The people angry about the Rosie comment aren't Rosie O'Donnell, they're strangers - and the meat of the comment, her weight, is something O'Donnell could change if she so desired. Since its directed at a specific individual, and is changeable, I don't get why total strangers would take offense at the comment. In Rosie's case, its a simple matter of putting down the fork, finding an exercise regime and sticking with it.
I think this behavior that I'm asking about - people getting offended by Trump's comments, seemingly on Rosie's behalf - is what the alt-right calls "virtue signaling."
This is the part I still don't get, and you still haven't offered any explanation for. I at least understand the part about it being targeted at one individual. That makes sense. But what does it being changeable have to do with it?
I think this behavior that I'm asking about - people getting offended by Trump's comments, seemingly on Rosie's behalf - is what the alt-right calls "virtue signaling."
Yeah, that does happen.
But there are also people who think that a guy who makes irrelevant, demeaning, and crude remarks about another person's physical appearance in a public forum, and displays a clear malicious enjoyment in doing so, is showing himself to be a cruel and petty bully who is utterly unfit for high office. Call it "vice signaling". The fact that O'Donnell could go on a diet is beside the point. You have complete control over what shirt you wear, but if I stop you on the street and loudly announce to all passersby that I think your shirt makes you look like a moron and let's all point and laugh at you for being stupid enough to choose it, then that reveals something about my character, doesn't it? Those passersby don't have to get offended on your behalf, or even disagree objectively with my assessment of your fashion sense, to decide that I'm an ********.
That's something the media keeps bringing up. It didn't make sense to get mad there since you can control your weight. It makes more sense getting mad about his period crack to Mrs Kelly since that's biological and pretty much just a fact of life.
So,
a) You can't necessarily control your weight, and you can't control it easily
b) It is perfectly reasonable for me to get insulted by the fact you are behaving like an ********, even if not directed at me
c) Even if the two above things were not true, repeatedly insulting others is behaviour unbecoming teenagers, let alone 70 year old possible presidents.
If I was with somebody on a date and she starts demeaning the wait staff and everybody around us, I would think she's a terrible person and not want to be around her even if she was nice to me.
I had hoped that we would set a higher standard for the position of "leader of the free world" and "most powerful person in the world" than even just a person we would want to date.
Honestly, at this point (actually I made the argument last Friday, but it stands stronger now) I feel Donald Trump has lost all undecided voters. If Donald Trump wins, I suspect it will be because Hillary Clinton's campaign spontaneously combusts... which could be a thing, but even then it might not be enough to keep Hillary, or heck, maybe even a third party candidate from still beating Trump if it gets even worse for Republicans from here.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
So this news broke... Is this the straw that broke the camel's back for his campaign?
Maybe. But he's already survived so many things that ought to immediately disqualify a candidate from the presidency. And like his tax returns, this shouldn't exactly be a surprise for anyone. If people are reconsidering their allegiance to him after this, I'd like to ask them where the hell they've been for all the other disgusting statements he's made, or for Ivana's deposition that he violently raped her which we've known about for over a year. What sort of voter thought Trump was presidential material until today, and is only now coming to the realization that he may in fact be a sick sociopathic bastard?
This election season has been... frustrating.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Very much agree with that. I doubt it will stop Trump, and November can't come soon enough. Hillary winning seems inevitable, the sooner we get this over with the better. I'm not sure that there will be an election that quite tops this one in terms of being frustrating.
So this news broke... Is this the straw that broke the camel's back for his campaign?
It certainly looks bad no matter how you spin it.
This race was over nine years ago- Hillary was poised to take over after Obama, Bush Jr. was such a huge failure that Republicans still can't escape it, and Trump has been a giant ****-up/opponent of the actual Republican platform. This sexist scandal was what finally managed to metaphorically bury Trump six feet deep after all the nails in his coffin were driven in.
Maybe. But he's already survived so many things that ought to immediately disqualify a candidate from the presidency. And like his tax returns, this shouldn't exactly be a surprise for anyone. If people are reconsidering their allegiance to him after this, I'd like to ask them where the hell they've been for all the other disgusting statements he's made, or for Ivana's deposition that he violently raped her which we've known about for over a year. What sort of voter thought Trump was presidential material until today, and is only now coming to the realization that he may in fact be a sick sociopathic bastard?
This election season has been... frustrating.
If there's one takeway from Trump and his antics, it's the fact that he has successfully abused the country's polarization. If this election were 50 years ago, Trump would get Goldwatered. People used to split their tickets far more than they do now. Nowadays most people vote straight down the ticket as all D or R regardless of who is running.
If there's one takeway from Trump and his antics, it's the fact that he has successfully abused the country's polarization.
Or that about 30% of this country is *unbelievably* stupid.
In fact, let's discuss this: how are people THIS stupid? Why is ANYONE voting for Trump?
Because he speaks to things that they agree with? I mean, that's generally speaking why people vote the way they do. I'd imagine that for most people that are voting for him the scandals aren't as important as the message. Though there are also some diehard people who are absolutely determined to keep Hillary from winning.
That and conspiracy theories. I imagine there are probably quite a few people who believe that anything negative about Trump is made up. But at least based off of comments on Facebook I really think the "Hillary is just as bad or worse" crowd is probably the one I've see the most of. I don't tend to see a lot of people voting for Trump on his merits so much as against Hillary. Albeit, that's pretty consistently the reason I see people voting for Hillary as well.
Albeit, that's pretty consistently the reason I see people voting for Hillary as well.
Because this election is awful... I think the large majority of people voting for Trump are people who don't realize or don't understand that he's a problem. It's too extreme to be otherwise. Unless the supremacists are really THAT prevalent. But I hope not.
Albeit, that's pretty consistently the reason I see people voting for Hillary as well.
Because this election is awful... I think the large majority of people voting for Trump are people who don't realize or don't understand that he's a problem. It's too extreme to be otherwise. Unless the supremacists are really THAT prevalent. But I hope not.
Hearing from all of my teachers in general in college, this election is the most bizarre one they've ever seen. I can only hope this remains our "worst" election. I'm really worried that the element of fear will continue to be prevalent in future ones, which will cloud people's judgment on things more and more. About the only positive thing Trump winning the nomination could bring is a shift in how the parties operate, but I'm not even sure if that will happen.
Because this election is awful... I think the large majority of people voting for Trump are people who don't realize or don't understand that he's a problem. It's too extreme to be otherwise. Unless the supremacists are really THAT prevalent. But I hope not.
This is the sort of reasoning that lets people talk themselves into believing we don't live in a racist society. No matter what awful thing you observe, no matter how many people gleefully support it, you find some way to convince yourself that there can't really be "THAT" many racists.
Because this election is awful... I think the large majority of people voting for Trump are people who don't realize or don't understand that he's a problem. It's too extreme to be otherwise. Unless the supremacists are really THAT prevalent. But I hope not.
This is the sort of reasoning that lets people talk themselves into believing we don't live in a racist society. No matter what awful thing you observe, no matter how many people gleefully support it, you find some way to convince yourself that there can't really be "THAT" many racists.
Oh, I wouldn't be surprised. But given what the country has shown in the past, it's reasonable to expect ignorance over malice. The presence of supremacists in the US is certainly much bigger than it has any right to be. But the presence of ignorance is almost certainly worse.
Oh, I wouldn't be surprised. But given what the country has shown in the past, it's reasonable to expect ignorance over malice. The presence of supremacists in the US is certainly much bigger than it has any right to be. But the presence of ignorance is almost certainly worse.
What has the country shown in the past, our shining history of racial harmony? Yeah, definitely not malice.
Oh, I wouldn't be surprised. But given what the country has shown in the past, it's reasonable to expect ignorance over malice. The presence of supremacists in the US is certainly much bigger than it has any right to be. But the presence of ignorance is almost certainly worse.
What has the country shown in the past, our shining history of racial harmony? Yeah, definitely not malice.
No, our history of overwhelming ignorance. Yes, the racial history is bad. Yes, there's plenty of bigotry out there. But do I think it's actually more prevalent than ignorance? No. And I'd challenge anyone to show that it is more prevalent.
No, our history of overwhelming ignorance. Yes, the racial history is bad. Yes, there's plenty of bigotry out there. But do I think it's actually more prevalent than ignorance? No. And I'd challenge anyone to show that it is more prevalent.
Whatever makes you feel better, I guess. We won't be able to fix the problems until people like you are willing to face them. But it's a harsh reality to face, and it's probably better that you not have your bubble burst, right?
In fact, let's discuss this: how are people THIS stupid? Why is ANYONE voting for Trump?
Lack of news literacy.
We've got a major murder trial for an alleged serial killer getting started here in Omaha. The case has been all over the local news for months. If you even just irregularly glanced at the front-page headlines, you would at least know that somebody named Anthony Garcia has been accused of some murders. Well, they just seated the jury, and reportedly a third of the candidates didn't have a clue.
There will be a significant fraction of people going to the voting booths next month who will have no idea that Donald Trump has ever said anything even mildly off-color in his life. They will vote for Trump purely because of the R next to his name, and perhaps what little they've heard about him indirectly from other people who are also supporters. (And mutatis mutandis for some Clinton voters -- this isn't exactly a partisan problem.)
Whatever makes you feel better, I guess. We won't be able to fix the problems until people like you are willing to face them. But it's a harsh reality to face, and it's probably better that you not have your bubble burst, right?
Absolutely shameful.
Watch it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
There will be a significant fraction of people going to the voting booths next month who will have no idea that this whole sexual assault boasting thing even happened. They will vote for Trump purely because of the R next to his name, and perhaps what little they've heard about him indirectly from other people who are also supporters. (And mutatis mutandis for Clinton voters -- this isn't exactly a partisan problem.)
I don't think that's true. For comparison, let's look at polls about voters' familiarity with the Khan family controversy. The media frenzy and reaction among Republican officials surrounding this recent video seems bigger than that following the Khan situation, so I would expect at least as many people to know about the video as knew about the Khans.
This poll, asked on August 1 and 2, "As you may know, the parents of a Muslim-American soldier who died while serving in the U.S. Army in Iraq appeared at the Democratic Convention and the father spoke out against Donald Trump. How familiar are you with Trump’s response to comments by the parents?" For reference, Trump made the response in question on the 29th and 30th of July, so this poll is taken in the immediate aftermath. The response was that 65% were very or somewhat familiar, and only 22% had no familiarity.
The vast majority of voters know about these things. Sure, there's a small minority who doesn't, but most people who are voting for Trump are voting for him because they agree with him, not because they've managed to dodge any media exposure for the past year.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is the part I still don't get, and you still haven't offered any explanation for. I at least understand the part about it being targeted at one individual. That makes sense. But what does it being changeable have to do with it?
But there are also people who think that a guy who makes irrelevant, demeaning, and crude remarks about another person's physical appearance in a public forum, and displays a clear malicious enjoyment in doing so, is showing himself to be a cruel and petty bully who is utterly unfit for high office. Call it "vice signaling". The fact that O'Donnell could go on a diet is beside the point. You have complete control over what shirt you wear, but if I stop you on the street and loudly announce to all passersby that I think your shirt makes you look like a moron and let's all point and laugh at you for being stupid enough to choose it, then that reveals something about my character, doesn't it? Those passersby don't have to get offended on your behalf, or even disagree objectively with my assessment of your fashion sense, to decide that I'm an ********.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
So,
a) You can't necessarily control your weight, and you can't control it easily
b) It is perfectly reasonable for me to get insulted by the fact you are behaving like an ********, even if not directed at me
c) Even if the two above things were not true, repeatedly insulting others is behaviour unbecoming teenagers, let alone 70 year old possible presidents.
b.) I disagree, but Blinking did a fine job of laying on the rationale for it. So now I have a better understanding of the why.
c.) No arguments from me.
I had hoped that we would set a higher standard for the position of "leader of the free world" and "most powerful person in the world" than even just a person we would want to date.
So this news broke... Is this the straw that broke the camel's back for his campaign?
It certainly looks bad no matter how you spin it.
Yes.
Honestly, at this point (actually I made the argument last Friday, but it stands stronger now) I feel Donald Trump has lost all undecided voters. If Donald Trump wins, I suspect it will be because Hillary Clinton's campaign spontaneously combusts... which could be a thing, but even then it might not be enough to keep Hillary, or heck, maybe even a third party candidate from still beating Trump if it gets even worse for Republicans from here.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
This election season has been... frustrating.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
This race was over nine years ago- Hillary was poised to take over after Obama, Bush Jr. was such a huge failure that Republicans still can't escape it, and Trump has been a giant ****-up/opponent of the actual Republican platform. This sexist scandal was what finally managed to metaphorically bury Trump six feet deep after all the nails in his coffin were driven in.
If there's one takeway from Trump and his antics, it's the fact that he has successfully abused the country's polarization. If this election were 50 years ago, Trump would get Goldwatered. People used to split their tickets far more than they do now. Nowadays most people vote straight down the ticket as all D or R regardless of who is running.
In fact, let's discuss this: how are people THIS stupid? Why is ANYONE voting for Trump?
Because he speaks to things that they agree with? I mean, that's generally speaking why people vote the way they do. I'd imagine that for most people that are voting for him the scandals aren't as important as the message. Though there are also some diehard people who are absolutely determined to keep Hillary from winning.
That and conspiracy theories. I imagine there are probably quite a few people who believe that anything negative about Trump is made up. But at least based off of comments on Facebook I really think the "Hillary is just as bad or worse" crowd is probably the one I've see the most of. I don't tend to see a lot of people voting for Trump on his merits so much as against Hillary. Albeit, that's pretty consistently the reason I see people voting for Hillary as well.
Because this election is awful... I think the large majority of people voting for Trump are people who don't realize or don't understand that he's a problem. It's too extreme to be otherwise. Unless the supremacists are really THAT prevalent. But I hope not.
Hearing from all of my teachers in general in college, this election is the most bizarre one they've ever seen. I can only hope this remains our "worst" election. I'm really worried that the element of fear will continue to be prevalent in future ones, which will cloud people's judgment on things more and more. About the only positive thing Trump winning the nomination could bring is a shift in how the parties operate, but I'm not even sure if that will happen.
This is the sort of reasoning that lets people talk themselves into believing we don't live in a racist society. No matter what awful thing you observe, no matter how many people gleefully support it, you find some way to convince yourself that there can't really be "THAT" many racists.
Oh, I wouldn't be surprised. But given what the country has shown in the past, it's reasonable to expect ignorance over malice. The presence of supremacists in the US is certainly much bigger than it has any right to be. But the presence of ignorance is almost certainly worse.
What has the country shown in the past, our shining history of racial harmony? Yeah, definitely not malice.
No, our history of overwhelming ignorance. Yes, the racial history is bad. Yes, there's plenty of bigotry out there. But do I think it's actually more prevalent than ignorance? No. And I'd challenge anyone to show that it is more prevalent.
Whatever makes you feel better, I guess. We won't be able to fix the problems until people like you are willing to face them. But it's a harsh reality to face, and it's probably better that you not have your bubble burst, right?
Absolutely shameful.
We've got a major murder trial for an alleged serial killer getting started here in Omaha. The case has been all over the local news for months. If you even just irregularly glanced at the front-page headlines, you would at least know that somebody named Anthony Garcia has been accused of some murders. Well, they just seated the jury, and reportedly a third of the candidates didn't have a clue.
There will be a significant fraction of people going to the voting booths next month who will have no idea that Donald Trump has ever said anything even mildly off-color in his life. They will vote for Trump purely because of the R next to his name, and perhaps what little they've heard about him indirectly from other people who are also supporters. (And mutatis mutandis for some Clinton voters -- this isn't exactly a partisan problem.)
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I don't think that's true. For comparison, let's look at polls about voters' familiarity with the Khan family controversy. The media frenzy and reaction among Republican officials surrounding this recent video seems bigger than that following the Khan situation, so I would expect at least as many people to know about the video as knew about the Khans.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2016/08/03/fox-news-poll-aug-3-2016/
This poll, asked on August 1 and 2, "As you may know, the parents of a Muslim-American soldier who died while serving in the U.S. Army in Iraq appeared at the Democratic Convention and the father spoke out against Donald Trump. How familiar are you with Trump’s response to comments by the parents?" For reference, Trump made the response in question on the 29th and 30th of July, so this poll is taken in the immediate aftermath. The response was that 65% were very or somewhat familiar, and only 22% had no familiarity.
In this poll, taken a week later:
http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1180a1The2016Election.pdf
Only 15% had "no opinion" about the matter.
The vast majority of voters know about these things. Sure, there's a small minority who doesn't, but most people who are voting for Trump are voting for him because they agree with him, not because they've managed to dodge any media exposure for the past year.