7 ms·

~75 million people voted for Donald Trump - it is hardly socially unacceptable to vote for a republican and you have a secret vote anyway.

skynet-9000 6y ago
> it is hardly socially unacceptable to vote for a republican and you have a secret vote anyway. Those two things are not in conflict with each other: a sizable percentage of Trump voters may have been counting on the fact that they could secretly vote in order to protect themselves and even their jobs. It seems that, today, some vocal people arguing for censorship immediately assume that anyone on the side of free speech and liberal thought is secretly a Trump apologist.
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  > Those two things are not in conflict with each other: a sizable percentage of Trump voters may have been counting on the fact that they could secretly vote in order to protect themselves and even their jobs. Black people have lost their jobs for years for being black (See, Kaepernick.) many mad about this post didn't care then. It's all fake, using free speech to coverup blatantly partisan items. They can't actually be on the side of free speech and be a Trump apologist. He was extremely anti-media, one of the most anti-press presidents we have had.
  - quercetumMons 6y ago
    Kaepernick did not lose his job for being black. You can be pro free-speech and anti-media for the same reason you can be capitalist and anti-corporation.
jimbokun 6y ago
For the most part, it is socially unacceptable to vote Republican if you live in a large US city, and it is socially unacceptable to vote Democrat if you live in a rural area.
- jancsika 6y ago
  I've never seen any evidence that it's "socially unacceptable" in any meaningful sense of the term to vote Democrat in a rural area. Where are you getting this?
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    It's just an extension of how rural vs urban societies handle people doing weird stuff they don't like. If someone's doing something dumb and weird in a well off rural area nobody cares as long as they aren't actively negatively affecting people. Like maybe people will talk behind your back and think you're an idiot but that's about it. If someone's doing something dumb and weird somewhere densely populated and wealthy people pour over the bylaws, call whoever they can to harass you and generally try to force you to stop by making your life miserable. If someone's doing something dumb and weird somewhere poor, regardless of urban vs rural, nobody gives a crap because people have bigger problems.
  - jimbokun 6y ago
    Anecdote: My son's soccer team from the city decided they wanted to make a statement against racism and kneel for the national anthem before games. At one of the suburban/rural schools, they were vehemently booed and yelled at by the parents and supporters of the other team. (And the decision to kneel was made after a game the previous season against a different rural high school where my son's team mates were racially abused during the game.)
    - xyzzyz 6y ago
      That’s not booing for voting, that’s about making a divisive political statement on a freaking kid soccer game. When you bring your activism into non-political contexts, don’t get surprised when people don’t like it.
      - jimbokun 6y ago
        So you’re saying it’s socially unacceptable?

skynet-9000 6y ago

> it is hardly socially unacceptable to vote for a republican and you have a secret vote anyway. Those two things are not in conflict with each other: a sizable percentage of Trump voters may have been counting on the fact that they could secretly vote in order to protect themselves and even their jobs. It seems that, today, some vocal people arguing for censorship immediately assume that anyone on the side of free speech and liberal thought is secretly a Trump apologist.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago
> Those two things are not in conflict with each other: a sizable percentage of Trump voters may have been counting on the fact that they could secretly vote in order to protect themselves and even their jobs. Black people have lost their jobs for years for being black (See, Kaepernick.) many mad about this post didn't care then. It's all fake, using free speech to coverup blatantly partisan items. They can't actually be on the side of free speech and be a Trump apologist. He was extremely anti-media, one of the most anti-press presidents we have had.
- quercetumMons 6y ago
  Kaepernick did not lose his job for being black. You can be pro free-speech and anti-media for the same reason you can be capitalist and anti-corporation.

jimbokun 6y ago

For the most part, it is socially unacceptable to vote Republican if you live in a large US city, and it is socially unacceptable to vote Democrat if you live in a rural area.

jancsika 6y ago
I've never seen any evidence that it's "socially unacceptable" in any meaningful sense of the term to vote Democrat in a rural area. Where are you getting this?
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  It's just an extension of how rural vs urban societies handle people doing weird stuff they don't like. If someone's doing something dumb and weird in a well off rural area nobody cares as long as they aren't actively negatively affecting people. Like maybe people will talk behind your back and think you're an idiot but that's about it. If someone's doing something dumb and weird somewhere densely populated and wealthy people pour over the bylaws, call whoever they can to harass you and generally try to force you to stop by making your life miserable. If someone's doing something dumb and weird somewhere poor, regardless of urban vs rural, nobody gives a crap because people have bigger problems.
- jimbokun 6y ago
  Anecdote: My son's soccer team from the city decided they wanted to make a statement against racism and kneel for the national anthem before games. At one of the suburban/rural schools, they were vehemently booed and yelled at by the parents and supporters of the other team. (And the decision to kneel was made after a game the previous season against a different rural high school where my son's team mates were racially abused during the game.)
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    That’s not booing for voting, that’s about making a divisive political statement on a freaking kid soccer game. When you bring your activism into non-political contexts, don’t get surprised when people don’t like it.
    - jimbokun 6y ago
      So you’re saying it’s socially unacceptable?