To be fair, it's not really reasonable to try to characterize racists, xenophobes, and misogynists as simply having "different political views." They clearly hold particular views about large groups of people, and those views are often quite repugnant.
It's not simply a difference of opinion. It's a matter of people believing that it is appropriate to establish or maintain power over these groups of people, of treating them as less human.
I mean, sure, they can be tired of being called out for their awful views and vote according to those views, but is it really appropriate to minimize these things? Would they really vote differently if they were never called these things? They're going to support the candidates who validate their racist, misogynist views either way.
Here is the problem with blanket labels applied to people, though: not everyone who gets called "racist" is actually racist. Perjorative labels should be used only for individual people who have demonstrated whatever behavior it is that has earned them the label.
This Montana election, though, should help pour some fuel on the fire to make certain that future elections are more "in your face" from both sides.
To be fair, it's not really reasonable to try to characterize racists, xenophobes, and misogynists as simply having "different political views." They clearly hold particular views about large groups of people, and those views are often quite repugnant.
It's not simply a difference of opinion. It's a matter of people believing that it is appropriate to establish or maintain power over these groups of people, of treating them as less human.
I mean, sure, they can be tired of being called out for their awful views and vote according to those views, but is it really appropriate to minimize these things? Would they really vote differently if they were never called these things? They're going to support the candidates who validate their racist, misogynist views either way.
This Montana election, though, should help pour some fuel on the fire to make certain that future elections are more "in your face" from both sides.
I'm sure that reporter just forced his way into his office to report what he saw and wasn't trying to goad the man or anything like that. Montana elections are always prime news. I remember hearing about the last election there. Oh wait...
Perhaps some of the people voting for Gianforte did so because they are tired of people calling them "racist", "xenophobe", "misogynist", or "deplorable" on a daily basis.
perhaps some of the people voting for gianforte are deplorable individuals who voted for him because they identify with a degenerate maniac that he is
Perhaps some of the people voting for Gianforte did so because they are tired of people calling them "racist", "xenophobe", "misogynist", or "deplorable" on a daily basis.
perhaps some of the people voting for gianforte are deplorable individuals who voted for him because they identify with a degenerate maniac that he is
Maybe some of them voted for Gianforte because they didn't like the views of the candidate running against him. No, that can't be possible. There are obviously just hundreds of thousands of racist, bigoted Nazis in Montana.
Another liberal victory in Montana! Oh wait... But there's Georgia! Oh wait... I wouldn't be too sure about Trump going down in flames if I were on the left. Advertisers and media outlets in marginal states sure are getting rich though. Probably more money spent in this Montana election than in all the rest of the elections there in the last 20 years put together.
Hardly would have been "another" liberal victory in Montana, it would have been a ridiculous upset even in this climate. Trump won the State by 25 points, and this is a single-seat state. Quist lost by 6%, which is a 19 point swing over the course of 120 days. Democrats don't have to swing districts like Montana to take back the House. They have to swing 24 districts where the Republican only won by about 5%. And, for the record, I actually think they are going to win the Georgia seat (another seat they have no business winning in any other climate). I never thought they had a chance at this one, even after the assault.
As for being preachy....again, I don't hail from San Francisco or New York. I spent the entirety of my childhood in a town that is exactly like most of the State of Montana. A big open area of nothing with a couple of scattered small cities. The racism in many of these places isn't even sitting below the surface. Literally ANY time a rap song would come on when my best friend's dad was in the room, he would say "turn off that n****r-jive". Most of the boys in town found this so absolutely hilarious that half the kids in the school started using this term for all rap music. That's how small and insulated it was. These people aren't alienated by social media, they've alienated themselves by choice. I never once in my life actually called my best friend's dad a racist. No one did. He absolutely is one, as was a sizable portion of the rest of the town. My cousin (after my aunt moved to town) was the only black person in the entire school (black father, white mother) and she couldn't even finish high school where I did. She had to transfer for 9th-12th grade because of what she was going through.
I have 15 years of field research into small-town rural America. I'm not preaching, I'm telling you what I saw. I can guarantee you this Sheriff who is essentially letting Gianforte off the hook has probably drank beer in his garage on multiple occasions. They are pals. It's almost inconceivable to me that they wouldn't be. The same people talking about violence on college campuses are now saying how much of a "p***y snowflake" Ben Jacobs is for not fighting back and defending himself "like a man", even though if he had done that, they'd be eviscerating him for doing so. I'm not surprised by Montana. Why be surprised by anything anymore?? But I'm not going to stop pointing out that over the last 6 months, the Republican Party has had absolutely NO problem putting forth and voting for both a guy who admitted to sexual assault on tape and now someone who beat down a reporter asking him a perfectly legitimate question. Maybe reporters should start arming themselves.
I'm sure that reporter just forced his way into his office to report what he saw and wasn't trying to goad the man or anything like that. Montana elections are always prime news. I remember hearing about the last election there. Oh wait...
Ummm....no, listen to the audio. And this is really, I'm sorry to say, the kind of mentality that is excusing the entire thing. Asking a question is not "goading" someone into assaulting you. He asked a question about the CBO score of the health-care bill, Gianforte deflected, and Jacobs basically said, "well the Election is tomorrow can we get an answer" and then Gianforte went ape-shit. That's what happened.
Perhaps some of the people voting for Gianforte did so because they are tired of people calling them "racist", "xenophobe", "misogynist", or "deplorable" on a daily basis.
perhaps some of the people voting for gianforte are deplorable individuals who voted for him because they identify with a degenerate maniac that he is
Maybe some of them voted for Gianforte because they didn't like the views of the candidate running against him. No, that can't be possible. There are obviously just hundreds of thousands of racist, bigoted Nazis in Montana.
maybe some germans voted for hitler because they didn't like the views of the socialist candidate. what can you do? that obviously means they are nothing other than upright germans - who wants socialism right?
Perhaps some of the people voting for Gianforte did so because they are tired of people calling them "racist", "xenophobe", "misogynist", or "deplorable" on a daily basis.
perhaps some of the people voting for gianforte are deplorable individuals who voted for him because they identify with a degenerate maniac that he is
Maybe some of them voted for Gianforte because they didn't like the views of the candidate running against him. No, that can't be possible. There are obviously just hundreds of thousands of racist, bigoted Nazis in Montana.
maybe some germans voted for hitler because they didn't like the views of the socialist candidate. what can you do? that obviously means they are nothing other than upright germans - who wants socialism right?
They absolutely did vote for Hitler because they were scared of Communism. What's your point? If they were diviners they probably would have voted differently. Although they then would have been able to foresee what would have happened had they voted Communist, too. There might have been little difference in the end. Comparing then to now is quite irrelevant. It's a different world entirely...
The trouble with this country right now is we only get two choices. I for one don't agree with all the tenets of either party so I have to pick based on what I believe is best at that time. It would be interesting if candidates couldn't put a D or R by their names and we had to choose solely on the beliefs of that person instead of what that person's party tells them to say.
I thought I made my point. Those people voted the way they thought was less dangerous to them at that time in history. You really can't say they were wrong unless you know exactly what would have happened had they voted differently. Stalin was responsible for more deaths than Hitler (barring the actual war - but even in that case the West still might have had to fight a world war anyway against a different threat).
We view that time through the lens of hindsight. If you grew up in Germany in the 20's and 30's, believe it or not, you may have even voted for Hitler. To say otherwise is arrogant. You would not be the same person you are now.
perhaps some of the people voting for gianforte are deplorable individuals who voted for him because they identify with a degenerate maniac that he is
I did mention that, yes. People are starting to *want* their candidates to be aggressive or to "stand up against" whatever group it is they dislike. There is no way that such an attitude ends well if carried to its logical conclusion.
I don't think Gianforte is a degenerate maniac because of this one incident but, on the other hand, I wouldn't invite him over for dinner, either. I presume he failed to remember that reporters are supposed to get in a candidate's face and ask the hard questions. Mr. Jacobs' questions was completely legitimate--the CBO did give the health insurance bill a low score, after all.
@jjstraka34 I did listen to the audio. There was clearly more to Gianforte's anger than that one question. Whether that particular reporter was the cause or not is what isn't clear. I don't believe you get the whole story from one brief recording.
I thought I made my point. Those people voted the way they thought was less dangerous to them at that time in history. You really can't say they were wrong unless you know exactly what would have happened had they voted differently. Stalin was responsible for more deaths than Hitler (barring the actual war - but even in that case the West still might have had to fight a world war anyway against a different threat).
We view that time through the lens of hindsight. If you grew up in Germany in the 20's and 30's, believe it or not, you may have even voted for Hitler. To say otherwise is arrogant. You would not be the same person you are now.
It's also not clear to me that a democrat in some backwater election wouldn't do the same thing if a bunch of right-wing reporters were shoving microphones and cameras at them. I for one know I would get angry if a bunch of reporters who don't really give a crap about my district showed up with a political agenda and bombarded me with questions.
I thought I made my point. Those people voted the way they thought was less dangerous to them at that time in history. You really can't say they were wrong unless you know exactly what would have happened had they voted differently. Stalin was responsible for more deaths than Hitler (barring the actual war - but even in that case the West still might have had to fight a world war anyway against a different threat).
We view that time through the lens of hindsight. If you grew up in Germany in the 20's and 30's, believe it or not, you may have even voted for Hitler. To say otherwise is arrogant. You would not be the same person you are now.
that's absolutely disgusting.
I don't disagree with that sentiment. To say that you wouldn't be that way in different circumstances is very dangerous however. The only way to stop history from repeating itself is to learn from it. We need to prevent that perfect storm from ever happening again. Unfortunately the extreme polarization of society is pushing things in that direction. In my opinion, of course.
I hope I'm wrong and people are more enlightened now than they were then. Fingers crossed!
Actually, if a person is not prepared to have a reporter show up at random, shoving a microphone and camera in their face, then that person should not enter politics.
There is some merit to what @Balrog99 is saying. By July 1933, the NSDAP was the only political party allowed to exist in Germany, leaving its citizens with two choices: vote for the NSDAP or not vote at all. "Not voting" might have been viewed by some as subversion or treason, which itself would leave you with another choice: stay and continue not to vote or leave. Fear can be a powerful motivator causing people to react in ways which they may not otherwise have done.
@jjstraka34 I did listen to the audio. There was clearly more to Gianforte's anger than that one question. Whether that particular reporter was the cause or not is what isn't clear. I don't believe you get the whole story from one brief recording.
Oh indeed there is, because the same reporter and newspaper also reported this. Go figure:
Another liberal victory in Montana! Oh wait... But there's Georgia! Oh wait... I wouldn't be too sure about Trump going down in flames if I were on the left. Advertisers and media outlets in marginal states sure are getting rich though. Probably more money spent in this Montana election than in all the rest of the elections there in the last 20 years put together.
Baffling how people don't see through Don the Con and think voting for millionaires to take away their healthcare, give the rich tax cuts, and cut social safety nets, is what they want.
Georgia still might go Blue, the candidate just didn't win the seat out right.
Didn't work in Montana, Kansas, Georgia but New Hampshire flipped a state legislature seat from red to blue from first time ever.
@Mathsorcerer My point was that those reporters wouldn't show up in Montana EVER (except maybe to ski) but for the political climate right now. That alone would be very irritating. Politics is by nature confrontational and reporters are supposed to be neutral (but many aren't). Therein lies the problem.
You caught us. All right wingers are racist. We believe in laws only for brown people. Yup. Really hateful over here.
It's amazing that the left gets away with so flippantly abusing abhorrent accusations like that, frankly. As if they have free reign to slander anyone and everyone they don't like.
This actually makes the entire scenario much worse, not better.
Eh, I'm not bothered as much by that after reading the article.
$250k in ETFs in the Russian stock market? For a guy whose net worth is roughly a thousand times that? If I have 10k in ETFs, that'd be the equivalent of me having a net worth of ten million dollars. Which I don't.
The guy has also apparently disclosed his tax returns for the last 10 years, unlike *cough* someone *cough*. So it's actually refreshing to see someone willing to follow appearances.
I am bothered by why he has the investments at all. They seem to be losing money. Both have trended downwards since their formation. There are very large strings of negative returns in looking at them from virtually any perspective time period of returns. Since their formation, both ETFs have lost roughly 4% value over their life (one is about 7 year old, the other is about 10 years old).
Setting aside the politics of foreign investment and that it's Russia in particular, I wouldn't feel comfortable investing in ETFs that are slowly, unsteadily but slowly, losing money.
Simple: I am both a mathematician and a sorcerer by training. I can assure you that that was a difficult undergraduate program at university--most people never make it through the second year of alchemy.
*************
The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has decided not to reinstate the latest travel ban. Chief Judge Roger Gregory states that the executive order uses "vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination." The Trump Administration is considering appealing to the Supreme Court.
*************
My investments in indexed funds have a year-to-date return of 9.98% and their 5-year annualized return is currently 13.39%. As long as your investments beat 4%, an overestimate of long-term inflation, you are doing well (or at least not losing money).
You caught us. All right wingers are racist. We believe in laws only for brown people. Yup. Really hateful over here.
It's amazing that the left gets away with so flippantly abusing abhorrent accusations like that, frankly. As if they have free reign to slander anyone and everyone they don't like.
We don't think you are all racists we think you all are misguided by supporting the side with the racist agendas. True, some of you are deplorables, not all. Even if you personally are not racist, are you proud to share the side with racists? It's kind of like how your side attacks all islam when only some are "radical islamic terrorists" when all islamic people are not like that.
But there's more wrong on the right than just the racism. Here's some other things the left doesn't like about the right: Supply side economics Intolerance for anyone not straight white christian Desires to gut people's education and or christianize it Desires to ruin the environment for business Want to make poor people's lives worse Corporations over people
You caught us. All right wingers are racist. We believe in laws only for brown people. Yup. Really hateful over here.
It's amazing that the left gets away with so flippantly abusing abhorrent accusations like that, frankly. As if they have free reign to slander anyone and everyone they don't like.
Who said all right wingers are racist? That isnt what was said at all.
What was said, was some republicans views appeal to racist and those with intolerant views.
The Trump executive order that was just shot down again is an example of this. What makes it worse though, is that they are attempting to pass it off as a "security issue."
Tightening up immigration and refugee claims is a legitimate right wing concern/policy. But singling out certain groups for said policy isnt.
@Mathsorcerer Ah, the sweet wizardry of mathematics. I figured it was something like that. At which university did you find that discipline? I'd guess Hogwarts but I don't think they have a college program there!
You caught us. All right wingers are racist. We believe in laws only for brown people. Yup. Really hateful over here.
It's amazing that the left gets away with so flippantly abusing abhorrent accusations like that, frankly. As if they have free reign to slander anyone and everyone they don't like.
We don't think you are all racists we think you all are misguided by supporting the side with the racist agendas. True, some of you are deplorables, not all. Even if you personally are not racist, are you proud to share the side with racists? It's kind of like how your side attacks all islam when only some are "radical islamic terrorists" when all islamic people are not like that.
But there's more wrong on the right than just the racism. Here's some other things the left doesn't like about the right: Supply side economics Intolerance for anyone not straight white christian Desires to gut people's education and or christianize it Desires to ruin the environment for business Want to make poor people's lives worse Corporations over people
Yup, lets keep generalizing and talking down to people who are different than you. Methinks the kettle doth protest too much.
This is exactly the kind of preachy, I'm better than you because you're 'x' views that alienate those people. The more the left talks this way the more entrenched those folks become. There are better ways of approaching these issues than calling people Nazi's (which is absolutely ridiculous and an insult to the millions that died in those concentration camps). If I yelled at you, called you a 'commie' and outed you as stupid on social media, I'm sure you'd see the errors of your ways and join me on the conservative side. Right?
It isn't preachy, it's just the facts.
I'm not saying I'm better than anyone, I'm saying if you want to be racist or misogynist, then own it. Don't whine extensively about how unfair it is that people on the left correctly identified your repellent views.
I also didn't call anyone a Nazi, so maybe straw man a little less?
Comments
This Montana election, though, should help pour some fuel on the fire to make certain that future elections are more "in your face" from both sides.
I'm sure that reporter just forced his way into his office to report what he saw and wasn't trying to goad the man or anything like that. Montana elections are always prime news. I remember hearing about the last election there. Oh wait...
As for being preachy....again, I don't hail from San Francisco or New York. I spent the entirety of my childhood in a town that is exactly like most of the State of Montana. A big open area of nothing with a couple of scattered small cities. The racism in many of these places isn't even sitting below the surface. Literally ANY time a rap song would come on when my best friend's dad was in the room, he would say "turn off that n****r-jive". Most of the boys in town found this so absolutely hilarious that half the kids in the school started using this term for all rap music. That's how small and insulated it was. These people aren't alienated by social media, they've alienated themselves by choice. I never once in my life actually called my best friend's dad a racist. No one did. He absolutely is one, as was a sizable portion of the rest of the town. My cousin (after my aunt moved to town) was the only black person in the entire school (black father, white mother) and she couldn't even finish high school where I did. She had to transfer for 9th-12th grade because of what she was going through.
I have 15 years of field research into small-town rural America. I'm not preaching, I'm telling you what I saw. I can guarantee you this Sheriff who is essentially letting Gianforte off the hook has probably drank beer in his garage on multiple occasions. They are pals. It's almost inconceivable to me that they wouldn't be. The same people talking about violence on college campuses are now saying how much of a "p***y snowflake" Ben Jacobs is for not fighting back and defending himself "like a man", even though if he had done that, they'd be eviscerating him for doing so. I'm not surprised by Montana. Why be surprised by anything anymore?? But I'm not going to stop pointing out that over the last 6 months, the Republican Party has had absolutely NO problem putting forth and voting for both a guy who admitted to sexual assault on tape and now someone who beat down a reporter asking him a perfectly legitimate question. Maybe reporters should start arming themselves. Ummm....no, listen to the audio. And this is really, I'm sorry to say, the kind of mentality that is excusing the entire thing. Asking a question is not "goading" someone into assaulting you. He asked a question about the CBO score of the health-care bill, Gianforte deflected, and Jacobs basically said, "well the Election is tomorrow can we get an answer" and then Gianforte went ape-shit. That's what happened.
Pipe dream I know...
We view that time through the lens of hindsight. If you grew up in Germany in the 20's and 30's, believe it or not, you may have even voted for Hitler. To say otherwise is arrogant. You would not be the same person you are now.
I don't think Gianforte is a degenerate maniac because of this one incident but, on the other hand, I wouldn't invite him over for dinner, either. I presume he failed to remember that reporters are supposed to get in a candidate's face and ask the hard questions. Mr. Jacobs' questions was completely legitimate--the CBO did give the health insurance bill a low score, after all.
I did listen to the audio. There was clearly more to Gianforte's anger than that one question. Whether that particular reporter was the cause or not is what isn't clear. I don't believe you get the whole story from one brief recording.
I hope I'm wrong and people are more enlightened now than they were then. Fingers crossed!
There is some merit to what @Balrog99 is saying. By July 1933, the NSDAP was the only political party allowed to exist in Germany, leaving its citizens with two choices: vote for the NSDAP or not vote at all. "Not voting" might have been viewed by some as subversion or treason, which itself would leave you with another choice: stay and continue not to vote or leave. Fear can be a powerful motivator causing people to react in ways which they may not otherwise have done.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/28/greg-gianforte-republican-candidate-congress-russia-companies
This actually makes the entire scenario much worse, not better.
Georgia still might go Blue, the candidate just didn't win the seat out right.
Didn't work in Montana, Kansas, Georgia but New Hampshire flipped a state legislature seat from red to blue from first time ever.
My point was that those reporters wouldn't show up in Montana EVER (except maybe to ski) but for the political climate right now. That alone would be very irritating. Politics is by nature confrontational and reporters are supposed to be neutral (but many aren't). Therein lies the problem.
Btw: What's the story behind your moniker?
It's amazing that the left gets away with so flippantly abusing abhorrent accusations like that, frankly. As if they have free reign to slander anyone and everyone they don't like.
$250k in ETFs in the Russian stock market? For a guy whose net worth is roughly a thousand times that? If I have 10k in ETFs, that'd be the equivalent of me having a net worth of ten million dollars. Which I don't.
The guy has also apparently disclosed his tax returns for the last 10 years, unlike *cough* someone *cough*. So it's actually refreshing to see someone willing to follow appearances.
I am bothered by why he has the investments at all. They seem to be losing money. Both have trended downwards since their formation. There are very large strings of negative returns in looking at them from virtually any perspective time period of returns. Since their formation, both ETFs have lost roughly 4% value over their life (one is about 7 year old, the other is about 10 years old).
Setting aside the politics of foreign investment and that it's Russia in particular, I wouldn't feel comfortable investing in ETFs that are slowly, unsteadily but slowly, losing money.
*************
The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has decided not to reinstate the latest travel ban. Chief Judge Roger Gregory states that the executive order uses "vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination." The Trump Administration is considering appealing to the Supreme Court.
*************
My investments in indexed funds have a year-to-date return of 9.98% and their 5-year annualized return is currently 13.39%. As long as your investments beat 4%, an overestimate of long-term inflation, you are doing well (or at least not losing money).
But there's more wrong on the right than just the racism. Here's some other things the left doesn't like about the right:
Supply side economics
Intolerance for anyone not straight white christian
Desires to gut people's education and or christianize it
Desires to ruin the environment for business
Want to make poor people's lives worse
Corporations over people
What was said, was some republicans views appeal to racist and those with intolerant views.
The Trump executive order that was just shot down again is an example of this. What makes it worse though, is that they are attempting to pass it off as a "security issue."
Tightening up immigration and refugee claims is a legitimate right wing concern/policy. But singling out certain groups for said policy isnt.
Ah, the sweet wizardry of mathematics. I figured it was something like that. At which university did you find that discipline? I'd guess Hogwarts but I don't think they have a college program there!
I'm not saying I'm better than anyone, I'm saying if you want to be racist or misogynist, then own it. Don't whine extensively about how unfair it is that people on the left correctly identified your repellent views.
I also didn't call anyone a Nazi, so maybe straw man a little less?