Protestors Are Assholes

[Hagtard Celine Dion Mustard]

As someone who clearly remembers the inane fearmongering that was rampant among demonstrators just before Obama took office, I can absolutely say that the more important things to acknowledge are those which both groups have in common, rather than focusing on the subtle, irrelevant differences.

Every time we have a presidential election, these people come out in a full force of dehumanizing hypocrisy, carrying the message that if democracy isn't on their side this particular time, then it must be broken and the rules no longer apply to them. Then the people towards the middle either rationalize their legitimacy if they're on the same team or lambast the entire ideology if they aren't.

I'm fucking tired of it. Protestors are assholes.

Not to deny that sometimes it takes an asshole to get things done (Trump voters obviously think so), but can we stop pretending that these people are an exception to the rules just because we happen to support the same party? Can we at least just admit that they're being assholes?

Many of them didn't even vote. They seem to think that because they only care about one set of issues in the presidential election that everyone who voted the other way must have done so in order to undermine those particular issues. And don't get me started on character-assassination. Why are the assholes who rave about Donald Trump being a womanizer perfectly fine with the idea of the first First Gentleman being Bill Clinton?

The moderate liberals are looking the other way, just like the moderate conservatives looked the other way when the other set of assholes did the same thing in 2008 and 2012.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Chew on my horrible, scabby ass.

[Hagtard Celine Dion Mustard]

And none of this is to downplay the role that protestors play; I just wish we weren't bullshitting ourselves and each other every time it happens. Instead of rationalizing and blanket-judging, I wish we could just step back and say, "Our asshole protestors are keeping your guy in check. When our guy is in office, your asshole protestors keep ours in check." None of this "our protestors are okay but yours were shit" kind of nonsense.

Just keep it real.

[Salty]

False dichotomy.
For one thing, I don't ever have any problems with any protestor.
For another, the Trump vs Bill Clinton argument is totally, completely, utterly stupid as he wasn't running for President.

Opinions are like assholes, AWESOME.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

Eat seven dicks, new guy.

[Faust]

If this was Bush/Clinton or Obama/Clinton you'd have a point. Irreconcilable political differences are arguably the only ones that apply to your argument (which at its heart still boils down to the "sour grapes" argument which I don't buy).

The fact is they aren't protesting Trumps political views of which there are very few consistent ones, because racism/homophobia/misogyny isn't a political stance.
Lets take the Bill Clinton argument, he falls into the latter, he had a relatively exploitative relationship with an intern when he was in a position of trust and power and then lied about it to the American people and it destroyed him, ending his presidency.

Trump (apart from flip flopping, lying and otherwise being unable to hold any kind of consistent political discourse) embodies open racism/homophobia/misogyny and a host of other pretty shitty characteristics and views and he is entering his presidency.

The Hilary isn't clean argument doesn't wash either: she was a bad candidate, he was an awful one, its detestable that they were the best two candidates a country of Three hundred million plus people could come up with, and that on its own, before anything else, is worthy of protest.

[Hagtard Celine Dion Mustard]

False dichotomy.

Reactionary right-wing demonstrators vs. reactionary left-wing demonstrators is a literal, actual dichotomy. With as divided as politics are in this country, I can hardly think of a clearer example of genuine opposites.

The problem is that they have more in common than anyone on either side seems willing to entertain.

For one thing, I don't ever have any problems with any protestor.

I have problems with the fact that people are constantly rationalizing "their" protestors/wingbats/extremists while using opposing demonstrators/nutjobs/radicals to condemn the entire other side. I have problems with mass hypocrisy.

I'm not condemning protestors in theory by calling them assholes; I'm just being honest. Protestors are assholes. It takes a special kind of person to go out and shout in the streets, vandalize monuments, and stop traffic in a state that actually voted the way they wanted it to vote.

For another, the Trump vs Bill Clinton argument is totally, completely, utterly stupid as he wasn't running for President.

Precisely the kind of rationalization I'm talking about. Things don't need to be perfectly equal to be comparable. If people were less upset about the fact that Bill Clinton would wind up being the First Gentleman due to his plethora of misogynistic sex-scandals than Donald Trump being president but still highly critical of the idea, I would understand. Unfortunately, the fact is that absolutely nobody on the left seems to care because he's on their team.

Opinions are like assholes, AWESOME.

Opinions are like children. Those who have them are usually the ones least qualified.

[Hagtard Celine Dion Mustard]

Relevant: http://www.vox.com/identities/2016/11/15/13595508/racism-trump-research-study

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Great.  Another alt-right assmonkey.

[Hagtard Celine Dion Mustard]

Great.  Another alt-right assmonkey.

Anyone who doesn't conform to either side gets labeled as the other side by both sides. It's getting so you can't even debate with people that you would otherwise agree with.

[Salty]

Reactionary right-wing demonstrators vs. reactionary left-wing demonstrators is a literal, actual dichotomy. With as divided as politics are in this country, I can hardly think of a clearer example of genuine opposites.

The problem is that they have more in common than anyone on either side seems willing to entertain.

Right-wing =/= NAZIs. You see, the falseness of the dichotomy lies in associating behavior to the right that should not exist in the first place. It's not pepsi vs coke. It's pepsi vs a stinking pile of NAZI garbage.

Precisely the kind of rationalization I'm talking about. Things don't need to be perfectly equal to be comparable. If people were less upset about the fact that Bill Clinton would wind up being the First Gentleman due to his plethora of misogynistic sex-scandals than Donald Trump being president but still highly critical of the idea, I would understand. Unfortunately, the fact is that absolutely nobody on the left seems to care because he's on their team.

It's this sort of stupid, presumptuous bullshit which make sit hard to take you seriously. It makes it, in fact, a little difficult to imagine you're not trapped in a basement somewhere, and this is your cry for help.

Opinions are like children. Those who have them are usually the ones least qualified.

Anyone who doesn't conform to either side gets labeled as the other side by both sides. It's getting so you can't even debate with people that you would otherwise agree with.

Welcome to the party.

Why do you assume anyone agrees with you about anything?

[Hagtard Celine Dion Mustard]

its detestable that they were the best two candidates a country of Three hundred million plus people could come up with, and that on its own, before anything else, is worthy of protest.

I'm much more satisfied with the fact that Sanders is actively attempting (and apparently making headway) at reforming the DNC. If they want to appeal to 21st Century America, they probably need to ditch the Old Guard.

And if Trump does wind up screwing everything, they'll be in a better position to capitalize on his failures. What I'm hoping is that they don't follow the GOP's lead by actively attempting to cause him to fail in order to do so.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Sorry, new guy, but your head is way too far up your ass.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I seriously recommend looking at the economic demographics for Trump voters. They are not what you have assumed they are. They are mostly Christian, mostly make more than $50k and less than $100k per annum, mostly have high school degrees but not college degrees, and the single strongest predictor for voting for Trump was racism, followed by misogyny.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/06/racial-anxiety-is-a-huge-driver-of-support-for-donald-trump-two-new-studies-find/

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/10/23/how-sexism-drives-support-for-donald-trump/

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

FWIW, the WaPo is a liberal mouthpiece but I looked at that study they cited, expecting it to be methodologically unsound, but I couldn't find any major criticisms. And, to some extent, it is my job to know when science is shitty.