9 ms·

>Twenty-three days ago you and Marco sought to get Peter Thiel removed from YC for his support of Trump WOW. This is insane! Things like this and Mozilla's CEO

by blahi 10y ago

>Twenty-three days ago you and Marco sought to get Peter Thiel removed from YC for his support of Trump WOW. This is insane! Things like this and Mozilla's CEO situation are exactly why Trump won the destitute and the rich alike. Liberals shoving down their half-baked morals into everybody's throats. How condescending. So much for Egalitarianism. We are equal, just not with Trump voters. What a hypocrisy.

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
exactly why Trump won the destitute and the rich alike. That sounds a lot like the half-baked shoving you're trying to describe. I wouldn't be so convinced the 50+ million people who voted Trump fit neatly in to those two categories.
snikeris 10y ago
Yeah it's intolerance. Coming from the party that's so concerned with calling everyone else intolerant.
- peterclary 10y ago
  So we should all be tolerant of racism, sexism, outright sexual assualt ("grab 'em by the pussy") and boasting of same, mocking the disabled, stiffing contractors and suppliers?
  - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
    >So we should all be tolerant of racism, sexism, outright sexual assualt ("grab 'em by the pussy") and boasting of same, mocking the disabled, stiffing contractors and suppliers? The problem is, most Trump supporters are not racist or sexist. You're doing a witch hunt where you accuse someone of being a witch, and then justifying that it's okay to kill them them because they're witches. Do you see how wrong that is? You don't even know them personally, so how would you even know that they're witches?
    - peterclary 10y ago
      I've advocated killing nobody and no one. Nor have I accused anyone of being racist or sexist except Trump. Trump has said he will ban all Muslims entering the USA. That is discrimination on the grounds of religion. He has repeatedly characterised Mexicans as rapists. That is racism. He has repeatedly made disrespectful comments about women based on their appearance and questioned their ability to do their job based on whether they're on their Period. That is sexism. He has boasted about being able to get away with uninhibited sexual contact because of his position of power and money. Women have corroborated his own claims and have stated that it was unwelcome. When both he and they are making consistent statements the balance of probability is that they're both telling the truth. The idea that non-protest counts as consent is massively dangerous especially if one party has all the power and if the contact in question has already happened and finished.
      - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
        >Trump has said he will ban all Muslims entering the USA. That is discrimination on the grounds of religion. Not really. It's only discrimination if Trump applies it to every Muslims. But Trump doesn't apply it to every Muslims. Trump said he will temporary ban immigrants (they don't even have to be Muslim) from countries with direct ties to terrorism, until they can be properly vet. This is not discrimination against Muslims because Trump has no problem with Muslims who are U.S. citizens and Trump has no problem with Muslims who are from countries that are fighting against ISIS. >He has repeatedly made disrespectful comments about women based on their appearance. That is sexism. If you're talking about Miss Universe... It was not sexism. Trump was preemptively defending Miss Universe from the incoming media. The media was going to have a field day with her when she shows up at the Miss Universe 60 pounds overweight. She didn't understand that the media was about to hang her out to dry. Trump knew what was going to happen, so he invited the media over, and called the reporters fat, and Trump even called himself fat, and tells everyone that being fat is normal, so that the reporters can not call her fat (because they will look like hypocrites). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpXsAoXZIMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpXsAoXZIMg CNN then proceeded to call her fat anyway. http://archive.is/jHaEh http://archive.is/jHaEh Afterward, she backs-tabbed him, even though they wanted to fire her and he saved her ass. https://i.sli.mg/8gzCQX.jpg https://i.sli.mg/8gzCQX.jpg She is not a good person. She threaten to kill a judge, and involved in the gateway driving of a murder. http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/09/28/miss-universe-alicia-machado-accused-threatening-to-kill-judge-in-late-90s.html http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/09/28/miss-univers... >...questioned their ability to do their job based on whether they're on their Period. This have no factual evidence. Not only that, he had done many things to help empowered women. For example, he was the first to let a woman be in charge of building a skyscraper building. That was unheard of during the 80's. He also admit that a female worker with skills and abilities is worth more than 10 male workers. >Women have corroborated his own claims and have stated that it was unwelcome. No evidence. Trump either had never even met those people before, or they just want their 15 minute of fame, or were being paid by his opponents. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f8d_1478953280 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f8d_1478953280 >The idea that non-protest counts as consent is massively dangerous especially if one party has all the power and if the contact in question has already happened and finished. Trump said they let him grab their pussy. Emphasis on the THEY LET part. That's consent. All these are just election smears. The typical election smears that you see every election years, as rivals tries to make their opponents look as bad as possible. None of these are even important, as the election result have shown. Voters are not stupid. They care more about jobs, security, and health issues than these smears. Hillary was so focus on the smearing Trump that she forgot about what the voters actually cares about. And that's why she lost.
  - RHSeeger 10y ago
    We should try to convince them why we believe they are wrong, rather than just condemning them and pointing out how they are lesser people for not agreeing with us.
    - matt4077 10y ago
      It's really hard to get anywhere if it requires explaining everything from first principle. I'm also really sorry for overestimating people by assuming that "do not grab women by their genitals without their consent" or "do not shoot people for fun – even when they're African-American" don't need further justification. And yes, I am, just now, calling these people idiots. Because their argument seems to be "I don't like how you're making fun of me, so I'm gonna find some bystanders and beat them up, because I know how much it hurts you to watch people suffer". I'd also say this "condescension" has always been a two-way street. All the talk of "real America" has, since at least the Sarah Palin disaster, been a way to insult "the elites".
      - infinite8s 10y ago
        The talk of 'real America' has been going on since the founding of the country.
    - infinite8s 10y ago
      And if they can't be convinced? At a certain point accommodation becomes pointless. How do you convince a racist not to be racist?
      - mikecke 10y ago
        The point is to not convince, but to make the playing ground such that the act of discrimination provides negative value towards the actor.
        infinite8s 10y ago
        The only way to change the playing field in that way is to have a majority of people feel the same way, which requires either convincing them or waiting until the old group dies out.
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    > racism, sexism Up to and including anything that anyone might consider to go under those labels? > outright sexual assualt ("grab 'em by the pussy") We should at least be careful of describing something that is not an instance of "outright sexual assault" as "outright sexual assault". "boasting of same" is not the same. > stiffing contractors and suppliers I assume Hillary is also out then, as that would be tolerating corruption?
    - peterclary 10y ago
      Are you saying that grabbing somebody like that isn't sexual assault, or are you suggesting that Trump was dishonest when he claimed he did it?
      - Chris2048 10y ago
        "and when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." The context does't lead me to believe anything about Trumps actual actions.
        techdragon 10y ago
        What did the testimony from the women who came forward and described the things he had done to them lead you to believe? Personally I thought it was just a stupid rather vulgar boast when I first heard the line. Then we heard from victims... who's testimonials changed my opinion quite easily. It's one thing to be the sort of idiot that says such things... it's another thing entirely to do them. Also since I'm not even an American I have no inherent bias towards either end of the stupidly partisan political spectrum that is D vs R in the US of A Personally I think George Washington was completely correct in his characterisation of political parties in his farewell address. [1] (20 to 25 ) and why he hoped they would never be formed in America. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty. 1 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Washington%27s_Farewell_Address#20 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Washington%27s_Farewell_Addre...
  - snikeris 10y ago
    No, but you should be tolerant of others who don't share your beliefs. Calling for Peter Thiel to be thrown out of YC or telling your employees to resign if they support Trump is being intolerant.
    - peterclary 10y ago
      Do you believe that any belief, however extreme, should be tolerated?
      - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
        Is Peter Thiel going around lynching Black people like the KKK? No? Then he's free to vote for whoever he wants.
      - snikeris 10y ago
        Yes. Who decides what is extreme? As long as you're not infringing on my rights, why should I care about the contents of your head?
  - corey_moncure 10y ago
    >"grab 'em by the pussy" Whereas, "Got 'em by the balls" has passed fully into colloquial usage for some time now, it may be difficult for many to feel earnest moral outrage over this statement when the plaintiff's core platform includes social equality of the sexes. Rather, all your audience hears is the political Left reiterating a double standard that is stacked against whites, males, and particularly the intersection of the two categories. The vast majority of both parties lives their entire life without bearing any hatred for any race or gender as a category of person. Leftists are subject to the same basic human nature as Rightists, and this includes the tendencies to censor, bully, label, and dismiss those who disagree with us.
    - peterclary 10y ago
      Sorry, by plaintiff you mean who, exactly? If you mean Trump, we'll have to see if he follows through on his promises, but his own public remarks suggest a severe want of genuine respect for women. And speaking as a White Male, the idea that the deck is stacked against us, compared to the experiences of women and minorities, suggests either a deliberate blindness or an attempt to troll. It is simply one of the most jaw-dropping suggestions I've ever seen in a HN comment.
      - nathanasmith 10y ago
        >And speaking as a White Male, the idea that the deck is stacked against us So you speak for the experience of all white males now? You know what it's like to grow up in Appalachia? Did you lose a factory job in Michigan? Did you have any experience coal mining in Pennsylvania until you couldn't? Have you farmed in the middle of Kansas? If not then don't try to speak for the people who have. This kind of rhetoric from the left is a very good reason why Trump is the President-Elect right now. If your side figures that out sometime in the next four years, you might have a chance next time.
        tptacek 10y ago
        This is true. But that doesn't mean the preceding comment was right to compare "grab them by the balls" to "grab them by the pussy". "Grab them by the balls" is an expression. "Grab them by the pussy" was a claim that Trump could do exactly that, to anyone he chose, by virtue of his celebrity. That claim was backed by a Cosby-esque assortment of women with sexual assault stories involving Trump.
  - oldmanjay 10y ago
    No, you should be tolerant of people. You should also endeavor to note the distinction between saying something and doing something, because it's not even subtle and insisting it doesn't exist, for example by labeling a joke "sexual assault," does not convince reasonable people that you are on the level.
    - peterclary 10y ago
      So I'm not "on the level"? Classy. I'm pretty clear in the distinction between saying and doing, and it's pretty well-established that speech itself can be harmful. I think the Left and Right both point to things that the other says which they find objectionable, so there is broad agreement on that principle at least. Regarding tolerance of people, that depends on how they're behaving. Society doesn't tolerate certain behaviours, and will imprison people for some of them, so arguing that you should always tolerate people is to separate people and their actions in a way that isn't always possible or appropriate.
      - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
        There's a difference between bragging and actually doing something. Trump brag that he's so rich, women would let him grab their pussy. Women would LET him grab their pussy. Also, he said the women LET him do it. In other word, they CONSENT! Typical guys bragging to each other.
  - snikeris 10y ago
    We certainly shouldn't physically assault people because they support someone we've deemed racist, sexist, etc: http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&p=156489#p156470 http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&p=156...
    - tptacek 10y ago
      We agree. Could you remind Trump's racist fringe of supporters of that?
mfukar 10y ago
> Liberals shoving down their half-baked morals into everybody's throats. How condescending. So much for Egalitarianism. We are equal, just not with Trump voters. What a hypocrisy. Mind you, never in the history of history have people fought against discrimination, corruption, and oppression by saying "but they might have a point too".
- DefaultUserHN 10y ago
  Using accusation of discrimination, corruption, and oppression to justify the oppression of Trump supporters is morally wrong. The witch-hunt must stop. Do you see what you're doing? "Witches are bad, and since Trump supporters are witches, it's okay to kill them." It's all accusations. There is no videos proof of Trump supporters going around lynching Black people like what the KKK did back in the old days. You're doing a witch hunt where you accuse Trump supporters of being a witch, and then justifying that it's okay to kill them them because they're witches. Do you see how wrong that is? You don't even know them personally, so how would you even know that they're witches?
  - mfukar 10y ago
    I made a comment about the actions people take against what they perceive as oppressive, corrupt, and unjust, and you think I'm doing a witch hunt. Not a very solid attempt at trolling, plus too long text, 2/10.
    - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
      What Liberals are doing to Trump supporters is the same thing that the Nazi did to the Jews. The Nazi accused the Jews of many many things. The Nazi tricked everyone to hate the Jews (with all sorts of accusations). Once people hated the Jews, the Nazi were able to kill off the Jews without any backlash, because in those people's mind, the Jews "deserved" it. Liberals are doing the same thing to Trump supporters. Accuse Trump supporters of being racist (I don't see any Trump supporter going around lynching Black people), and making it okay to beat up Trump supporter because they "deserve" it. This witch hunt has to stop. It's 2016 already, and I can't believe witch hunt (under the new name "Trump Supporters Are Racist And They Deserve To Get Beat Up") is still happening.
matt4077 10y ago
I'm gonna keep shoving my half-baked morals of "not assaulting women" and "lynching is somewhat out of date" into every throat I can find. Trump's victory only shows I overestimated people. My morals may not have a majority, so it's great they aren't subject to a popularity contest. Democracy isn't about two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. Regarding "egalitarianism": People are created equal, they deserve equal chances, equal treatment before the law when the situations are equal. it doesn't mean all opinions deserve equal consideration. If I get cancer, I'll listen to an expert. If I read something on foreign policy, I'll give more weight to a Condi Rice interview in the NYT than something by "blahi". It's the result of a general policy called "Don't be an idiot".
- blahi 10y ago
  Your smugness and arrogance are what brought us Trump. You know how people ought to feel, how they should form their opinion. By all means, keep doing what you're doing. Nothing wrong with your approach.

by blahi 10y ago

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago

exactly why Trump won the destitute and the rich alike. That sounds a lot like the half-baked shoving you're trying to describe. I wouldn't be so convinced the 50+ million people who voted Trump fit neatly in to those two categories.

snikeris 10y ago

Yeah it's intolerance. Coming from the party that's so concerned with calling everyone else intolerant.

peterclary 10y ago
So we should all be tolerant of racism, sexism, outright sexual assualt ("grab 'em by the pussy") and boasting of same, mocking the disabled, stiffing contractors and suppliers?
- DefaultUserHN 10y ago
  >So we should all be tolerant of racism, sexism, outright sexual assualt ("grab 'em by the pussy") and boasting of same, mocking the disabled, stiffing contractors and suppliers? The problem is, most Trump supporters are not racist or sexist. You're doing a witch hunt where you accuse someone of being a witch, and then justifying that it's okay to kill them them because they're witches. Do you see how wrong that is? You don't even know them personally, so how would you even know that they're witches?
  - peterclary 10y ago
    I've advocated killing nobody and no one. Nor have I accused anyone of being racist or sexist except Trump. Trump has said he will ban all Muslims entering the USA. That is discrimination on the grounds of religion. He has repeatedly characterised Mexicans as rapists. That is racism. He has repeatedly made disrespectful comments about women based on their appearance and questioned their ability to do their job based on whether they're on their Period. That is sexism. He has boasted about being able to get away with uninhibited sexual contact because of his position of power and money. Women have corroborated his own claims and have stated that it was unwelcome. When both he and they are making consistent statements the balance of probability is that they're both telling the truth. The idea that non-protest counts as consent is massively dangerous especially if one party has all the power and if the contact in question has already happened and finished.
    - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
      >Trump has said he will ban all Muslims entering the USA. That is discrimination on the grounds of religion. Not really. It's only discrimination if Trump applies it to every Muslims. But Trump doesn't apply it to every Muslims. Trump said he will temporary ban immigrants (they don't even have to be Muslim) from countries with direct ties to terrorism, until they can be properly vet. This is not discrimination against Muslims because Trump has no problem with Muslims who are U.S. citizens and Trump has no problem with Muslims who are from countries that are fighting against ISIS. >He has repeatedly made disrespectful comments about women based on their appearance. That is sexism. If you're talking about Miss Universe... It was not sexism. Trump was preemptively defending Miss Universe from the incoming media. The media was going to have a field day with her when she shows up at the Miss Universe 60 pounds overweight. She didn't understand that the media was about to hang her out to dry. Trump knew what was going to happen, so he invited the media over, and called the reporters fat, and Trump even called himself fat, and tells everyone that being fat is normal, so that the reporters can not call her fat (because they will look like hypocrites). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpXsAoXZIMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpXsAoXZIMg CNN then proceeded to call her fat anyway. http://archive.is/jHaEh http://archive.is/jHaEh Afterward, she backs-tabbed him, even though they wanted to fire her and he saved her ass. https://i.sli.mg/8gzCQX.jpg https://i.sli.mg/8gzCQX.jpg She is not a good person. She threaten to kill a judge, and involved in the gateway driving of a murder. http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/09/28/miss-universe-alicia-machado-accused-threatening-to-kill-judge-in-late-90s.html http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/09/28/miss-univers... >...questioned their ability to do their job based on whether they're on their Period. This have no factual evidence. Not only that, he had done many things to help empowered women. For example, he was the first to let a woman be in charge of building a skyscraper building. That was unheard of during the 80's. He also admit that a female worker with skills and abilities is worth more than 10 male workers. >Women have corroborated his own claims and have stated that it was unwelcome. No evidence. Trump either had never even met those people before, or they just want their 15 minute of fame, or were being paid by his opponents. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f8d_1478953280 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f8d_1478953280 >The idea that non-protest counts as consent is massively dangerous especially if one party has all the power and if the contact in question has already happened and finished. Trump said they let him grab their pussy. Emphasis on the THEY LET part. That's consent. All these are just election smears. The typical election smears that you see every election years, as rivals tries to make their opponents look as bad as possible. None of these are even important, as the election result have shown. Voters are not stupid. They care more about jobs, security, and health issues than these smears. Hillary was so focus on the smearing Trump that she forgot about what the voters actually cares about. And that's why she lost.
- RHSeeger 10y ago
  We should try to convince them why we believe they are wrong, rather than just condemning them and pointing out how they are lesser people for not agreeing with us.
  - matt4077 10y ago
    It's really hard to get anywhere if it requires explaining everything from first principle. I'm also really sorry for overestimating people by assuming that "do not grab women by their genitals without their consent" or "do not shoot people for fun – even when they're African-American" don't need further justification. And yes, I am, just now, calling these people idiots. Because their argument seems to be "I don't like how you're making fun of me, so I'm gonna find some bystanders and beat them up, because I know how much it hurts you to watch people suffer". I'd also say this "condescension" has always been a two-way street. All the talk of "real America" has, since at least the Sarah Palin disaster, been a way to insult "the elites".
    - infinite8s 10y ago
      The talk of 'real America' has been going on since the founding of the country.
  - infinite8s 10y ago
    And if they can't be convinced? At a certain point accommodation becomes pointless. How do you convince a racist not to be racist?
    - mikecke 10y ago
      The point is to not convince, but to make the playing ground such that the act of discrimination provides negative value towards the actor.
      - infinite8s 10y ago
        The only way to change the playing field in that way is to have a majority of people feel the same way, which requires either convincing them or waiting until the old group dies out.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  > racism, sexism Up to and including anything that anyone might consider to go under those labels? > outright sexual assualt ("grab 'em by the pussy") We should at least be careful of describing something that is not an instance of "outright sexual assault" as "outright sexual assault". "boasting of same" is not the same. > stiffing contractors and suppliers I assume Hillary is also out then, as that would be tolerating corruption?
  - peterclary 10y ago
    Are you saying that grabbing somebody like that isn't sexual assault, or are you suggesting that Trump was dishonest when he claimed he did it?
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      "and when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." The context does't lead me to believe anything about Trumps actual actions.
      - techdragon 10y ago
        What did the testimony from the women who came forward and described the things he had done to them lead you to believe? Personally I thought it was just a stupid rather vulgar boast when I first heard the line. Then we heard from victims... who's testimonials changed my opinion quite easily. It's one thing to be the sort of idiot that says such things... it's another thing entirely to do them. Also since I'm not even an American I have no inherent bias towards either end of the stupidly partisan political spectrum that is D vs R in the US of A Personally I think George Washington was completely correct in his characterisation of political parties in his farewell address. [1] (20 to 25 ) and why he hoped they would never be formed in America. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty. 1 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Washington%27s_Farewell_Address#20 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Washington%27s_Farewell_Addre...
- snikeris 10y ago
  No, but you should be tolerant of others who don't share your beliefs. Calling for Peter Thiel to be thrown out of YC or telling your employees to resign if they support Trump is being intolerant.
  - peterclary 10y ago
    Do you believe that any belief, however extreme, should be tolerated?
    - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
      Is Peter Thiel going around lynching Black people like the KKK? No? Then he's free to vote for whoever he wants.
    - snikeris 10y ago
      Yes. Who decides what is extreme? As long as you're not infringing on my rights, why should I care about the contents of your head?
- corey_moncure 10y ago
  >"grab 'em by the pussy" Whereas, "Got 'em by the balls" has passed fully into colloquial usage for some time now, it may be difficult for many to feel earnest moral outrage over this statement when the plaintiff's core platform includes social equality of the sexes. Rather, all your audience hears is the political Left reiterating a double standard that is stacked against whites, males, and particularly the intersection of the two categories. The vast majority of both parties lives their entire life without bearing any hatred for any race or gender as a category of person. Leftists are subject to the same basic human nature as Rightists, and this includes the tendencies to censor, bully, label, and dismiss those who disagree with us.
  - peterclary 10y ago
    Sorry, by plaintiff you mean who, exactly? If you mean Trump, we'll have to see if he follows through on his promises, but his own public remarks suggest a severe want of genuine respect for women. And speaking as a White Male, the idea that the deck is stacked against us, compared to the experiences of women and minorities, suggests either a deliberate blindness or an attempt to troll. It is simply one of the most jaw-dropping suggestions I've ever seen in a HN comment.
    - nathanasmith 10y ago
      >And speaking as a White Male, the idea that the deck is stacked against us So you speak for the experience of all white males now? You know what it's like to grow up in Appalachia? Did you lose a factory job in Michigan? Did you have any experience coal mining in Pennsylvania until you couldn't? Have you farmed in the middle of Kansas? If not then don't try to speak for the people who have. This kind of rhetoric from the left is a very good reason why Trump is the President-Elect right now. If your side figures that out sometime in the next four years, you might have a chance next time.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        This is true. But that doesn't mean the preceding comment was right to compare "grab them by the balls" to "grab them by the pussy". "Grab them by the balls" is an expression. "Grab them by the pussy" was a claim that Trump could do exactly that, to anyone he chose, by virtue of his celebrity. That claim was backed by a Cosby-esque assortment of women with sexual assault stories involving Trump.
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  No, you should be tolerant of people. You should also endeavor to note the distinction between saying something and doing something, because it's not even subtle and insisting it doesn't exist, for example by labeling a joke "sexual assault," does not convince reasonable people that you are on the level.
  - peterclary 10y ago
    So I'm not "on the level"? Classy. I'm pretty clear in the distinction between saying and doing, and it's pretty well-established that speech itself can be harmful. I think the Left and Right both point to things that the other says which they find objectionable, so there is broad agreement on that principle at least. Regarding tolerance of people, that depends on how they're behaving. Society doesn't tolerate certain behaviours, and will imprison people for some of them, so arguing that you should always tolerate people is to separate people and their actions in a way that isn't always possible or appropriate.
    - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
      There's a difference between bragging and actually doing something. Trump brag that he's so rich, women would let him grab their pussy. Women would LET him grab their pussy. Also, he said the women LET him do it. In other word, they CONSENT! Typical guys bragging to each other.
- snikeris 10y ago
  We certainly shouldn't physically assault people because they support someone we've deemed racist, sexist, etc: http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&p=156489#p156470 http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&p=156...
  - tptacek 10y ago
    We agree. Could you remind Trump's racist fringe of supporters of that?

mfukar 10y ago

> Liberals shoving down their half-baked morals into everybody's throats. How condescending. So much for Egalitarianism. We are equal, just not with Trump voters. What a hypocrisy. Mind you, never in the history of history have people fought against discrimination, corruption, and oppression by saying "but they might have a point too".

DefaultUserHN 10y ago
Using accusation of discrimination, corruption, and oppression to justify the oppression of Trump supporters is morally wrong. The witch-hunt must stop. Do you see what you're doing? "Witches are bad, and since Trump supporters are witches, it's okay to kill them." It's all accusations. There is no videos proof of Trump supporters going around lynching Black people like what the KKK did back in the old days. You're doing a witch hunt where you accuse Trump supporters of being a witch, and then justifying that it's okay to kill them them because they're witches. Do you see how wrong that is? You don't even know them personally, so how would you even know that they're witches?
- mfukar 10y ago
  I made a comment about the actions people take against what they perceive as oppressive, corrupt, and unjust, and you think I'm doing a witch hunt. Not a very solid attempt at trolling, plus too long text, 2/10.
  - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
    What Liberals are doing to Trump supporters is the same thing that the Nazi did to the Jews. The Nazi accused the Jews of many many things. The Nazi tricked everyone to hate the Jews (with all sorts of accusations). Once people hated the Jews, the Nazi were able to kill off the Jews without any backlash, because in those people's mind, the Jews "deserved" it. Liberals are doing the same thing to Trump supporters. Accuse Trump supporters of being racist (I don't see any Trump supporter going around lynching Black people), and making it okay to beat up Trump supporter because they "deserve" it. This witch hunt has to stop. It's 2016 already, and I can't believe witch hunt (under the new name "Trump Supporters Are Racist And They Deserve To Get Beat Up") is still happening.

matt4077 10y ago

I'm gonna keep shoving my half-baked morals of "not assaulting women" and "lynching is somewhat out of date" into every throat I can find. Trump's victory only shows I overestimated people. My morals may not have a majority, so it's great they aren't subject to a popularity contest. Democracy isn't about two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. Regarding "egalitarianism": People are created equal, they deserve equal chances, equal treatment before the law when the situations are equal. it doesn't mean all opinions deserve equal consideration. If I get cancer, I'll listen to an expert. If I read something on foreign policy, I'll give more weight to a Condi Rice interview in the NYT than something by "blahi". It's the result of a general policy called "Don't be an idiot".

blahi 10y ago
Your smugness and arrogance are what brought us Trump. You know how people ought to feel, how they should form their opinion. By all means, keep doing what you're doing. Nothing wrong with your approach.