6 ms·

How can anybody actually support the current administration if this sort of thing is what is being pushed. how is this improving the world? how is this better?

How can anybody actually support the current administration if this sort of thing is what is being pushed. how is this improving the world? how is this better? how is this good? anyone?

maneesh 9y ago
"How can anybody actually support Silicon Valley if this sort of thing is what is being pushed. how is this improving the world? how is this better? how is this good?" https://imgur.com/a/vGbLm https://imgur.com/a/vGbLm
- jimjimjim 9y ago
  interesting article. right. back to the original question...
  - snowpanda 9y ago
    Your question was being answered. You asked how, OP showed you how by showing you that you're likely doing it yourself. Unless you've never used a product from SF.
    - scrollaway 9y ago
      I'm not aware of San Francisco censoring the CDC. And should you point me to such a thing happening, I would certainly be against it. If maneesh's or your point is that you somehow cannot be against this without also being hypocritical, please check your assumptions. "You're likely doing it yourself" is complete bs.
- wnevets 9y ago
  are you really comparing a title of a post on hacker news to official policy of the united states of america?
  - smsm42 9y ago
    It's not only the title of a post. There are lots of things you can't say in academic environment (as dozens of people proved), in work environment (as Damore example proved), in conference environment (as Tim Hunt example proved) and in many other places. We see people persecuted for speech all around, sometimes successfully, sometimes not, but it's not like it's some foreign idea that some evil Trumper just invented. Yes, of course, it's not a government agency policy. It is a university policy, corporate policy, industry policy, media policy, and so on, and so forth. But it's in no way unprecedented to have those, and I'm not sure what's the big difference here - the policy in question applies to the workers of the agency, just as university policy would apply to the workers of the university. Obama administration chose not to use words like "radical Islam", "war on terror", "jihadi" and others that were not aligned with their political goals. He also banned words like "Eskimo" and "Aleut" from appearing in federal laws[1], since they are not considered acceptable anymore. Trump administration, of course, has its own policies, but the practice of telling government workers which words they can and can't use is certainly not new. [1] https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2016/05/23/obama-signs-measure-to-get-rid-of-the-word-eskimo-in-federal-laws/ https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2016/05/23/obama-signs-measu...
- cscurmudgeon 9y ago
  Not all words are same. Some words are good. Some words are bad.
ams6110 9y ago
You are aware that many people said pretty much the same thing about many of Obama's initiatives and policies.
- jimjimjim 9y ago
  interesting. right. back to the original question...
- mulmen 9y ago
  What's your point? Does that somehow give all future administrations carte blanche?
  - ams6110 9y ago
    My point is that anyone can cherry pick something and turn it into a general "how can anyone support this administration" when of course the reality is more complicated. People who didn't like Obama did exactly the same thing.
    - jimjimjim 9y ago
      so you are ok with the cdc not being allowed to use those words?
      - ryanx435 9y ago
        Your missing the point, and based on your other posts, your probably missing it on purpose.
        jimjimjim 9y ago
        i see the point of your statement. but it is not an answer to the original questions.
        retrogradeorbit 9y ago
        You have been judged guilty of thought crime.
ryanx435 9y ago
If I answer truthfully I'm going to be down voted and shamed, so I won't answer. Instead, I'm going to continue to be part of the silent majority that supports him, but doesn't speak out because we are often falsely labeled as deplorables or worse. Edit: people like me are what you get when society stifles free speech: unwilling to engage and so continuing in our beliefs silently. maybe you coastal elitists should stop shaming people for having different opinions and mental models of how the world works. And if you dummies think that speech isn't being stifled, look no further than James Demore being fired for trying to figure out root cause analysis of why there aren't more women in tech Edit 2: someone is going through my post history and downvoting. Good job, ladies, you're proving my point. Edit 3: and now I'm not allowed to respond to people because I'm posting "too fast". Great.
- ryanwaggoner 9y ago
  I'm downvoting you anyway, not for supporting him, but for the faux martyrdom that contributes nothing to the discussion. We actually really need to hear from thoughtful people who support Trump if they're out there, because 99% of the vocal supporters I hear are batshit crazy. That could just be my bias, of course :) Also, "majority"? He lost the popular vote and I believe he has the lowest 1-year approval rating of any modern President? What majority are you referring to?
  - kelukelugames 9y ago
    The "majority" that believe voter fraud is massive and the deep state is real. Have you seen the comments on Trump's facebook posts?
- scrollaway 9y ago
  You're going to be downvoted either way, because a post that just complains about theoretical downvotes gets downvoted on this site. So you might as well take the opportunity to explain. It's also worth mentioning that the question GP is asking isn't really "how can people support the administration", as there's many, many answers to it. The real question is "how can people support this?". And frankly, enlighten me. Do you support this? Edit: I should also remind you that Trump is not supported by a "silent majority". Quite the opposite: Trump is supported and was elected by a vocal minority. His approval rating today is the lowest it's ever been according to 538's aggregations. It's time americans get their head out of the sand on this topic.

How can anybody actually support the current administration if this sort of thing is what is being pushed. how is this improving the world? how is this better? how is this good? anyone?

maneesh 9y ago

"How can anybody actually support Silicon Valley if this sort of thing is what is being pushed. how is this improving the world? how is this better? how is this good?" https://imgur.com/a/vGbLm https://imgur.com/a/vGbLm

jimjimjim 9y ago
interesting article. right. back to the original question...
- snowpanda 9y ago
  Your question was being answered. You asked how, OP showed you how by showing you that you're likely doing it yourself. Unless you've never used a product from SF.
  - scrollaway 9y ago
    I'm not aware of San Francisco censoring the CDC. And should you point me to such a thing happening, I would certainly be against it. If maneesh's or your point is that you somehow cannot be against this without also being hypocritical, please check your assumptions. "You're likely doing it yourself" is complete bs.
wnevets 9y ago
are you really comparing a title of a post on hacker news to official policy of the united states of america?
- smsm42 9y ago
  It's not only the title of a post. There are lots of things you can't say in academic environment (as dozens of people proved), in work environment (as Damore example proved), in conference environment (as Tim Hunt example proved) and in many other places. We see people persecuted for speech all around, sometimes successfully, sometimes not, but it's not like it's some foreign idea that some evil Trumper just invented. Yes, of course, it's not a government agency policy. It is a university policy, corporate policy, industry policy, media policy, and so on, and so forth. But it's in no way unprecedented to have those, and I'm not sure what's the big difference here - the policy in question applies to the workers of the agency, just as university policy would apply to the workers of the university. Obama administration chose not to use words like "radical Islam", "war on terror", "jihadi" and others that were not aligned with their political goals. He also banned words like "Eskimo" and "Aleut" from appearing in federal laws[1], since they are not considered acceptable anymore. Trump administration, of course, has its own policies, but the practice of telling government workers which words they can and can't use is certainly not new. [1] https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2016/05/23/obama-signs-measure-to-get-rid-of-the-word-eskimo-in-federal-laws/ https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2016/05/23/obama-signs-measu...
cscurmudgeon 9y ago
Not all words are same. Some words are good. Some words are bad.

ams6110 9y ago

You are aware that many people said pretty much the same thing about many of Obama's initiatives and policies.

jimjimjim 9y ago
interesting. right. back to the original question...
mulmen 9y ago
What's your point? Does that somehow give all future administrations carte blanche?
- ams6110 9y ago
  My point is that anyone can cherry pick something and turn it into a general "how can anyone support this administration" when of course the reality is more complicated. People who didn't like Obama did exactly the same thing.
  - jimjimjim 9y ago
    so you are ok with the cdc not being allowed to use those words?
    - ryanx435 9y ago
      Your missing the point, and based on your other posts, your probably missing it on purpose.
      - jimjimjim 9y ago
        i see the point of your statement. but it is not an answer to the original questions.
      - retrogradeorbit 9y ago
        You have been judged guilty of thought crime.

ryanx435 9y ago

If I answer truthfully I'm going to be down voted and shamed, so I won't answer. Instead, I'm going to continue to be part of the silent majority that supports him, but doesn't speak out because we are often falsely labeled as deplorables or worse. Edit: people like me are what you get when society stifles free speech: unwilling to engage and so continuing in our beliefs silently. maybe you coastal elitists should stop shaming people for having different opinions and mental models of how the world works. And if you dummies think that speech isn't being stifled, look no further than James Demore being fired for trying to figure out root cause analysis of why there aren't more women in tech Edit 2: someone is going through my post history and downvoting. Good job, ladies, you're proving my point. Edit 3: and now I'm not allowed to respond to people because I'm posting "too fast". Great.

ryanwaggoner 9y ago
I'm downvoting you anyway, not for supporting him, but for the faux martyrdom that contributes nothing to the discussion. We actually really need to hear from thoughtful people who support Trump if they're out there, because 99% of the vocal supporters I hear are batshit crazy. That could just be my bias, of course :) Also, "majority"? He lost the popular vote and I believe he has the lowest 1-year approval rating of any modern President? What majority are you referring to?
- kelukelugames 9y ago
  The "majority" that believe voter fraud is massive and the deep state is real. Have you seen the comments on Trump's facebook posts?
scrollaway 9y ago
You're going to be downvoted either way, because a post that just complains about theoretical downvotes gets downvoted on this site. So you might as well take the opportunity to explain. It's also worth mentioning that the question GP is asking isn't really "how can people support the administration", as there's many, many answers to it. The real question is "how can people support this?". And frankly, enlighten me. Do you support this? Edit: I should also remind you that Trump is not supported by a "silent majority". Quite the opposite: Trump is supported and was elected by a vocal minority. His approval rating today is the lowest it's ever been according to 538's aggregations. It's time americans get their head out of the sand on this topic.