Not so hidden racism

[mossrose]

The liberals were upset at the ~5000 Trump scandals and Trump's ongoing incompetency. Not just because they wrongly predicted who would win an election. If you think the latter's the cause rather than the former, I'd say you can't have seen much liberal media coverage during Trump's time in office. So in general your explanation's just plain wrong.

So the liberals were upset about all those (alleged) things even before he was elected? Because that's when the leftist crap started, when he was nominated and maybe before that. Liberals are psychic now!

[Cow Poke]

If my temperature is 98.6 degrees then I have a fever. That's just more evidence for just how I am

Yeah, when I'm sick, my temperature goes DOWN.

[rogue06]

Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back again
Oh, hey, 98.6, her lovin' is the medicine that saved me
Oh, I love my baby

If my temperature is 98.6 degrees then I have a fever. That's just more evidence for just how I am

[Cow Poke]

The 99.9% statistic was what the scientists and government routinely told us for quite some time. FWIU it is actually 98.6%


But there is nothing I can say about Egyptian pyramids at the South Pole

Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back again
Oh, hey, 98.6, her lovin' is the medicine that saved me
Oh, I love my baby

[rogue06]

How "intelligent and informed" you are can be seen from this:

Mountain Man on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

(and of course you fell for a hoax article which used a picture of the Egyptian pyramids for a city newly discovered under the Antarctic icecap)

The 99.9% statistic was what the scientists and government routinely told us for quite some time. FWIU it is actually 98.6%


But there is nothing I can say about Egyptian pyramids at the South Pole

[Roy]

If your views were really shaped by intelligent and informed people like me...

How "intelligent and informed" you are can be seen from this:

Mountain Man on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

(and of course you fell for a hoax article which used a picture of the Egyptian pyramids for a city newly discovered under the Antarctic icecap)

[CivilDiscourse]

What we face now is that those checks and balances can only work if the legislative and judicial branches are themselves populated by people not beholden or under the power of such a person. And we are well underway towards destroying the ultimate effectiveness of that safeguard. With every trip to mar a largo followed by yet another legislator changing their story and falling in line with Trump's desired outcomes, we move one step closer to autocracy.

That is straight up fear-mongering.

[oxmixmudd]

I see it mostly as a loss of power when they had convinced themselves that power was certain. Suddenly feeling powerless when you were so certain you were were about to win made them angry. That caused them to lash out. They found the catharsis exhilarating, and got addicted to the anger.

Being able to ascribe THAT as a motivation for the ongoing concern about Trump - especially in light of the big lie about the 2020 election, the jan 6 Insurrection and his propagation of deadly falsehoods and purely self serving interference with health organization policy during the pandemic - is nearly incomprehensible and unconscionable. Im sure you believe it has a chance of being true, but it simply can't be justified objectively. You don't convince the entire word's media sources to react to the man as they did based on such a petty and momentary thing.

The media were daily accosted by Trump's denial of truth, invention of lie, lack of integrity and corruption, and just general incompetence, placing fealty above competence in nearly every appointment. Trump was everything the founding Fathers imagined when they strove to create a system of checks and balances in place to keep a rogue and corrupt man from stealing power and taking control of our government. And while they essentially worked, they were found many times to be inadequate to the task.

What we face now is that those checks and balances can only work if the legislative and judicial branches are themselves populated by people not beholden or under the power of such a person. And we are well underway towards destroying the ultimate effectiveness of that critical safeguard. With every trip to mar a largo followed by yet another legislator changing their story and falling in line with Trump's desired outcomes, we move one step closer to autocracy. If not Trump, then some other demagogue riding the Trumpian wave

[CivilDiscourse]

I think you're describing the Republican party here.

I'm sure you do.

[Starlight]

I remember them being upset about Trump pouring fish food into a koi pond after Abe did.

I must have missed that story at the time as I have no memory of it. From googling it, I do see it was briefly a thing until it was debunked. Possibly the sources I follow did their research and so never reported it in the first place. Though given there were about 3 Trump scandals a week I'm sure I've long forgotten most of the ones I did hear about. Not surprising one in a thousand trump scandals turned out not to actually be a scandal.

I remember them being upset about a secret bank server between Trump and Russia that was neither.

I do remember that story, and since I couldn't remember any outcome from it I had a little google just now. This 2020 piece tells me that nobody seems to have ever gotten to the bottom of what was going on there.

I remember Rachel Maddow releasing Trump's tax returns and there being nothing in them after an hour of hype.

Trump's tax records in general show he lost the most money of any person in America across several boom years for the industries he was involved in. From them and other financial documents, we known he was a terrible businessman, losing his entire 400 million dollar inheritance in successive business failures, and surviving only on huge loans from multiple banks who all eventually blacklisted him across the course of his six bankruptcies to the point where by 2016 he may have been well in the negatives financially. I don't generally enjoy Rachel Maddow's overhyping approach to her show and haven't ever watched more than a few minutes of her show.

A clear example was the annual outrage over the Christmas decorations of Melania Trump.

Hearing her swear at Christmas itself was pretty hilarious. Especially given the Republican obsession with the fake idea of a war on Christmas.

Or, you know the people who slut-shamed Melania.

Not quite sure what you're referring to here. But would that be worse than those who insisted Michelle Obama was transgender?

When the initial Anger became the Anchoring point, nothing good followed.

I think you're describing the Republican party here.

[CivilDiscourse]

The liberals were upset at the ~5000 Trump scandals and Trump's ongoing incompetency. Not just because they wrongly predicted who would win an election. If you think the latter's the cause rather than the former, I'd say you can't have seen much liberal media coverage during Trump's time in office. So in general your explanation's just plain wrong.

Oh, I saw the liberal coverage. I remember them being upset about Trump pouring fish food into a koi pond after Abe did. I remember them being upset about a secret bank server between Trump and Russia that was neither. I remember Rachel Maddow releasing Trump's tax returns and there being nothing in them after an hour of hype.

In the end, alot of the outrage was anger looking for something to manifest around. A clear example was the annual outrage over the Christmas decorations of Melania Trump. Or, you know the people who slut-shamed Melania. When the initial Anger became the Anchoring point, nothing good followed.

[Starlight]

The liberals were upset at the ~5000 Trump scandals and Trump's ongoing incompetency. Not just because they wrongly predicted who would win an election. If you think the latter's the cause rather than the former, I'd say you can't have seen much liberal media coverage during Trump's time in office. So in general your explanation's just plain wrong.

[CivilDiscourse]

That explanation would apply equally to any group ever to lose an election. I suppose you could say that was what Republicans did on Jan 6. But in general, Dems don't seem to have done it in 2000, or 2004, nor Republicans in 2008 nor 2012.

It's also not an explanation that would apply to people like me, who hated Hillary, both because of her stealing the primary from Bernie and because she was so much a centrist corporate sell-out, that we wouldn't have considered a win by her to be a win for progressive goals.

So, overall, I'm not buying your explanation. Its predictions of who should have been angry and when, are wrong.

No. Not really. This isn't the level of certainty that exists during most elections. Every party is "certain" they are going to win an election, but they still look at the election with uncertainty. The same way that a sports team fan is "certain" their team is going to win.

Democrats and liberals went into this election with the level of certainty of getting married that a groom has on the wedding day while standing at the altar. Trump winning was the equivalent of the Bride leaving him at the altar. That's the level of certainty they had and then lost.

[Starlight]

I see it mostly as a loss of power when they had convinced themselves that power was certain. Suddenly feeling powerless when you were so certain you were were about to win made them angry. That caused them to lash out. They found the catharsis exhilarating, and got addicted to the anger.

That explanation would apply equally to any group ever to lose an election. I suppose you could say that was what Republicans did on Jan 6. But in general, Dems don't seem to have done it in 2000, or 2004, nor Republicans in 2008 nor 2012.

It's also not an explanation that would apply to people like me, who hated Hillary, both because of her stealing the primary from Bernie and because she was so much a centrist corporate sell-out, that we wouldn't have considered a win by her to be a win for progressive goals.

So, overall, I'm not buying your explanation. Its predictions of who should have been angry and when, are wrong.

[CivilDiscourse]

It was liberals seeing the mask come so fully off the US Republican base that was so enlightening.

Up until then, a lot of liberals had convinced themselves that all the US Republican voters were fundamentally good people, that they were fundamentally rational, reachable, and that if only liberals were sufficiently nice to them, made sufficient effort to understand them, and reached out to them in the right way, they could be convinced.

Article after after in liberal media told us we just needed to try harder to reach Republicans, be even nicer, that their apparent obstinacy was all our fault for not spending enough time and effort in understanding in seeing where they were coming from, and being empathetic to their views. The media were absolutely convinced that if only we'd reach across the aisle even more, that we'd be able to connect with Republicans. They seemed utterly convinced that if liberals reached out a hand of friendship to Republicans for the hundredth time time that they it might not be slapped away by Republicans like it was the previous 99 times.

But the Trump election and administration showed even the densest of liberals really really clearly, that Republicans would defend anything, excuse anything, and cackle that they were triggering the libs by embracing abhorrent behavior. No liberal could fail to see the Republican base's demonstration of their complete and utter lack of standards and morals.

But over and over and over again, throughout Trump's ~5000 scandals, his supporters not merely defended him every step of the way in every instance, but cheered him on, declaring him to be the best president ever. The worse the thing Trump did, and the more horrified the liberals were as a result, the more Trump's supporters seemed to love it. They reveled in the depravity.

Seeing people not merely having no standards, but actively glorying in evil, changes how you view them. You realize these are not people you can just convince by being extra extra nice to.

I see it mostly as a loss of power when they had convinced themselves that power was certain. Suddenly feeling powerless when you were so certain you were were about to win made them angry. That caused them to lash out. They found the catharsis exhilarating, and got addicted to the anger.