Octopus Overlords

em2nought wrote:If it wasn't for Trump's base, Israel would have been overrun long ago. I'd more likely believe that Obama's base are the true anti-Semites.

RunningMn9 wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:Not to mention that Jews voted in large numbers for Obama. Those anti-Semites.

Jews yes, Israelis no. Israelis overwhelmingly supported Romney.
cite

em2nought wrote:

Kurth wrote:And the suggestion that it could just be "a silly mistake/oversight" ignores the fact that there are significant and virulent strains of anti-Semitism running through segments of Trump's base, and this is an issue that he is well aware of.

If it wasn't for Trump's base, Israel would have been overrun long ago. I'd more likely believe that Obama's base are the true anti-Semites.

Captain Caveman wrote:Also, turns out Trump's star of David tweet originated at a white supremacist site.

So much for it being a sheriff's badge.

tgb wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:Also, turns out Trump's star of David tweet originated at a white supremacist site.

So much for it being a sheriff's badge.

I suspected this was another one of his re-tweets.

Grifman wrote:Of course now Trump's revised tweet is anti-Japanese since it uses the red sun from the Japanese flag

tgb wrote:Stay classy, RIP

Defiant wrote:

tgb wrote:Stay classy, RIP

His point, I assume, is that that tweet came from someone on the far left, namely the son of one of Clinton's unofficial advisors.

I still wouldn't put it in the same (classless) class as personally tweeting a blatantly anti-semitic tweet, as Trump did, though.

tgb wrote:
Perhaps, perhaps not. Tweeting something like that just days after Weizel's death is pretty low.

tgb wrote:Stay classy, RIP

tgb wrote:

Defiant wrote:

tgb wrote:Stay classy, RIP

His point, I assume, is that that tweet came from someone on the far left, namely the son of one of Clinton's unofficial advisors.

I still wouldn't put it in the same (classless) class as personally tweeting a blatantly anti-semitic tweet, as Trump did, though.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Tweeting something like that just days after Weizel's death is pretty low.

Defiant wrote:

tgb wrote:
Perhaps, perhaps not. Tweeting something like that just days after Weizel's death is pretty low.

Rip was, I'm assuming, using it as an attack on Clinton. I was saying that Trump was worse than Clinton, not that he was worse than Blumenthal (who are both pretty toxic)

Rip wrote:
For all we know the Tweet was done by someone on Trump's staff.

Rip wrote:

tgb wrote:Stay classy, RIP

You blame me for pointing out that Max Blumenthal is a disgusting piece of crap and that unlike Trump there is no debating as to what he thinks on the subject?

Rip wrote:

tgb wrote:Stay classy, RIP

You blame me for pointing out that Max Blumenthal is a disgusting piece of crap and that unlike Trump there is no debating as to what he thinks on the subject?

Max Peck wrote:

YellowKing wrote:
I told him to stop getting his hopes up and prepare for eight years of Hillary.

Where is all this anger coming from? It’s viral, and Trump is Typhoid Mary. Intellectually and emotionally weakened by years of steadily degraded public discourse, we are now two separate ideological countries, LeftLand and RightLand, speaking different languages, the lines between us down. Not only do our two subcountries reason differently; they draw upon non-intersecting data sets and access entirely different mythological systems. You and I approach a castle. One of us has watched only “Monty Python and the Holy Grail,” the other only “Game of Thrones.” What is the meaning, to the collective “we,” of yon castle? We have no common basis from which to discuss it. You, the other knight, strike me as bafflingly ignorant, a little unmoored. In the old days, a liberal and a conservative (a “dove” and a “hawk,” say) got their data from one of three nightly news programs, a local paper, and a handful of national magazines, and were thus starting with the same basic facts (even if those facts were questionable, limited, or erroneous). Now each of us constructs a custom informational universe, wittingly (we choose to go to the sources that uphold our existing beliefs and thus flatter us) or unwittingly (our app algorithms do the driving for us). The data we get this way, pre-imprinted with spin and mythos, are intensely one-dimensional. (As a proud knight of LeftLand, I was interested to find that, in RightLand, Vince Foster has still been murdered, Dick Morris is a reliable source, kids are brainwashed “way to the left” by going to college, and Obama may yet be Muslim. I expect that my interviewees found some of my core beliefs equally jaw-dropping.)

(I expect that my interviewees found some of my core beliefs equally jaw-dropping.)

YellowKing wrote:

(I expect that my interviewees found some of my core beliefs equally jaw-dropping.)

Yes, yes, yes.

My father-in-law got frustrated today talking politics, and he goes, "Why can't people just understand what would happen if Hillary was elected? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand how it would destroy this country!" (Actual quote). He literally could not comprehend how other people could think differently than him, and it was frustrating him almost to the point of tears.

I don't talk politics around family anymore because there is no more reason, no more logic, no more looking at a data set and discussing different ways of interpreting it. It's just "I'm right, and anybody who doesn't agree with me is a moron."

I think a lot of people fall into this trap because challenging your own belief system might be one of the hardest things on earth to do. When you come out on the other side, however, it's worth all the pain and suffering. You either reinforce what you thought was true, giving you even more conviction. Or some of your old weak beliefs are cast aside for ones that are better.

It's funny how we'll go to ten different websites to look up reviews of a product we want to buy, but we won't do the same to figure out all the angles of a news story or politician.