians, and picked the one they liked…

for better or worse, we'll never know what negative/unpopular/bad things a President Clinton would have done

an election is a choice between 2 alternates though

didn't like X (maybe 'thought X would do bad things' is a better way to translate that), is a valid reason to vote for Y, and doesn't translate very well to "just to fuck with everyone"

---------

if you dislike Trump, the Democratic Party's failure to give the American people a better alternative to Trump than Clinton, deserves some portion of the blame

(and while we're on it, the medias failure to hold the democratic party accountable to produce better options than Trump deserve a good deal of the blame as well)

-----------

These things work in balance, Trump gets away with a lot of the stuff he gets away with, because people don't trust the alternatives,

people don't trust the alternatives, because those alternatives have proven themselves unworthy of trust

Re: Make America Hate Again

#312

Post by jazzyk » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 6:24 PM UTC

elechi wrote: post #308

jazzyk wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that Obama de facto stopped - or at least severely limited - Iraqi immigration for 6 months in 2011. There was no outright ban, but the flow of Iraqis slowed significantly. Would you call it a hateful act as well?

> You know that Obama de facto stopped - or at least severely limited - Iraqi immigration for 6 months in 2011. There was no outright ban, but the flow of Iraqis slowed significantly. The comparison barely pasts muster when you consider the circumstances. First of all, Obama's 'ban' was based on an intelligence report that stated that terrorist had already gotten into the US through the immigration program, and wante…

US Green card holders are NOT affected by this. This was either mis-communicated, or a mistake (that should have never been made).

I don't see it as anti-Muslim decision, 87% of the world's Muslim population are not affected. I see it as anti-terrorism decision, targeted at the top 7 most terrorist-ridden countries in the world [1].

Yes, it sucks for law-abiding citizens of these countries who would like to visit the US in the next 120 days. But it is only temporary.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Terrorism_Index

Re: Make America Hate Again

#313

Post by willstrafach » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 6:25 PM UTC

justinlaster wrote: post #154

metafunctor wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Sadly, it seems HN may be getting overrun by Trump apologists. Where's the next good place to be after HN gets gaslighted to not knowing the meaning of words?

I called this out a few months ago, and got told by a moderator to not employ conspiracy theories. Yet, week by week, I watch as brand new accounts show up on these types of posts to spout the same short-sighted, toxic talking points that always get vomited out by Trump supporters. They don't say anything related to technology, they always tend to comment on political posts. I've been watching a few accounts and ther…

> Yet, week by week, I watch as brand new accounts show up on these types of posts to spout the same short-sighted, toxic talking points that always get vomited out by Trump supporters.

I have noticed this as well and did not mention until recently, thought I was overthinking it. Good to see some others noticing this.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#314

Post by beat » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 6:39 PM UTC

humanrebar wrote: post #302

beat wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A temporary restraining order in a non-emergency is not overstepping any authority. I see absolutely no reason why this is too important to go through due process.

There's a good point there, but I can also see the merit of letting the commander in chief get the benefit of the doubt, especially since we're not talking about U.S. citizens as far as I can tell.

No, but US citizens are affected. The US-born children of long-term non-citizen residents may lose a parent, for example, if that parent isn't let back in.

The other day, a lawyer friend of mine had to advise a client of his not to return home to visit his dying father. This client has lived in the US for 20 years, and runs a business employing six US citizens. But if he goes to visit his father, he may not be allowed back into the US. That father will die without seeing his eldest son because of this policy. But if this man has American-born children (I don't know if he does), he might be permanently separated from his children if he visits his dying father.

Think about the implications.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#315

Post by Eridrus » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 6:56 PM UTC

cylinder wrote: post #307

beat wrote: post #210

Regardless of how one feels about the order itself, the fact is, courts are ordering it temporarily suspended, and the Trump administration is ignoring court orders. Legislators are going to airports to see that travelers arriving in their district and being detained are allowed access to counsel, and they're not allowed to meet with the detainees. This is a constitutional crisis. This is not about the right or wrong…

The orders have not been suspended. The Judge ordered that refugee arrivals should not be sent back to their home countries due to the risk of danger.

There have been two separate rulings, one of them says that detainees should be granted access to their lawyer.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#316

Post by jartelt » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 7:10 PM UTC

jazzyk wrote: post #312

elechi wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know that Obama de facto stopped - or at least severely limited - Iraqi immigration for 6 months in 2011. There was no outright ban, but the flow of Iraqis slowed significantly. The comparison barely pasts muster when you consider the circumstances. First of all, Obama's 'ban' was based on an intelligence report that stated that terrorist had already gotten into the US through the immigration program, and wante…

US Green card holders are NOT affected by this. This was either mis-communicated, or a mistake (that should have never been made). I don't see it as anti-Muslim decision, 87% of the world's Muslim population are not affected. I see it as anti-terrorism decision, targeted at the top 7 most terrorist-ridden countries in the world [1]. Yes, it sucks for law-abiding citizens of these countries who would like to visit the…

No, Trump's inner circle purposely decided to not exclude green card holders from the Executive Order even after the Homeland Security Secretary suggested they should do so (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/stephen-bannon-donald-...). They could have easily crafted a better policy, so I think it is naive to call this a mistake.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#317

Post by jartelt » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 7:15 PM UTC

mikeyouse wrote: post #296

pluma wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still struggling to understand where this obsession with explaining how Trump got people to vote for him comes from. The real killing blow was the low turnout for the Democrat candidate. Trump only had to beat Clinton and practically nobody (outside the most progressive parts of the US) voted for Clinton. Trump may have swayed some undecided voters in his favours as a protest vote but all he had to do was rally t…

The tricky part about Clinton "not matching the numbers" of Obama's reelection is that she received more votes than he did. She received more votes than everyone who has ever ran for President with the exception of Obama in 2008. Nobody is claiming that Trump's win is illegitimate due to the electoral vs. popular mismatch, but it's clear that something is seriously wrong when a candidate can win an election by severa…

Isn't the obvious answer to eliminate the electoral college? The president effects all citizens equally, so it makes the most sense that each citizen's vote should have equal weight in the presidential election. We don't need the electoral college to promote state's rights. States already get 2 senators regardless of population and get to make their own state laws (as long as they are constitutional).

Re: Make America Hate Again

#318

Post by panglott » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 7:26 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #179

panglott wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is a racist society: "race" has no valid biological basis, but is a salient social category which impacts social and economic interactions in a wide variety of ways, producing inequalities of privilege and injustice. Whether or not you have bigotry in your heart is beside the point—no one can know such things. When you spend all your energy trying to prove that you are untainted and innocent of racism, it seem…

I don't know what you mean by "racist". Can you provide a clear and unambiguous definition? I don't think you can.

Racialism is is the idea that Homo sapiens can be divided into separate social categories or "races" based on a variety of relatively arbitrary society-specific markers: religion, kinship, skin color, and so on. The ideas of race is tied up with the idea of ancestry (and nation), but the biological link between genetic ancestry and racial identities is very ambiguous. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/12/22/a-lot...

Racism is the discriminatory or prejudicial treatment of people based on these socially-salient-but-mostly-arbitrary social categories. This is pretty basic stuff, really.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#319

Post by jartelt » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 7:32 PM UTC

Corristowolf wrote: post #290

mikeash wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was policy. Then that policy was loosened. The loosening is rather vague and still leaves a lot of room for trouble, so it remains to be seen just what the practical effects are. Now they "will be allowed to board U.S. bound aircraft and will be assessed for exceptions at arrival ports of entry." I totally agree that focusing on the list itself is silly. It's a good example of why Trump should have divested his bu…

And this policy is also for 90days.

And then they can issue another executive order that says the same thing for another 120 days... This looks like a textbook example of issuing a controversial and overreaching order, waiting for the push-back, saying "we will fix the issues on a case-by-case basis, trust us", and then waiting for the push-back to drop in intensity. In the end, we are still left with a controversial and overreaching order and the president can decide to not fix the issue as promised.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#320

Post by nailer » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 7:35 PM UTC

derrickdirge wrote: post #304

jazzyk wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because conservative, old Muslim men never call anyone "gay", right? For wearing a trendy piece of clothing, for example? My male friend has been called "gay" a few times because he likes Broadway shows. You can believe in any hearsay you want, but at the end of the day, this was a US-hating, Muslim guy/couple, killing LGBT people (for whom many Muslims have special hatred, and like to throw them off the roofs).

My point is that we should be cautious about assuming that his motives were uncomplicated. For what it's worth, the FBI also found no evidence linking him to ISIL. We can't possibly know what he felt in his heart, but making policy decisions based on the assumption that we can is reckless and only serves to further smooth over any of hint of subtlety left in American public discourse.

So there's no evidence connecting him to Isil (which there generally isn't: Isil spread messages to sympathetic people telling them to do things - ask employees of one well known company who have an unlisted London office because someone wants to slit their throats). Recapping:

- The FBI has investigated and found no links that he was a patron of the club.

- He has, for a fact, murdered people in the name of Islam.

We can't know what he felt in his heart, but also we don't have any reason to believe his stated motives aren't his actual ones. It an uncomfortable fact, but a large percentage of Muslims say they believe in Sharia which holds some pretty awful beliefs about gay people (and women, and others).