4 ms·

If this isn't what they were voting for, what did they think they were voting for? Did none of them believe that he would actually do the crazy shit he said he

by vkou 2y ago

If this isn't what they were voting for, what did they think they were voting for? Did none of them believe that he would actually do the crazy shit he said he would? Did none of them pay attention to the insanity of his first term? I have a simpler explanation: they all know what they were voting for, and none of them give a shit. It's the same as the mob cheering and applauding the sieg heil on Monday. They know it's deplorable and unamerican and they don't care. Because the only thing that matters is that their boy will stick it to the enemy.

sudosysgen 2y ago
Given the binary choice, much if the American people simply didn't vote. You can't present a false dichitomoty, and then act as if any downstream choice is full approval.
- vkou 2y ago
  They always had the choice of not voting. The people who voted for this actively engaged and endorsed it. It strains credulity for them to claim ignorance.
  - sudosysgen 2y ago
    Plenty of Americans chose not to vote, many others did mainly out of massive social pressure.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  Not voting is a choice. It's a choice for "I don't care how this train moves, I'm moving with it". So yes, those non-voters tacitly approved of the idea of Trump being elected. They didn't hate it enough to get to the polls. Those who thought "nothing would change no matter what"... well nothing has changed I guess. I suppose Harris would have done mass deportation raids and cutting funding from science and healthcare at all, right?
  - School-Cotton 2y ago
    I lived in New York during the election, nothing would have changed regardless of who I voted for, because New York went to Harris anyway. So in my case, “nothing would change no matter what” was objectively true.
School-Cotton 2y ago
Do you really believe that the majority of Americans — or even the majority of Trump voters — are applauding the use of Nazi symbols? That is completely divorced from reality. The only people openly supporting Nazism are the extreme fringe right which is fortunately still nowhere near the majority in the real world.
- theGnuMe 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - School-Cotton 2y ago
    How does that contradict what I wrote?
- refurb 2y ago
  Social media and HN included is a magnet for people with extreme political views to voice them (presumably because it’s the only audience they have). Trump won with an overwhelming mandate. He is popular with a majority of the country. The fact that nobody on HN seems to support Trump should tell you about who is on HN.
  - stevenwoo 2y ago
    I think you are wrong about the overwhelming mandate unless you are solely using the electoral college total as the yardstick. The popular vote is much closer.
    - refurb 2y ago
      You need to look at things in totality. - won the popular vote by over 2M votes - won by electoral college by 84 votes That alone would be “a solid showing”. But he also: - carried the Republicans to maintain a majority in the House - helped increased the margin of seats in the Senate to a majority Many members of the Republican party had been against Trump. This election, most were pro-Trump. His popularity helped pull both houses. And did this after the opposition tried every tactics possible to ruin him - a fake Russian dossier that was peddled unquestioningly by the media, a misdemeanor crime gets prosecuted as a felony in the hopes to bankrupt or disqualify him from running again. Against those odds? That showing is remarkable. Oh and he was almost assassinated, twice. Then add on top he increased Republican share in solid Blue states like NY and CA by double digits. He increased Republican votes with black and hispanic voters. He basically increased every single voting group across the board. In light of the challenges, the outcome is a clear showing that a significant percentage of the US voters support him and the people in his party that are aligned to him. I'm not sure what else you'd need to show a clear mandate.

by vkou 2y ago

sudosysgen 2y ago

Given the binary choice, much if the American people simply didn't vote. You can't present a false dichitomoty, and then act as if any downstream choice is full approval.

vkou 2y ago
They always had the choice of not voting. The people who voted for this actively engaged and endorsed it. It strains credulity for them to claim ignorance.
- sudosysgen 2y ago
  Plenty of Americans chose not to vote, many others did mainly out of massive social pressure.
johnnyanmac 2y ago
Not voting is a choice. It's a choice for "I don't care how this train moves, I'm moving with it". So yes, those non-voters tacitly approved of the idea of Trump being elected. They didn't hate it enough to get to the polls. Those who thought "nothing would change no matter what"... well nothing has changed I guess. I suppose Harris would have done mass deportation raids and cutting funding from science and healthcare at all, right?
- School-Cotton 2y ago
  I lived in New York during the election, nothing would have changed regardless of who I voted for, because New York went to Harris anyway. So in my case, “nothing would change no matter what” was objectively true.

School-Cotton 2y ago

Do you really believe that the majority of Americans — or even the majority of Trump voters — are applauding the use of Nazi symbols? That is completely divorced from reality. The only people openly supporting Nazism are the extreme fringe right which is fortunately still nowhere near the majority in the real world.

theGnuMe 2y ago
[flagged]
- School-Cotton 2y ago
  How does that contradict what I wrote?
refurb 2y ago
Social media and HN included is a magnet for people with extreme political views to voice them (presumably because it’s the only audience they have). Trump won with an overwhelming mandate. He is popular with a majority of the country. The fact that nobody on HN seems to support Trump should tell you about who is on HN.
- stevenwoo 2y ago
  I think you are wrong about the overwhelming mandate unless you are solely using the electoral college total as the yardstick. The popular vote is much closer.
  - refurb 2y ago
    You need to look at things in totality. - won the popular vote by over 2M votes - won by electoral college by 84 votes That alone would be “a solid showing”. But he also: - carried the Republicans to maintain a majority in the House - helped increased the margin of seats in the Senate to a majority Many members of the Republican party had been against Trump. This election, most were pro-Trump. His popularity helped pull both houses. And did this after the opposition tried every tactics possible to ruin him - a fake Russian dossier that was peddled unquestioningly by the media, a misdemeanor crime gets prosecuted as a felony in the hopes to bankrupt or disqualify him from running again. Against those odds? That showing is remarkable. Oh and he was almost assassinated, twice. Then add on top he increased Republican share in solid Blue states like NY and CA by double digits. He increased Republican votes with black and hispanic voters. He basically increased every single voting group across the board. In light of the challenges, the outcome is a clear showing that a significant percentage of the US voters support him and the people in his party that are aligned to him. I'm not sure what else you'd need to show a clear mandate.