In a Basket of Deplorables

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UnBreakable

LOL ... the DonaldBot?

Sounds about right.

That's the closest meme I could find. It had a basket and almost says "Deplorables" if you look at it fast.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Guilt by association? You mean more words that have no power in and of themselves?

Again note the "violence against Trump supporters" that you can tie to these words of Clinton? which you have told us time and again have no power to cause action ... That it is always the beliefs of the actors that are the cause ... Then perhaps you won't appear to be perpetuating one big hypocritical diatribe that you yourself disagree with.

Are you saying that Clintons words MADE people act?

Prove it.

I am not saying that, of course.

A fallacy is an error in reasoning. The words spoken, the unsound argument, are only a reflection of that.

I'll put it as plainly as I can because I know you do not like philosophical talk.

I've always stated time and time again that the sophist is responsible for his fallacy, but the listener is always responsible for believing it. For instance, you are the cause of your straw-man and non sequitur, and anyone who accepts or agrees with your arguments is the cause of their own misjudgement in agreeing with them. Your words do not force or push anyone to believe them just as they didn't force or push me to not believe them. The cause of me reading them was myself; the cause of me disagreeing/agreeing with them was myself; the cause of me responding to them was myself.

Clinton's words are a reflection of her own beliefs and/or deception. It's up to everyone else to agree or disagree with her fallacy. Ever since the words have left her mouth, they are not out there pushing people around, forcing people to agree or disagree as if by sorcery.

Clinton's words do not cause violence, no, but the very same error in reasoning can justify violence in the minds who commit it. Irrational thinking can cause irrational behaviour.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Clinton's words do not cause violence, no, but the very same error in reasoning can justify violence in the minds who commit it. Irrational thinking can cause irrational behaviour.

Can't you say the same about Trump's words?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You don't have to put it simply, LesMis ... you just have to make sense, which on this issue, you do not when you speak out of both sides of your mouth.

Although when pressed to it, here, you finally worked your way to some kind of consistency with your own "philosophy."

Clinton's words do not cause violence. Period.

If others act violently, having heard her words or not, that is their action, their responsibility.

Your incessant whining about Clinton's non-action is thereby revealed for the pale, impotent nothingness that it is.

Thanks for your honesty.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I let this debate slide into areas that appeared off-topic only because I saw the on-topic relevance. I let you slip. I let you make statements I could then twist slightly into a terrible statement. I did all that because it was the only way to drive my point across - the flashing neon sign of hypocrisy that surrounds political correctness.

Except this isn't a debate. And, of course some will believe you. I could make the same claim - funny you felt the need

Should I be sorry that you couldn't understand me? Or should I just wonder about that? But, no - what's this? You misunderstood on purpose?

You went from being incensed about what Hillary said - to this:

You also advocate, along with a desire for lawlessness, an utter end to all fairness and equity.

I didn't, actually

Do you care at all about Americans? Do you have any empathy for someone killed in cold blood? How about for women mentally scarred by being horribly violated? Or, as your words seem

What kind of question in the middle of a civil conversation?

Do you care at all about Americans? Do you have any empathy for someone killed in cold blood? How about for women mentally scarred by being horribly violated? Or, as your words seem to indicate, do you only care for one particular group of people - Mexicans?

I've heard this sort of thing before. Personally - and on a national level. You make the claim that Trumps America feels maligned? Children - if they can dish it our and not take it - when they've also been laying it on pretty thick for decades

It took you no time at all to unravel the OP - and make it clear your expectations of me

I never insulted you

Because obviously, she meant what I think she meant. She thinks Americans are deplorable, unforgivable, irredeemable, and despicable.

You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."

"But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here -- I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas -- as well as, you know, New York and California -- but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different.

People believe what they want to believe. Comprehension...interesting thing isn't it? If you pretend you were confused - especially on purpose - why you can rearrange reality however it suits you - right?

I enjoy a really good discussion - when the other person holds up their end, and they own up to what they say and do

Honestly this is absurd by Hillary's standards, by someone's definition, almost every single person is deplorable if you shine a light on their entire life the older they are the more likely at some point they'd done or said something that could be any of those things. I'm 37 years old, I wasn't always like I am today. There have been times I firmly fell into deplorable. Same with most any person I've ever met. Never been around a person ever where nothing questionable bigoted has not come out of their mouth.

Is there some point where something isn't quite bigoted enough to be considered deplorable? What's the standard? How bigoted do you have to be before you're deplorable? Also what's deplorable mean? Is it nonredeemable? Are these people no longer human? Are they to be written off as hopeless?

What about all the other things about "Deplorables" I mean does their deplorableness cancel out everything else about them? I mean surely they do things other than be bigots. Like be doctors, defend the country through the service, contribute to the economy, work, have saved a life. Where these people always deplorable? Is it not possible we could reach them to help them become non deplorable? If someone's a bigot but believe in the sanctity of life and is against murder, does being against murder become bad by association?

What exactly is Hillary saying? What exactly IS the point here?

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

If you pretend you were confused - especially on purpose - why you can rearrange reality however it suits you - right?

I never pretended anything. I am incensed at Hillary's words... and actions, and attitude, and policies for that matter. I simply let your own words trap you.

No need to get worked up about it. That wasn't what you meant, according to you, so it's not important. Right? That's what you've been arguing: Hillary didn't mean it that way when she called people deplorable, so why worry about it? Nothing to see here, just accept you took it wrong.

The biggest problem with this argument is that as soon as the situation is turned back on you, your hypocrisy shows through like a supernova blast through a Fresnel lens. You just proved that... twice now.

Fairness says what is acceptable for one side is good for the other. You have argued that Hillary's statement was misunderstood and innocent, yet when someone else makes a statement, you try to re-define, twist, and de-contextualize it to fit your own desired meaning. That's not fair. That is hypocrisy.

And to make it even more hilarious, Gryphon66 posted, immediately after I showed the hypocrisy, a link to an entire Web page devoted exclusively to taking Trump's comments out of context. I even thanked him for helping emphasize the point, although based on his response I have to assume he gets as little of it as you apparently do.

Ah, well, fun is fun, but I have other things to do besides beat a dead horse. I think my point has been made. Thank you for proving it so well.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I simply let your own words trap you.

Is that honest? Maybe you just didn't understand what I was saying. Like you already admitted :-)

I think you just needed a stage - and a target

Everything I said is still up for discussion. And still, you have this need to attack and insult - and self indulge?

If Trump is your guy - he's your guy. Hillary said more than what you will allow for, but I can see that's not something that we can discuss. You want this to be about defending one thing or attacking another - I was trying to move past that

This is no ordinary election - obviously. Outside the hollow halls of ATS ( I might have said hallowed at one time - but not anymore - apparently...and - I guess. It all feels a little hollow these days) there's something extraordinary happening

People are starting to wake up to the fact that the division is killing us. Right and left are talking to each other - a little here, a little there...but it's a fascinating and wonderful thing to see. It's also easy to miss because the bulk of the chatter is still made up of vitriol, hate and one-upmanship. More importantly - an unwillingness to actually listen to what the other person is trying to say

But it's there. It gives me hope

Here at ATS - for years - there were people I could have a wonderful if heated discussion with. Even with my fellow lefties because we don't all see things the same - but, some of my most memorable chats were with people who see the world very differently from the way I see it. I miss those people

I don't mind getting down in the mud - there are a few people here who do nothing but malign other people. Every single thread - every single post. So, it is what it is. Those ponies have only one trick. Attack, insult - attack - insult. It's shallow, tedious - boring. Hopeless. Trying to have a real conversation with them is a waste of time

I've seen some folks here (on the right - and the left) working harder than usual lately to bridge the gap. One of those would be Gryph - right here in this thread. But you don't actually see that - do you? :-)

And to make it even more hilarious, Gryphon66 posted, immediately after I showed the hypocrisy, a link to an entire Web page devoted exclusively to taking Trump's comments out of context. I even thanked him for helping emphasize the point, although based on his response I have to assume he gets as little of it as you apparently do.

Pat yourself on the back a little more - you obviously deserve it. Apparently you're some kind of oratorical debating wunderkind

(How much more rope do you need Redneck? )

:-)

I'm sorry about the conversation that got away. I expected more. I won't make the same mistake twice

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You don't have to put it simply, LesMis ... you just have to make sense, which on this issue, you do not when you speak out of both sides of your mouth.

Although when pressed to it, here, you finally worked your way to some kind of consistency with your own "philosophy."

Clinton's words do not cause violence. Period.

If others act violently, having heard her words or not, that is their action, their responsibility.

Your incessant whining about Clinton's non-action is thereby revealed for the pale, impotent nothingness that it is.

Thanks for your honesty.

Yet you use and abuse the very same fallacy in your own thinking, not to mention myriad other fallacies, which when contrasted to your claims to desire truth a reason, turns out to be mere sophistry. Your incessant sophistry is reflected in your words, as is Clinton's.

Though you deceive with your mouth, you no less tell the truth in the way you use it. Thanks for your honesty.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So winword got it right?

So? What's your point? They're just as bad as us?

a reply to: Puppylove

You make interesting points

What exactly is Hillary saying? What exactly IS the point here?

Her point is that people have very real concerns, and that some of them believe Trump is the answer

Some of those people that support Trump are deplorable. We can argue about if they are or aren't all day. Opinion is hard to prove. If any of us here in all honesty believe there is nothing on this planet to deplore - then this is obviously not a statement that's going to go over very well. With those people anyhow

Hillary was right. I'm only sorry she apologized

But, Pupplove - if you want my less snarky take on it? Language is an imperfect tool sometimes - is what I think. She could have said it differently - she could have gone long. It was an acknowledgement of an obvious truth, a compliment - and a plea. She's making a kind of offer. She was speaking to those who aren't deplorable but are only looking for answers - same as any of us

What she said was obvious. The fact that it rankles makes perfect sense

If history teaches us anything - it's that we can all get caught up in fear and hysteria and become less reasonable - if not out and out irrational

It's no secret Trump is not my cup of tea. I'll be voting for Hillary. I understand that statement makes everything I say suspect

:-)

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

I think it's just more divisional tactics, guilt by association, identity politics, that serves no purpose other than to draw lines, paint people with derogatory labels, and create confusion and chaos manipulating people through fear and hate pushing us vs them rhetoric. I think these tactics are getting tired and old, I think many people are getting tired of and sick of it. I've posted many reasons these tactics are logically absurd, and stand on the shakiest of ground at best.

It's bitten her in the ass, it's also bitten Trump in the ass. So far in this election both her and Trump have been called out on such tactics, each by the other side and people in the middle. It has bitten them in the ass and it should.

Both sides have used these absurd methods to try and manipulate the voters, and I for one can see through it, and I think more and more people are doing so. Trump ran into this same problem with his comments on immigrants, and rightly so. It just so happens, that was awhile ago and he's already suffered and come back from it. Hillary's is more recent and it's her turn to be bit in the ass.

More and more people are being fed up with these diversionary identity politics and beginning to see through it for what it is. We're becoming more and more united against those trying to divide us up into neat little packages of deplorables and non deplorables. This is a good thing. I'm glad people are waking up and this divisional BS is turning into a hindrance rather than a boon to the political elite.

More and more people are turning their backs on those trying to turn us against each other. Go us. Telling us what you're going to do for us, stop just pointing fingers and trying to get us to fight each other using divide and conquer.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Blatta blatta dishonesty blatta blatta sophistry blatta blatta desperately trying to make your opinion of Gryph important since your arguments in this thread and its creation were so clearly shown to be hypocritical...

Sad, really.

I see we're now relying on catch phrases "divisive identity politics" rather like "social justice warrior" to tag and demean anything we don't want to actually deal with logically.

Calling out racism, sexism ET. AL. when it exists is not mere "identity politics," and if it's divisive, it needs to be.

It is the racists, sexists, homophobes and religious bigots that are causing the divisions, because they cannot accept that people are different and that they have no right to treat people differently just because they are different.

Further treating people differently isn't just a matter of personally not liking someone else, or even what they do, but about illegal and illegitimate discrimination in public situations.

The right attempts to hide under it's own versions of "identity politics" and "social justice" because the movement for the most part is intellectually bankrupt (as shown clearly in the ascendancy of Donald J. Trump.)

It's getting boring, really.

a reply to: Puppylove

More and more people are being fed up with these diversionary identity politics

How can politics be about anything other than identity?

This is the key to the whole kingdom

Civilization wants agreement. This election - for the United States - is going to be a real test. Not the election so much - but what comes after

a reply to: Gryphon66

It's getting boring, really.

:-)

I was just reading a story about Britney Spears with a little too much glee...

But, you know what? I think getting to the point of being bored is the best thing that could have happened. I feel like I can breathe and think again. Perchance even - to dream

a reply to: Gryphon66

People are no where near as deplorable and nonredeemable as these tactics make us out to be. We're all have far more in common than we do that separates us. Is racism bad, oh hell yes, so is a whole host of other things we all do, sometimes daily. But among those bad things are also good things, many things we all share in common.

People that get over racism and move on from it are those that get exposed to other "races" and people and come to find that common ground. It is divisionary, it's all about us vs. them without trying to find common ground and actually communicate with each.

The persons a racist let's call them names and tell them to # off. Heaven forbid we actually talk to them find out who they are, see if we can't find any common ground, make an actual connection, and work towards solving this issue. If a person is a racist something drove them there. Do you honestly judge entire people because of a single bad trait, if so how bad does it need to be, how racist is racist enough to be deplorable subhuman scum?

Racists are people, people for whom racism is one of their many faults.

We need to stop demonizing each other and seeing human beings first. Nothing is going to be resolved growling, gnashing our teeth at each other, drawing lines in the sand based on singular traits...

I've been at some point in my life pretty much everything on that list to at least a really minor degree by at least someone's definition of it, and if you're even slightly honest with yourself I've bet you've held some views and done some things others would think by some definition of it fall on that list.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Politics is supposed to be about policy, about doing things to better the country and lives of each other.

We should be arguing policy not who we think is a bigger jerk. We should be arguing for things not against each other.

If someone tries to pass a policy you think is racist argue the policy, I mean if it's racist you should be able to prove it pretty damn easy.

Are you really so scared that the United States is filled with so many racists they are suddenly going to start writing us back into the Jim Crow days?

Give the US people some credit, we've come a long way. About time we stop pointing fingers, give each other the benefit of the doubt, and start trying to work together and communicate again.

a reply to: Puppylove

Are you really so scared that the United States is filled with so many racists they are suddenly going to start writing us back into the Jim Crow days?

Hate Crimes Against American Muslims Most Since Post-9/11 Era

WASHINGTON — Hate crimes against American Muslims have soared to their highest levels since the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, according to data compiled by researchers, an increase apparently fueled by terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad and by divisive language on the campaign trail.

The trend has alarmed hate crime scholars and law-enforcement officials, who have documented hundreds of attacks — including arsons at mosques, assaults, shootings and threats of violence — since the beginning of 2015.

This is just one example - with one demographic

Personal belief and philosophy drives policy. We can't separate the two

Yes - I do worry. Identity has an effect on policy

a reply to: Spiramirabilis
The title of your posted article says it all: "Hate Crimes..."
"Hate" crimes are the authoritarian cabal's way of dehumanizing.
A crime is a crime. All are to be viewed as equal before the law and yet if one can be shown to "hate" while committing a crime, that person can be punished more severely. Where is logic in that equation? Murder is murder. Assault is assault. Vandalism is vandalism.
Is the victim less dead or less injured if the the perp is not a "hater"?
The "trend" mentioned in article is among those who make their living from this dehumanization process---"hate crime scholars and law enforcement."
It is past time that we got back to basing charges on actions, not emotions. That's the way the Constitution outlines our system of government. Persons are not less equal for holding unpopular views. "Deplorable" does not equal criminal. I find a lot of things in today's society deplorable but I don't advocate for locking people up for being deplorable or even hateful. I advocate for locking up people who cause harm to others by their actions.
"Hate" crimes are as illogical as victim-less crimes and both are products of the authoritarian thought processes.