Where is the line?

[Bat Guano 359]

29 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

I believe this board overestimates the amount of people that are lobotomized sycophants. The conservatives in my circle can easily disregard much of Trump’s rhetoric, which is admittedly wearing thin on all of us, and focus on his actions. The media should take my unsolicited advice and keep their disdain of Trump voters to a minimum, because as deplorable as we may seem, we’re also very perceptive. When used correctly, the media is a very necessary tool in protecting its citizenry. But once it starts surreptitiously pushing values, it has become something entirely else and worthy of distrust. But again, I would need to see the events leading up to this hypothetical war before determining what line has or hasn’t been crossed. 

I’ve revisited my view on the Iraq war on many occasions and it’s important to put things into proper context, meaning post 9/11. There were many, myself included, that were out for blood and we didn’t care whose it was. Much like in Vietnam when a platoon was wiped out in a 5 minute skirmish, only to have the enemy slip back into the bush and throw on civilian clothing. They ended up taking it out in the villagers, many who were enemy of course, but most who weren’t. They were angrily swinging at ghosts most of the time and my support of the Iraq war feels eerily similar when I find myself reminiscing. 

It wasn’t right then and it isn’t right today, hopefully now that my youthful bravado has faded, I’ll be able to properly diagnose such a mistake in the future. 

Sorry, that's not very reassuring. On the one hand it's good to hear your disavowal of your rather horrifying bloodlust post 9/11, but on the other I don't think you recognize how easily, casually, Trump would Trump up some excuse for war - he's on that path right now with Iran. He'd do anything to survive politically, and would literally not give a second thought to starting a war of choice if he thought it would help him.  Add to that the enormous megaphone the president has - any president - and the willingness the media has shown to go along with pretty much any use of force by any president (yes, it has; your tribe were whining about how mean the media were to Bush before the Iraq war, and then all of a sudden they were all in on the warmongering; the near-universal fawning when Trump shot cruise missiles into Syria was disgusting) and you have a situation where the public pressure for war becomes very strong in a hurry. Add to that the sycophantic behavior of the Trumpkins - and no, I don't think I'm overestimating that at all - and I guarantee a wag-the-dog war would be very easy for him to sell. And the fact that you're already waffling shows me you'd go along - maybe reluctantly, maybe enthusiastically. You'd find a way to convince yourself that what the president says is true; after all, when has he ever lied to the American people? So it doesn't look much like a line anymore.

[Eastwood 4,394]

The more important question is what percentage of the population do not have a line that Trump could cross. If the percentage is near what his approval rating is, then we may well be on our way to Civil War 2 or the splitting of the country into 3 - 5 different regions. If it's moderately less than his approval rating, we may still be in for a round of violence or two, but my thought is that the moment that modern comforts become endangered, people will back down to preserve their current way of life. It's easier to circle jerk on FB than it is to accept the rationing of supplies, of which, btw, bandwidth will be one of.

[Foosters 17,856]

4 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

The more important question is what percentage of the population do not have a line that Trump could cross. If the percentage is near what his approval rating is, then we may well be on our way to Civil War 2 or the splitting of the country into 3 - 5 different regions. If it's moderately less than his approval rating, we may still be in for a round of violence or two, but my thought is that the moment that modern comforts become endangered, people will back down to preserve their current way of life. It's easier to circle jerk on FB than it is to accept the rationing of supplies, of which, btw, bandwidth will be one of.

I think that number is easily 30%.

[Eastwood 4,394]

4 minutes ago, Foosters said:

I think that number is easily 30%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

He's currently sitting at 52.4% disapproval, 42% approval. Your number of 30% of Americans means that 71% of those who currently approve of Trump don't have a threshold to disapproval. Things certainly are bleak, right now, but as long as no more ground is given to the Trump admin, I think the country will survive the Trump presidency.

[Chrispy 132]

5 minutes ago, Bat Guano said:

Sorry, that's not very reassuring. On the one hand it's good to hear your disavowal of your rather horrifying bloodlust post 9/11, but on the other I don't think you recognize how easily, casually, Trump would Trump up some excuse for war - he's on that path right now with Iran. He'd do anything to survive politically, and would literally not give a second thought to starting a war of choice if he thought it would help him.  Add to that the enormous megaphone the president has - any president - and the willingness the media has shown to go along with pretty much any use of force by any president (yes, it has; your tribe were whining about how mean the media were to Bush before the Iraq war, and then all of a sudden they were all in on the warmongering; the near-universal fawning when Trump shot cruise missiles into Syria was disgusting) and you have a situation where the public pressure for war becomes very strong in a hurry. Add to that the sycophantic behavior of the Trumpkins - and no, I don't think I'm overestimating that at all - and I guarantee a wag-the-dog war would be very easy for him to sell. And the fact that you're already waffling shows me you'd go along - maybe reluctantly, maybe enthusiastically. You'd find a way to convince yourself that what the president says is true; after all, when has he ever lied to the American people? So it doesn't look much like a line anymore.

Well, I’m certainly not trying to reassure you. I’m also not quite sure that’s entirely possible due to your insistence on fretting over a vividly constructed hypothetical situation that has yet to come to fruition. I’m sorry to give you the impression that I’m waffling in my position, but the reality is that there are justified reasons to go to war also, and that needs to be taken into consideration. You’ve mentioned Iran a couple of times, so let’s just they go beyond rhetoric and actually decide to wipe Israel off the map, are we not obligated to intervene? I’ve already stated my position on an unprovoked war, but that’s simply not the only scenario one needs to ponder. 

[RomaVicta 29,908]

The fine line?

Sprouting a fourth dick up there.

 

[Biff Tannen 45,688]

12 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

but as long as no more ground is given to the Trump admin,

Who's going to stop them?  Congress?  Ha!

[Bat Guano 359]

9 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

Well, I’m certainly not trying to reassure you. I’m also not quite sure that’s entirely possible due to your insistence on fretting over a vividly constructed hypothetical situation that has yet to come to fruition. I’m sorry to give you the impression that I’m waffling in my position, but the reality is that there are justified reasons to go to war also, and that needs to be taken into consideration. You’ve mentioned Iran a couple of times, so let’s just they go beyond rhetoric and actually decide to wipe Israel off the map, are we not obligated to intervene? I’ve already stated my position on an unprovoked war, but that’s simply not the only scenario one needs to ponder. 

OK, let's go back to the original hypothetical: Starting a war. Jumping in on the side of an ally that's been attacked isn't starting a war.

The point is people take principled stances when there's no pressure and then abandon them when things get real; if you really want to take a principled stand on something, decide what your principles are, and stick to them.

[Bat Guano 359]

13 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

The fine line?

Sprouting a fourth dick up there.

 

This is the point.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

Trump's slathering horde of poorly educated, baying morons are not loyal to him as a person, they're loyal to what he currently represents. They would turn on him IN A SECOND if he went the wrong direction.

To lose their enthusiasm, he would have to become an honest, circumspect compromiser. Obviously he'd keep a lot of GOP voters and get back the Never-Trump DC'ers if he did that, but he'd lose the white supremacists, the Q lunatics, and the race grifters.

The "problem" is that he is literally incapable of it.

Edited November 8, 2018 by bad_teammate

[retread 2,951]

And the only way to keep people interested is to make Season 2 of this simulation even more tawdry and more in-your-face.

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, Bat Guano said:

OK, let's go back to the original hypothetical: Starting a war. Jumping in on the side of an ally that's been attacked isn't starting a war.

The point is people take principled stances when there's no pressure and then abandon them when things get real; if you really want to take a principled stand on something, decide what your principles are, and stick to them.

We could find some common ground on starting a war for strictly political purposes or on a whim based on flimsy intelligence, to be sure. War is a last resort, but absolutely necessary at times. So, the difficult part for individuals will be sifting through the information and figuring out whether it is justified, and unfortunately Trump and the media are short on credibility. I do know that if Trump utters the phrase “nation building” then I’m officially out. 

[AtticusFinch 155]

21 hours ago, Bat Guano said:

Now that the midterms are over and the Ds have the House, things are going to get rough. You think the first 2 years of the Trump presidency were bad? You ain’t seen nothing yet. After all, you gotta have a compelling story line for the upcoming seasons of the reality show, keep the ratings up. So you can be sure Trump will do some things that most people will find appalling – much worse than what he’s done before. And yet many people will still support him, just like they have after all the appalling things he’s already done. Even so, there should be a line for most people; there should be some principle, deep in the heart of even the most loyal and/or depraved Trump fan, that if it were violated, they would reluctantly part ways with the Orange One.

Now, if you are a Trump supporter, you should establish where that line is, before the roller coaster takes that first stomach-churning plunge. If you want to make data-driven decisions you establish what criteria will drive your decision beforehand and then stick to those criteria. Same goes for principles – decide what circumstances will violate your principles beforehand, and stick to it.

Are you as all-in as he thinks you are – i.e., he could shoot someone on 5^th Avenue and you’d still support him? Or do you think he’s done some stuff that’s maybe not so good, but the good – Supreme Court justices you like, maybe tax cuts and cutting regulations - still outweighs the bad? If you’re in the second category, what kind of thing would it take for you to drop him?

I was going to put firing Sessions on this list as a mild lead-in example, but he beat me to it. There will be worse to come. Here are some possible examples:

 

1.     Fire Robert Mueller

2.       Fire Rosenstein and meddle in/try to stop the Russia, etc. investigation

3.       Refuse to comply with lawful subpoenas from the Democratic House – for, e.g., his tax returns

4.       Refuse to comply with a Supreme Court ruling

5.       Piss tape – what if there really is one? What if it becomes public?

6.       Piss tape, part 2: What if Putin has been blackmailing him about the tape, or something else, and he really is a Russian puppet?

7.       Start a war

8.       Disband Congress

9.       Institute martial law

 

This is not an exhaustive list; I lack the imagination to predict some of what I am sure is coming. Feel free to add to it. Yes, I actually do think all of those things are possible, and much more. I think several of them are almost a certainty.

 

So where is your particular line? What would cause you to pull your support? Remember, no hedging later; you draw the line, and you stick to it.

I dont understand the obsession with the tax returns.   That is the IRS domain.  If it was unlawful, he would have been audited.  Did he use creative accounting, most certainly.. but it is still legal.  The idea that it contains some form of collusion evidence is laughable if you understand how a tax return works.  If Trump did collude, why would his accountants provide illicit payments of some form when the payee is certainly not providing the information to the IRS? The people after the tax return are like birthers.  Besides, I thought the Times already had his returns.   

[texashorne 1,178]

I guess my line if when Trump starts calling me a racist, sexist, moron, and nazi on a regular basis I will consider bailing on him.  Some of you guys need to consider that its while its perfectly ok to not like/support a president; the constant attacks on his supporters do no good in pulling people to align with your cause. It makes it worse. 

 

[Celery Man 20,955]

hey man, fuck your feelings.

[Bat Guano 359]

34 minutes ago, texashorne said:

I guess my line if when Trump starts calling me a racist, sexist, moron, and nazi on a regular basis I will consider bailing on him.  Some of you guys need to consider that its while its perfectly ok to not like/support a president; the constant attacks on his supporters do no good in pulling people to align with your cause. It makes it worse. 

 

You talkin' to me?

Did I call you any of those things? I don't remember calling you or anyone else anything like that.

Are you OK with Trump suspending the Constitution as long as he makes you feel good?

[Goredho 17,406]

2 hours ago, Eastwood said:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

He's currently sitting at 52.4% disapproval, 42% approval. Your number of 30% of Americans means that 71% of those who currently approve of Trump don't have a threshold to disapproval. Things certainly are bleak, right now, but as long as no more ground is given to the Trump admin, I think the country will survive the Trump presidency.

The country will certainly survive.  I mean, Germany survived Hitler.  You wouldn't wanted to have lived there for a generation or so, but they survived.

The real questions to me are:

1. What will be the dominant experiences our children have in this country in their lifetime if evangelical Christians and white nationalists come to dominate American leadership for an extended time?

2. What changes occur in the world if American democracy proves to be a failed experiment?

I don't like the answers to those if all-that-is-Trumpism proves to be more than a temporary hiccup in our nation's history

[Longhornfan1024 1,707]

20 hours ago, texashorne said:

I guess my line if when Trump starts calling me a racist, sexist, moron, and nazi on a regular basis I will consider bailing on him.  Some of you guys need to consider that its while its perfectly ok to not like/support a president; the constant attacks on his supporters do no good in pulling people to align with your cause. It makes it worse. 

 

Quick being a snowflake you beta cuck.  Trumpers are rape apologists, racists, and homophobes who embrace lying.  And some of them, I'm sure, are good people.