This is true, and I understand where @Quinn is coming from. I’m on that same thought process, and the only reason why I’m holding it together and remaining civil in this matter is because I have a lifetime of experience keeping the professional behavior even when I’ve been enraged beyond all reason (my current state of mind at the moment). This is a time of pain that borders on a feeling of betrayal and despair for where things are, and those who willingly made it possible are just so… infuriating that it takes an immense amount of willpower to not just go off like a verbal gattling gun.
That being said, if I may offer one point of consideration, for Quinn and others of a similar position: this is still a place governed by rules. Defiance of rules over feelings of enragement and betrayal, even when valid, is exactly the kind of behavior that the fucker we all despise engages in regularly.
So I think what @wincenworks is trying to convey here is that taking that out on other forum members who might have voted a certain way, and therefore share in the social responsibility of the outcome, is not gonna help anything other than make things tense around here, when this place is supposed to be a refuge from the outside world where this shit is happening, and that’s the place where we should be directing our rage.
Not telling anyone to do or not do anything, just presenting an option.
Wow what a day, and surely one that’s causing a lot of stir and commotion, but that’s a given. Watching the inauguration I really don’t know how to feel since it’s a mixed bag of emotions ranging from stuff I can get behind and stuff that regresses us as a society here in America.
Time to see how the next four years play out so I can give my vote to someone that will be the voice of the people.
Nobody is asking you to coddle Trump supporters, people are asking you to not trash the neighborhoods of random people then blame Trump. Your responsibilities are not suspended because something bad happened elsewhere.
This is not a complicated concept.
As for the pardons, given reactionary groups tendency to schism and assume that their individual group is the One True troop of followers - Trump pardoning a bunch of people who think they’re entitled to use violence to dictate policy has the potential to dramatically backfire.
do you mean this thread is being trashed by people asking why someone would vote for trump? or what does neighbourhoods of random people mean? how should one read this.
I assume this is a complicated metaphor about Naz. Got it, chief, we’ll lay off him.
I was specifically discussing those who continue to support Trump and his beliefs and his actions. Those who believe he not only deserves to get away with everything he’s done and become president, but those who actively want revenge on those who as much as questioned him, such as these poor bastards Biden had to save:
I’m not sure if Vance’s reputation as a not-Trump-cockgobbler is going to survive the next few years until 2028.
Why a random forum member claims they cast one vote in millions is not widely relevant. They are a sample size of one.
People are perfectly entitled to be upset at them, unfollow them on any platforms, cancel subscriptions, whatever. Those are personal decisions for people with existing relationships and nothing ro do with the forum.
Its not news, its not relevant to the wider discussion, not actionable by someone coming to read about news.
Nor not is another member announcing they do not respect people who voted that way.
Both are topics only of relevance to people who have a personal investment of the decisions made by those individuals.
Spamming up the thread with it is only going to inconvenience and upset people who clicked on the thread expecting civilized conversations. Much like spamming inane questions does.
By and large, it seems unlikely the majority of readers of this thread voted for Trump, certainly it is not a place one would look for a cluster of them. Same for the wider forum.
Using the forum for ineffectually howling that you dont respect people and ascribe negative motivations and moral judgements does nothing to inconvenience them. If anything, it might entertain them - hence why trolling is a thing.
The only people it spites are the people who almost certainly did not vote that way and are just trying to use the forum as intended.
It is, again, not a complicated concept. It is, in fact, one that intuitively understood by people who view the forum as a community of their peers.
I was unfortunate enough to come home from work today to see my parents actively watching the inauguration events. And so I too was hooked on watching the dumb, outrageous circus that it all was.
(I love my folks, they also hate Trump and everything he stands for – but my dad specifically tends to watch news of it just to keep up with what latest stupid thing he’s done or comes out of his mouth. And when it comes to US media, well… it was nearly every day they covered something like that the last time around. I’m extremely annoyed I’ll probably have to be exposed to that again for 4 years [well I hope to move out at least! XD], and I worry for his heart and health consuming that kind of news again…)
Anyway, that was... pure weirdness.
I know I tuned in late in the “festivities” of today. But man, I “loved” the part where Trump took to the mic, then proceeded to point out everyone around him who were “really great, tremendous” people that helped him get back in the President’s seat, having them stand up and get the crowd cheering them on every time. Awkward.
Or maybe it was the part where he brought up the families of some Israeli hostages – fine, gotta pull out some political “wow, look what we did on Day 1” bonus points despite this thing happening like a week before he’s even Prez. But then after thanking and shaking their hands, talking about how they need to get other hostages released, he abruptly shifted to talking about ‘The J6 “”“Hostages”“”’, right in front of them. The fucking gall. And THEN also spent like, I dunno, 20 mins, talking about his insane stupid plans, insulting the previous admin and president and his new executive orders that’ll improve America that the joe-schmoes cheering him on somehow believe it’ll affect them all positively. And the people in yellow scarves (the parents and such) are just… still standing there behind him…
Dude, let them go sit down, what do they have to to with “Hmm, I’m glad we brought MAGA back, y’know we tried “KAG”, yadda yadda [inane rambling continues]” Again. Super weird and awkward.
And to top it all off, tRump goes to a desk on the side to sign off on some executive orders live-on-camera right in this stadium! With every signature and announcement of the order getting massive applause, like he’s announcing someone in the audience just won the lottery every time. God… so fucking weird. What a cult…
I’m glad I spent most of today completely oblivious that Trump is now the new president of the USA. And now I’m sad that I’ve realized I’m gonna spend another 4 years of his outrageous, mind-boggling claims and juvenile conduct that no one seems to call him out on for long, or somehow seems to benefit him with the army of “yes men” he surrounds himself with, no matter the cost…
I dunno man, just, today, was a whole bunch of typical Trump Spectacle as it always is (I don’t normally follow Inaugurations, but I don’t think they usually happen like this one) and boy, oh boy, it’s gonna be a strange, scary, pull-my-hair-out 4 years again… yaayuuugh…
EDIT: Shit, sorry Win. I think as I was typing this, a lot of the thread got removed or something?
Remove this if ya need to. Just needed to release my incredulous thoughts about today’s TV events surrounding the US… argh…
People discuss ppoliics without it becoming a flame war all the time. The secret is to actually talk about politics like:
How anti-trans bills are part of a culture of scapegoating that has predictable pattern of shifting targets, always blaming a group for the problems and never fixing anything.
All these conversations are important for understanding things, and can take place in a civilized manner if entered into in good faith.
However no topic will remain civilized when people take it an an opportunity to act up, try to make themselves the hero of the story, someone else the villain, or generally try to be nusance for fun.
Its just like how you can talk about recipes, food and nutrition fine - but not if someone immediately starts with “well if you’re not a vegetarian/ keto/breatherian like me then you’re an idiot” or “why do you think you’re better tahn everyone!?” in rsponse to someone saying they dont eat pork.
If anything the argument we shouldn’t talk about politics creates flamewars because it prevents people developing the tools and skills to do so well, and thus results in people reducing it to tribalism and then communicating on the topic exclusively in insults, accusations, threats and memes.
If you don’t do the thinking, someone else will do it for you.
I approach things differently because I want to understand why people hold particular beliefs. If you’re not open to meaningful or productive discourse, then why bother engaging with those you claim to detest? You’re not even offering arguments for others observing the conversation to learn from.
Labeling millions of voters as cultists or ‘bad people’ is lazy and reductive, ignoring the complexities of political beliefs shaped by personal experiences, economic concerns, or specific policies. While I don’t disagree with many characterisations of Trump supporters, I choose to approach individuals with nuance and context rather than using them as props to broadcast my political ideology. Blanket moral condemnation often deepens polarisation and makes progress impossible. You’re free to wade into the mud on X if that’s your thing, but spare public threads from becoming your personal arena of moral judgement.
At the very least, explain why you’re convinced you’re right—don’t just proclaim it.
January 6th was terrible, and some will rationalise it to varying extremes. However, I don’t assume all Trump voters are fully informed or have thoroughly considered their perspectives. It depends on who you engage. I try to be careful when making moral judgements because of this. Opposing authoritarian populism requires understanding how it takes hold in the first place.
This isn’t about coddling—it’s about meaningful discourse, which is the point of this thread. Engaging doesn’t excuse harmful beliefs; it means understanding their roots to challenge them. Too often, people reduce their politics to opposing others rather than articulating what they stand for. We end up retreating into extremism and see enemies everywhere. It’s what MAGA does all the time.
I suspect the Covid-19 claims are cover for that WHO has been pushing for improvements in workplace health and safety for decades.
Trump and his co-president, Musk, want to “reshape” (read: scrap) OSHA and it’s hard to do that when WHO keeps pointing out that doing so would be a breach of your commitments to the group:
