7 ms·

> Almost all Americans think this sort of thing is nonsense. But the average American has little standing to hold the American bureaucracy accountable for its n

> Almost all Americans think this sort of thing is nonsense. But the average American has little standing to hold the American bureaucracy accountable for its nonsense. Sorry but they don't get off that easy when almost half of them voted Trump into office. > Americans, especially outside overcrowded urban areas, are courteous, helpful, hospitable people that are very tolerant of other people and ideas. I've found quite the opposite, out in the boonies you're more likely to get harassed when you're not the "right" color or religion. I've had some really nice, helpful people turn nasty as soon as I mentioned my atheism, for example.

b6 9y ago
> Sorry but they don't get off that easy when almost half of them voted Trump into office. Not to rehash the past, but I thought we had gotten it clear by now: voting for the guy does not indicate support. Americans vote for the candidate they fear and despise the least.
- pjc50 9y ago
  Voting is literally one of the two types of support that actually counts, far more than for-or-against posts on the internet. The other one would be giving money. If you voted for Trump, you supported Trump. It's OK to change your mind, but people need to own and take responsibility for what they do at the ballot box.
  - kalleboo 9y ago
    And people wonder why voter participation is so low...
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  > Americans vote for the [Republican or Democratic] candidate they fear and despise the least. That's exactly the flawed logic that is keeping us in this two party system. If we just vote for the candidate we support, neither Trump not Hillary would stand a chance. The trouble with convincing people to actually do that is that most Americans feel the need to be on the winning side. "My vote is worthless unless it's for someone who can actually win."
  - mejari 9y ago
    That's fundamentally not the "logic that is keeping us in this two party system". That logic is the logic of understanding our current electoral system. The US electoral system as it currently stands will inevitably result in a two-party system. Sure you can change which two parties it is, that's happened several times, but without changing First Past The Post you're not going to get any other system.
humanrebar 9y ago
Half didn't vote for Trump. Look again at the turnout rates. Also keep in mind that most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. I think that is kind of silly but that's the thought process of the Trump voters I talk to. I can't comment about your personal experiences in small town America other than to say that my experience is very different and that referring to areas epithetically (1) undermines your point. America is a very broad and diverse place, though, so there are idiots and bigots in places. But I would just like to point out that kind and welcoming people are easy to find. They don't make headlines. And good impressions don't last as long as bad ones, I guess. (1) Boonies or boondocks implies a judgemental attitude that people are backwards or unsophisticated. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boondocks https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boondocks
- croon 9y ago
  Americans as individuals are generally quite friendly, regardless of city. Let me ask you a loaded question though: Are you white? I am, and have had only good experiences both in NYC, LA, SF as well as a bunch of small towns. If you are not white, or dress differently, or are transgender, I can guarantee you which of a small town or a big city would be more embracing. (On aggregate, there are of course outliers on both sides)
- oAlbe 9y ago
  > [...] most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. That is not a valid argument by any possible mean. Everybody has the right to vote whatever they want of course, but saying what you said is like saying "people eat meat to piss off vegans more than because they like it". And regardless, the driving motive of something doesn't change the end result of such something. People need to take responsibility for their actions. They voted for Trump and their is the fault of the current state of things. Period. The reasons behind why they did it don't matter and, frankly, it's also nobody's business.
  - thomastjeffery 9y ago
    > That is not a valid argument by any possible mean. Now try convincing someone. That is what I tried to do throughout the entire election, but the propaganda machine is treated as fact by many here. These people get hung up on the idea that we can never leave the two party system, meaning no third party candidate will ever get elected. Here in Utah, we did manage to give McMullin 20% of the vote, but that was still marginally less than Hillary (after salt lake county) or Trump.
dredmorbius 9y ago
In the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, roughly 63 million votes, of a population of 325 million, were cast for #45. That is 19% of the total population. Reliable sources inform me that this may in fact be significantly less than half of all Americans. The notion of the nutcase fringe in politics has been around for a while -- there's about 20% of the vote you've got to be very aware of. Where other voters are insufficiently motivated, or actively discouraged by various means (voter suppression efforts, media, uninspiring candidates), the fringe can win. That said, there's a range of types throughout the country, and a worrying fraction are worrying. Or worse.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- philipps 9y ago
  The percentage of eligible voters (not total population) who selected Trump is somewhere around 26/27%, but more importantly, in a democracy, not voting is also a decision one needs to take responsibility for.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > in a democracy, not voting is also a decision one needs to take responsibility for. Yes, but it's a different decision than voting for candidate X. Facts matter in criticism.
- jbmorgado 9y ago
  Are you actually putting newborn children in the mix to pretend that only 19% of Americans wanted Trump there?
  - dredmorbius 9y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - 9y ago
phicoh 9y ago
You can't blame this on Trump alone. 8 years of Obama gave increased spying, kept the insane TSA, blocked people born in Iran from entering the country (independent of what nationality they currently have). Gave the ESTA Visa Waiver program, where you have to pay for getting exactly no rights what-so-ever. And as final insult, you are allowed to list the social media you use.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  I'll agree with all that. I think the average American knows all that stuff is dumb as well, and that is part of what I'm saying. The American voter, individually and in aggregate, has lost much say in American bureaucracy. I don't blame Trump alone in this. Bush thought Homeland Security was a good idea. But Trump thinks the problem with American government is that he hasn't been running it. We'll see that that is a foolish take on things soon. Obama made the same mistake and had the same revelation eventually, hence all the executive orders and phone calls in his later presidency instead of laws and reforms and such.
camgunz 9y ago
Agreed, I grew up in the midwest and I now live in NYC, and New Yorkers are far, far nicer than midwesterners. The intolerance in the red parts of the US is suffocating.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Sorry but they don't get off that easy when almost half of them voted Trump into office. Nowhere near half of Americans voted Trump into office. (Now, if you want to criticize a very large share of eligible voters for abstaining, that's valid, but abstaining isn't the same as voting for Trump.)
bzbarsky 9y ago
While it may feel cathartic to blame Trump for this, unfortunately the situation is much worse than that. The article is about an ESTA denial. ESTA was put in place during the Bush administration (July 2007), and random ESTA denials happened all the time during the Obama administration. Not much has changed on this front since Trump took office, as far as I can tell. I'm not sure exactly how we're getting away with having this ESTA thing at all for countries that are supposedly part of the Visa Waiver program, without them retaliating in kind. I only hope that we'll come to our senses and stop before they do so. But given that ESTA has now existed for 10 years and both parties seem to support it, I have low hopes of it going away.
- bonzini 9y ago
  ESTA replaced the previous I-94W form; in fact most of the questions are the same. You could also be denied entry before ESTA was introduced. The best rendition of the text on the I-94W form is undoubtedly Frank Zappa and the Ensemble Modern's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPPDrXHjJx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPPDrXHjJx8

b6 9y ago

> Sorry but they don't get off that easy when almost half of them voted Trump into office. Not to rehash the past, but I thought we had gotten it clear by now: voting for the guy does not indicate support. Americans vote for the candidate they fear and despise the least.

pjc50 9y ago
Voting is literally one of the two types of support that actually counts, far more than for-or-against posts on the internet. The other one would be giving money. If you voted for Trump, you supported Trump. It's OK to change your mind, but people need to own and take responsibility for what they do at the ballot box.
- kalleboo 9y ago
  And people wonder why voter participation is so low...
thomastjeffery 9y ago
> Americans vote for the [Republican or Democratic] candidate they fear and despise the least. That's exactly the flawed logic that is keeping us in this two party system. If we just vote for the candidate we support, neither Trump not Hillary would stand a chance. The trouble with convincing people to actually do that is that most Americans feel the need to be on the winning side. "My vote is worthless unless it's for someone who can actually win."
- mejari 9y ago
  That's fundamentally not the "logic that is keeping us in this two party system". That logic is the logic of understanding our current electoral system. The US electoral system as it currently stands will inevitably result in a two-party system. Sure you can change which two parties it is, that's happened several times, but without changing First Past The Post you're not going to get any other system.

humanrebar 9y ago

Half didn't vote for Trump. Look again at the turnout rates. Also keep in mind that most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. I think that is kind of silly but that's the thought process of the Trump voters I talk to. I can't comment about your personal experiences in small town America other than to say that my experience is very different and that referring to areas epithetically (1) undermines your point. America is a very broad and diverse place, though, so there are idiots and bigots in places. But I would just like to point out that kind and welcoming people are easy to find. They don't make headlines. And good impressions don't last as long as bad ones, I guess. (1) Boonies or boondocks implies a judgemental attitude that people are backwards or unsophisticated. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boondocks https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boondocks

croon 9y ago
Americans as individuals are generally quite friendly, regardless of city. Let me ask you a loaded question though: Are you white? I am, and have had only good experiences both in NYC, LA, SF as well as a bunch of small towns. If you are not white, or dress differently, or are transgender, I can guarantee you which of a small town or a big city would be more embracing. (On aggregate, there are of course outliers on both sides)
oAlbe 9y ago
> [...] most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. That is not a valid argument by any possible mean. Everybody has the right to vote whatever they want of course, but saying what you said is like saying "people eat meat to piss off vegans more than because they like it". And regardless, the driving motive of something doesn't change the end result of such something. People need to take responsibility for their actions. They voted for Trump and their is the fault of the current state of things. Period. The reasons behind why they did it don't matter and, frankly, it's also nobody's business.
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  > That is not a valid argument by any possible mean. Now try convincing someone. That is what I tried to do throughout the entire election, but the propaganda machine is treated as fact by many here. These people get hung up on the idea that we can never leave the two party system, meaning no third party candidate will ever get elected. Here in Utah, we did manage to give McMullin 20% of the vote, but that was still marginally less than Hillary (after salt lake county) or Trump.

dredmorbius 9y ago

In the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, roughly 63 million votes, of a population of 325 million, were cast for #45. That is 19% of the total population. Reliable sources inform me that this may in fact be significantly less than half of all Americans. The notion of the nutcase fringe in politics has been around for a while -- there's about 20% of the vote you've got to be very aware of. Where other voters are insufficiently motivated, or actively discouraged by various means (voter suppression efforts, media, uninspiring candidates), the fringe can win. That said, there's a range of types throughout the country, and a worrying fraction are worrying. Or worse.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
philipps 9y ago
The percentage of eligible voters (not total population) who selected Trump is somewhere around 26/27%, but more importantly, in a democracy, not voting is also a decision one needs to take responsibility for.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > in a democracy, not voting is also a decision one needs to take responsibility for. Yes, but it's a different decision than voting for candidate X. Facts matter in criticism.
jbmorgado 9y ago
Are you actually putting newborn children in the mix to pretend that only 19% of Americans wanted Trump there?
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - 9y ago

phicoh 9y ago

You can't blame this on Trump alone. 8 years of Obama gave increased spying, kept the insane TSA, blocked people born in Iran from entering the country (independent of what nationality they currently have). Gave the ESTA Visa Waiver program, where you have to pay for getting exactly no rights what-so-ever. And as final insult, you are allowed to list the social media you use.

humanrebar 9y ago
I'll agree with all that. I think the average American knows all that stuff is dumb as well, and that is part of what I'm saying. The American voter, individually and in aggregate, has lost much say in American bureaucracy. I don't blame Trump alone in this. Bush thought Homeland Security was a good idea. But Trump thinks the problem with American government is that he hasn't been running it. We'll see that that is a foolish take on things soon. Obama made the same mistake and had the same revelation eventually, hence all the executive orders and phone calls in his later presidency instead of laws and reforms and such.

camgunz 9y ago

Agreed, I grew up in the midwest and I now live in NYC, and New Yorkers are far, far nicer than midwesterners. The intolerance in the red parts of the US is suffocating.

dragonwriter 9y ago

> Sorry but they don't get off that easy when almost half of them voted Trump into office. Nowhere near half of Americans voted Trump into office. (Now, if you want to criticize a very large share of eligible voters for abstaining, that's valid, but abstaining isn't the same as voting for Trump.)

bzbarsky 9y ago

While it may feel cathartic to blame Trump for this, unfortunately the situation is much worse than that. The article is about an ESTA denial. ESTA was put in place during the Bush administration (July 2007), and random ESTA denials happened all the time during the Obama administration. Not much has changed on this front since Trump took office, as far as I can tell. I'm not sure exactly how we're getting away with having this ESTA thing at all for countries that are supposedly part of the Visa Waiver program, without them retaliating in kind. I only hope that we'll come to our senses and stop before they do so. But given that ESTA has now existed for 10 years and both parties seem to support it, I have low hopes of it going away.

bonzini 9y ago
ESTA replaced the previous I-94W form; in fact most of the questions are the same. You could also be denied entry before ESTA was introduced. The best rendition of the text on the I-94W form is undoubtedly Frank Zappa and the Ensemble Modern's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPPDrXHjJx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPPDrXHjJx8