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

What I Heard from Trump Supporters

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 906 posts

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#771

Post by macintux »

Arizhel wrote: post #505
mikeash wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conservative talk radio, and other similar media, have spent decades vilifying her. According to them, she has helped her husband prey on women, has had people killed to cover up crimes, is trying to push for a takeover of the US by the United Nations, and much, much more. Not much of this is connected to reality, but that just doesn't matter.

The part about her helping her husband prey on women has at least some truth to it. There's no shortage of women over the decades who have accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault; I think it's rather silly to claim that Billy is completely innocent. So just as with any rapist, a woman who insists on staying married to such a man and backing him up in public can be seen as "enabling" him. Honestly, I don't think all th…

The frustrating part about this, of course, is that while Hillary was accused of being an enabler, Trump has been accused of not only being an admitted sexual assaulter but actually raping an underage girl. Not "merely" statutory rape either.

Such a proud day for our country when he was elected.

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#772

Post by jstimpfle »

freehunter wrote: post #755
jstimpfle wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are confusing what the current law is , with what the law could , or should be, based on accepted moral values.

Leglislating on moral values is incredibly dangerous. Remember that a lot of people want their religion to be the official religion because they have better moral values. Remember that a lot of people want gay marriage to be banned because of their moral values. Remember that a lot of people want black people to have fewer rights because of their moral values. We constantly fight against legislation on moral values,…

You are confusing morality with "unreflected belief system".

Morality is the separation of right and wrong. There are of course different ways to build moral systems, but it's fair to say that pretty much all try to "resolve actual damage", whatever that means.

When I say "accepted moral values", I mean just that - the values that we as a society can agree on. Come on, that wasn't so hard.

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#773

Post by robbiemitchell »

godshatter wrote: post #639
robbiemitchell wrote: post #206

How did so many people get the wrong idea about what "freedom of speech" means? The right to say something without the government arresting you is a far cry from an imagined right to be heard by everyone about whatever you want to say.

"Freedom of speech" is an inalienable right that everyone has. The first amendment explains in what ways this right may be infringed by the government. When people talk about "freedom of speech", they are not talking about what the restrictions on the government are, they are talking about this basic individual right.

I'm referring to people who talk about it as if it should prevent other citizens from criticizing them.

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#774

Post by [deleted] »

godshatter wrote: post #639
robbiemitchell wrote: post #206

How did so many people get the wrong idea about what "freedom of speech" means? The right to say something without the government arresting you is a far cry from an imagined right to be heard by everyone about whatever you want to say.

"Freedom of speech" is an inalienable right that everyone has. The first amendment explains in what ways this right may be infringed by the government. When people talk about "freedom of speech", they are not talking about what the restrictions on the government are, they are talking about this basic individual right.

[deleted]

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#775

Post by GVIrish »

RangerScience wrote: post #666
GVIrish wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, main takeaway from this? Don't attack people. It seems like that's a big complaint from the[se] people: I've been attacked for my beliefs and values. Yes and no. If someone is willing to discuss their viewpoint and consider the opposing viewpoint in good faith, then I agree they shouldn't be attacked. If someone is willing to share their worldview without vitriol or hatefulness, they shouldn't have their char…

I think I see what you're saying, but... ...when has it ever actually helped to attack them? Also, +1 for: > But the truth is that tolerance is advancing rapidly and it is disorienting for people who've never had to practice it much.

What I was trying to get at, is that sometimes people use the word 'attacking' when other people are shouting down and being mean and nasty to people who hold a different viewpoint than them. But other times people say 'attacking' when people are calling out bigotry in a completely appropriate way. Like, yeah you're going to catch heat for calling the FLOTUS an ape in heels.

I'd agree that attacking in a mean and nasty way is rarely productive. But there's also a place for loudly condemning hatefulness and ignorance, usually when we're talking about public figures who are willfully divisive or hateful. If David Duke decides to hold a white power rally I don't think it's inappropriate for people to loudly protest someone like him. Or a politician getting in front of a crowd talking about 'legitimate rape'.

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#777

Post by thescribe »

AdeptusAquinas wrote: post #95

I can give him a data point from outside the US, from one of the other progressive, English speaking countries in the world, New Zealand: I don't know if it has fully sunk in yet to the US populace how completely they have humiliated themselves, on the world stage. We don't get exposed to Fox, or Breitbart, or even CNN. I get most of my international news from the BBC, for example. From our perspective, the election…

I think you are making an assumption of shared value. To many trump supporters the idea that international approval matters is somehow repugnant.

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#778

Post by freehunter »

jstimpfle wrote: post #772
freehunter wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leglislating on moral values is incredibly dangerous. Remember that a lot of people want their religion to be the official religion because they have better moral values. Remember that a lot of people want gay marriage to be banned because of their moral values. Remember that a lot of people want black people to have fewer rights because of their moral values. We constantly fight against legislation on moral values,…

You are confusing morality with "unreflected belief system". Morality is the separation of right and wrong. There are of course different ways to build moral systems, but it's fair to say that pretty much all try to "resolve actual damage", whatever that means. When I say "accepted moral values", I mean just that - the values that we as a society can agree on. Come on, that wasn't so hard.

In the early part of the 20th century, accepted moral values (the values that society could agree on) did not include voting rights for blacks or women. Our society does not always reflect absolute right or wrong.

Here is a straw man for you if you need the point made a little stronger and a little more ridiculous: what you're advocating for is that owning human beings, treating blacks as less than human, keeping them from voting, etc was right and was a completely moral act. I mean it was legal, and most everyone agreed with it. A lot of Germans agreed with the Nazi's treatment of Jews, too. Hell even Americans did when we locked the Japanese-Americans in internment camps. Was that morally right? Because society agreed on it?

Or maybe subjective moral opinions of the day aren't the best reasons to take away people's freedoms.

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#779

Post by mcphage »

leesalminen wrote: post #420
cr0sh wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deportation probably wouldn't be such a problem if they weren't also deporting legal residents along with the "illegal" ones. Yes - this happens. We still don't know how many Sherriff Joe and other officials in Arizona deported. It was basically a program here of "if you're brown enough, don't speak enough english, and can't produce any docs on the spot" you had a good chance of being rounded up, sent to an ICE facil…

Serious question: why would an American citizen choose to not learn the national language? Doesn't that disadvantage you severely in life?

> why would an American citizen choose to not learn the national language?

English isn't our national language—the US doesn't have one.

Re: What I Heard from Trump Supporters

#780

Post by mcphage »

rrauenza wrote: post #387
st3v3r wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false equivalence at it's best. If it was Mitt Romney or John McCain, you might have a point. But this was Trump. Trump openly mocked the disabled. He espoused xenophobic and racist viewpoints. He embraced the KKK's support of him, often retweeting white nationalists. Fuck, he put Steve Bannon, the head of the neo-Nazis as his advisor.

I agree with most of the above sentiment, but there's a little more context to the mocking of the disabled reporter. He'd been using those motions to mock people (who are backpedaling) in general for quite some time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgaC0leEb68

> He'd been using those motions to mock people (who are backpedaling) in general for quite some time

Oh, okay. So it's not jus that he's mocking a disabled reporter, but mocks other people as if they were disabled as well. Well, that's just fine, then.

Post reply on HN