Politics and Personal Relationships

I do not identify as a liberal, but I want to comment.

There are no circumstances where I would vote for Trump...with the possible exception of someone holding a gun to my head.

I would be terribly disappointed if Joe Biden were anti-choice on the question of abortion rights, but I would vote for him anyway. The choice is between Biden and Trump...and Biden will ALWAYS be my choice in that scenario.

I've actually seen pictures of people with them...having them as pets!

That would scare me.

That last post was funny and actually made me laugh. You might need to up the nastiness if you want to get that “hand me my ass” effect.

Ok Frank. I’m done with this. I’m going to leave you to it. I really would’ve liked to get an answer about whether your buddies are fond of the confederate flag and n*gger jokes but so it goes.

Yes! Thank you.

Biden, as a Catholic, is already "pro-life". People can be both pro-life and pro-choice, they just can't be anti-abortion and pro-choice. As Biden has explained, his views are shaped by his religion and he doesn't feel that he should impose his religious beliefs on others.

But no, I wouldn't switch to being a Trump supporter in the hypothetical case you've brought up. I'm not a single issue voter.

snood, I live in Australia, but out of respect for my "online privacy" (if there really is such a thing that is) I won't say which particular state I'm in (and not that I live in it by choice either). Australia is still a part of the British Monarchy, therefore the queen of england is our head of state. Therefore, we don't have a "president" like the US, we have a governor-general instead, and the Prime Minister is the elected head of the federal government here. While each state here has it's own state governor, with the respective state "premier" being the elected head of a state government here. It's the Prime Minister and the state premier's that make "executive decisions", while the governor-general and the state governor's are in practice just figure head's - although the governor-general and the state governor's do have the power to dismiss the federal and their respective state government respectively (the PM can also fire the governor-general and a state premier can fire their respective state governor AFAIU it).

Here, what you would call a "district attorney" in the US is not a politician, and aren't "elected" by public vote, we also don't have little redneck police and sheriff departments dotted all over the place like you do in the US. Local government here has nothing to do with law enforcement, education, health (except doing health inspections on local businesses), or anything else you couldn't call "very minor or basic". They are all responsibilities of the respective state government of the particular state you are in. So for example, if I was in Sydney and I called our version of your 911 (being 000 here) and I asked for police, it would be the New South Wales police force that would respond, because Sydney is in the state of New South Wales. If I was in Melbourne instead, it would be the Victorian state police force that would respond, because Melbourne is in the state of Victoria. The federal government also has their own agencies as well, like the AFP (the federal police), but they do not have the power to dictate to the states, and cannot tell the states what to do. The most they can do is try and bribe the states with federal funding. Because it's called the "constitution", and as the feds have found out with covid, it's a lesson in federation.

Anyhow, I have a friend in the US of A whom I actually met at another forum by simply just responding to one of their threads, not expecting them to befriend me. But it turned out that we have at least a few common interests, so, and to cut a long story short, I gave him my email address once I knew I could trust him, and knew he wasn't a bot or whatever else. I only know what he looks like because he has a picture of what I assume is his face in his profile picture/avatar. I honestly have no idea which political party he supports, if any, lat alone if he supports trump or biden. I have no interest either way in "which side he is on", and I don't care. But I DO know that he is a good guy, I've never seen him post or write anything even remotely racist, hateful, hypocritical, or anything similar, not even once. The only thing that matters to me is that he has a good character, and I'm not talking about "being perfect" (who is? not me, not anyone I've ever met, good, bad or ugly), I'm talking about being a decent human being. And as far as I'm concerned, I've not seen anything that doubts that. The same as I've never seen you or Frank ever post anything that would make me think either of you are racist in any way. I'd love to be able to met my American friend in person, and hopefully one day I'll get the chance. I'll be responding to an email he sent to me yesterday in response to my last email to him, so for now, that will have to do until hopefully one day we can catch up in person.

As far as US police shootings are concerned; one man isn't going to be able to fix that, be that trump, be that biden. These are far deeper societal issues that are ultimately causing that, and it's been happening for years, but doesn't seem to happen in most other country's. So as I've said before in other threads here, just electing some other clown isn't going to change much by itself. The amount of guns and gun culture in the USA are also a part of the problem, the same as police tactics and training are another part of the problem. People having to resort to crime who can't get proper employment (because they have a criminal record for example) and poverty are also a part of the problem. Your country needs to fix ALL of that to solve the problem of police shootings. In Australia, all police officers are armed with firearms, but they rarely ever shoot anyone, because most civilians aren't armed to the teeth with guns here, unlike the USA. Our gun culture and culture in general isn't anywhere near as toxic as it is in the US, that's the difference. It doesn't mean there aren't racist police officers, it doesn't mean that the non-white population doesn't get put in jail disproportionately compared to the white population here. The Aboriginal population is around 2% - 3% of Australia's total population, and yet, something like 40% of the prison population is Aboriginal. Their life expectancy is far lower than the white population's.

When that one man is the President, head of the federal executive branch it can change a lot. The previous administration started investigations of police departments across the country and got consent decrees to make changes. The current administration came into office and immediately stopped those investigations and waived the decrees. The current administration has stopped investigations into housing discrimination started before he came into office and has pardoned a law enforcement official infamous for his persecution of minorities. It's hard to say one man doesn't matter when he has already shown how much he does. Again, it is a tremendous privilege to say "yes, that's terrible but it really doesn't impact me much so I'm going to vote for the guy I'd like to have a beer with." I can see how someone who lives with those burdens daily, experiences the harm on a routine basis, would be angry at the nonchalance of the general public.

You've admitted that the same problems existed well before trump by your own post above. You've also admitted in the 8 years of the previous administration the most they were able to do is launch "investigations". Well, like Australia, your country has something called a "constitution", and like Australia, that same document gives the states certain powers and rights that no federal government can deny the states. The only way for the feds to overrule a state government is if, it's a power granted to the federal government by that same document, or the feds are able to prove in court that the respective state has acted "unconstitutionally", and the court agrees with the feds.

But let's go back to the first point: all of the current problems did not start with trump. One man cannot change everything all by themselves, the same as just electing yet another clown will not change much, if anything in itself. Because if that were true, then your country wouldn't have the problems it has, anymore than my country would have the problems it has. My country has had Royal Commission after Royal Commission, including into "black deaths in police custody", there has been recommendation, after recommendation made, but yet, not much has changed. Why? Because unless it's followed by meaningful action, then it's rather pointless, and therefore, NOTHING CHANGES.

The bottom line is: until everybody has the same level of access to things like education, employment, health services, housing, just to name a few, then the same problems will continue to crop up. And government policy alone isn't going to be enough, it starts at a societal level, police officers don't come from outer space, they come from society, the same as employers do, the same as anyone else does. In other words: until you Americans actually start believing in real equality, then there isn't much chance of the USA ever having a equal society. Ever wondered why the nordic countries don't tend to have high crime rates, race riots, etc? Well, it's because they have far more equal societies where you don't need to be rich to get a decent education, decent housing, decent health care, etc, etc... that's why. And how is that all paid for? Through people paying their fair share of tax, that's right, taxation, that's how.

So no, just electing another clown won't change much at all, as much as you may be kidding yourselves otherwise.

PS: I would have thought that as an engineer you would actually be interested in the solution, rather than just treating the symptoms. I guess I was wrong in thinking that about you. But hey, keep kidding yourself, no skin off my nose...

Wanted to post this again;

“To be completely honest: I don't give a **** if we were childhood best friends or my blood is in your veins. If you support Q-anon bullshit, stay the **** away from me. I wouldn't associate with an ISIS member, so why would I humor a dangerous, deluded dipshit like you?”

@swtfnlcfr


Why, indeed?

The fiction here is that all of our political views currently "conveniently" match up with those of one or the other candidate. I imagine there are several posters on the left here who feel the same way I do — Biden is vastly preferable to Trump even though his socio-economic positions and track record, in particular, are a lot more conservative than ours, and in a functional multi-party system we'd vote for a party to the left of his.

If there would be yet another major issue he was clearly more conservative than us, it wouldn't come as a great shock, and it wouldn't change much about our vote because Trump would still be worse on pretty much all counts. Hence: Bidenfreude.

That covers one end of your equation. The other end is to imagine Trump would be pro-choice. And you know, if pigs had wings they could fly. It's not that a pro-choice Trump is unimaginable, per se — I'm pretty sure he was, before he decided to run for office — or at the very least didn't care one way or another. It's that we know him well enough by now that, whatever purported personal views he might spout at any one time, he'll sell them out at the drop of a hat if needed to secure his power. And as the presidential candidate of the GOP, and one who relies on the evangelical voting bloc in particular, there would be 0 reason to trust what he'd say. The only genuine abiding belief he holds that transcends pure narcissism is bigotry — that's the one thing he won't compromise, which brings us back to square one.

Well said

I actually agree with Biden. I wonder if there are more democrats who feel the same way?

As a newly fallen away catholic because of the churches support of a proven crook and as unchristian a man who ever existed over abortion. This is the same, in my opinion, as the Spanish inquisition. I can't forgive the religious hierarchy for their unchristian attitude.

I might add that I adhor abortion but support right to choose. When in religious schools I was taught that everyone has their own conscience and should not be influenced by others. One should know if what they are doing is right for themselves.

Y’know something that makes me go, ‘hmmmm’?

It’s when I hear white people saying that their friends and relatives that still support Trump “aren’t racist and crazy” like those ‘other’ Trump supporters.

To a person. Seriously. They all say those hateful racists and crazy Qanons are ‘out there’ somewhere - not in their own homes. Not sharing their beds. Not looking at them across the dining room table.

It’s really a hell of a mathematical, statistical anomaly, isn’t it?

Seventy-four million of ‘em. All anonymous. Hmmm...

snood, and I pose this question to you respectfully, what about non-white supporters of Trump? I'm not talking about celebrity rap stars, either.


mystateline

A proportion of the Hispanic electorate identifies as "non-white" as well and historically 30-40% of Hispanics have voted for Republicans. According to exit polls, 32% voted for Trump in 2020 and the rate was higher for men. (Race, ethnicity, and complexion aren't covered in these polls so I don't know how many of these votes come from people who are perceived as not being "white".)


nyt

So should all these members of the U.S. non-white population who voted for Trump be considered "crazy racists"?

No, and I’d expect better of you than such a question.
You know damn well I’m not saying all Trump supporters are racist, anymore than I’m saying all white people are racist. My gist remains that when asked, no one seems to think anyone they know or anyone in their family share the beliefs of the Qanons or the Proud Boys or whites supremacists or white nationalists or any of the nutbag racists and fascists that have BECOME THE MAINSTREAM of the right.

They feel they have to keep that secret.

Your question reminds me of the one always asked whenever fragile white guilt is triggered about slavery. “You know that black people participated in the African slave trade?”

Not all republicans are racist. But the chances are exponentially better that if you are a racist you are a Republican. And you know that.

I think it's a legitimate question if only because it prompts you to provide more explanation and raises questions about non-white support for Trump that other people might want to consider.

No one in my admittedly small "social circle" fits that description. The few Trump supporters I've talked to have never mentioned the "crazy racist" stuff and are independent contractors or small business owners whose concerns are primarily with taxation and regulation.

I actually had an interesting discussion last September with a guy (a paleface) who runs an auto body shop. He was a Trump supporter. He's got a kid in college, in Brooklyn — the campus is in a black neighborhood. When he said that I girded myself for some sort of racist rant. Instead he had some very thoughtful things to say, contrasting the way kids grow up around here with the plight of the inner city kids there. He didn't suggest that all black people were BLM-inspired looters and instead talked about the discussion that all black parents have to have with their kids, their boys especially, sort of equivalent to being taught about "the birds and the bees" as a black person in a racist society. His support for Trump was based on the amount of business which came through his shop. It's an anecdotal story, I realize.

That was not my intention, at all. I wasn't playing "gotcha" — I was suggesting that black support for the GOP means that progressives, not African Americans, have a problem. The pitiful showing, in state houses and in Congress, in the last election is a case in point. I'm relieved that the stimulus bill made it through the Senate — Democrats should be able to run on their accomplishments, not simply their ideology.

This Atlantic article looks at the issue of how personal relationships have been, and continue to be, affected by the presidency of Donald Trump.

I’ve always said that I generally trust people more easily who have a lot of questions than those who seem to have all the answers.

I feel a lot more comfortable with people who can acknowledge the rifts that have occurred and admit to some ambivalence or hesitancy in dealing with Trump fans, than with people who either can’t see, can’t admit, or outright deny the seriousness of those rifts.

In any case, it’s an interesting (and not overly long) read.


https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2021/03/trump-friend-family-relationships/618457/

Hello Snood: To address what you said here,

"I submit that it is not natural for two people in a friendship or other close relationship to simply “agree to disagree” about ALL these things, and go blithely on without it changing the relationship."

Well, I am Canadian so didn't get to vote for Biden, but my husband and one of my best friends love Trump. We don't discuss politics. I just cannot understand how two incredibly intelligent and clever people could like him. It seems, to me, inexplicable. I still love them both, however.

And then you said,

"I can’t reconcile the notion that someone who is a good and decent person can be someone who supports a man as vile as 45 and all the vile white nationalism, vile misogyny and personal vileness he represents. It is in my thoughts when I interact with them, and if I interact with them long enough, it will be expressed in my words."

That doesn't happen for me. I don't understand how they think he is so wonderful, other than they are both very conservative (way right of right). They are not misogynists, and they are not racists. (Well, not any more than anyone else because I believe everyone is at least a little bit racist.) They are both very lovely, warm people. So... how I deal with it is we just don't discuss politics. And they are free to believe and think however they want, so I can respect the difference of opinion.