Why can't Trump supporters admit there is something wrong with him

[The Grand Nudger]

-or you're as wrong as you always have been, ad naus.  

You think that you're attempting a reductio ad absurdum for the same reason that you thought the association fallacy was being employed. Both more fruedian slip than sharp critical thought. You must insist that the comparisons are -absurd-... in order to avoid -association-. Unfortunately, neither of those uses are a valid use of either the inference or the foul call. Most probably understand how strongly you feel about it, but we wouldn't have need of these rules if bad arguments weren't so naturally compelling to human beings - case in point...nazis.

This how a little bit of knowledge can be dangerous, lol.

[Mister Agenda]

When someone erects a straw man of someone's position, no one is more qualified to understand that than the one being straw-manned, no matter how good or bad at logic they are.

I think differentiating between (back to google) Reductio Ad Absurdum and a strawman is very difficult for people bad at logic, because they don't have the ability to follow the implications of their position to the wacky conclusion.  So they just think their position is being misrepresented, which leads to incorrectly calling out "Strawman!"

As a rule of thumb, the person claiming or insinuating that they're better at logic, usually isn't.

[henryp]

A gamble implies some sort of expectation of potential payout.  What did you expect to gain?  Hopefully, you didn't expect any of what's happened....particularly, I hope you weren't expecting trump to make a running hitler joke of himself and his supporters, because then your vote would start to seem really strange.

That he'd follow through on his nationalistic economic policies.  I also like the idea of a more isolationist stance in global politics.  

I think the US is a bit like MC Hammer after he stopped making hit records, but was still behaving like he was.  I think a more isolationist/nationalistic position is better suited for our new position in the world.  At least it's better for me, in theory.

---

I think differentiating between (back to google) Reductio Ad Absurdum and a strawman is very difficult for people bad at logic, because they don't have the ability to follow the implications of their position to the wacky conclusion.  So they just think their position is being misrepresented, which leads to incorrectly calling out "Strawman!"

As a rule of thumb, the person claiming or insinuating that they're better at logic, usually isn't.

That could certainly be the case.

[The Grand Nudger]

That he'd follow through on his nationalistic economic policies.  I also like the idea of a more isolationist stance in global politics.
 

Those things, in your estimation, were worth accepting all the rest for?  

I think the US is a bit like MC Hammer after he stopped making hit records, but was still behaving like he was.  I think a more isolationist/nationalistic position is better suited for our new position in the world.  At least it's better for me, in theory.

Well, I think your theory is shit, but at least you have a theory and we don't have to deny the valid comparisons others make between this administration and that other administration.  

There's certainly nothing in what you wanted or expected that has anything to do with how hard the cheetoh pushes the nazi narrative - and so no reason for you to defend him for having done so.   You didn't vote for -that- shit.  

It's only your problem if you make it your problem, feelin me?  I'm sure that people might question your judgement, or suggest that you probably should have known this was going to happen what with the fuhrer constantly making it happen by promising to make it happen and then issuing his infamous reich eo straight from the desk of Bannon....but ultimately, we've all made mistakes.  

I don't disagree, at all, btw, that we aren't what we once were - that belligerantly throwing our weight (and wealth) around is a bad idea. I actually see this administration as further eroding whatever remained - that's kindof my whole problem with it, in a nutshell.

[henryp]

I think America needs wealth. We lose that, and shit is going to go downhill in a hurry. Probably goes for all 1st world countries. We've got a bit of a standard of living bubble, and if that pops, things could go very south very fast.

---

To the 2nd part, that's the conundrum of american politics. Shitty people's votes count to. If you don't try to get shitty people's votes, you don't win. I made the example with Obama in '08 coming out against gay marriage. Democrats I talked to all say the same thing. They said he didn't really believe it, and he was just trying to get the homophobic left's vote. I agree.

If Obama comes out for transgender rights in 2008, McCain would've been president. That's just how the game works, and it puts the voters in a real tough spot trying to suss out what's real, and what's politics.

[Thumpalumpacus]

And I don't think my vote was stupid.  It was definitely a gamble, though.  We'll see if it was a mistake in hindsight in a few years.

He has an idea or two that I don't disparage, but his behavior throughout the campaign called the parallels to my mind immediately and certainly influenced my decision to not vote for him. Of course, I've spent a bit of time reading up on the Third Reich over the last forty years.

History is definitely a useful study, and I sure wish more people engaged in it, lest they opt to "gamble" their vote chasing a siren song of rhetoric designed to put them off from rational thinking.

For what it's worth, I think every vote for Trump was a stupid one. Who in their right mind believes a "populist" billionaire? Who in their right mind chalks race-baiting and appeals to xenophobia up to politicking? Those were your warning signs, and you ignored them.

[Whateverist]

And I don't think my vote was stupid.  It was definitely a gamble, though.  We'll see if it was a mistake in hindsight in a few years.

He has an idea or two that I don't disparage, but his behavior throughout the campaign called the parallels to my mind immediately and certainly influenced my decision to not vote for him. Of course, I've spent a bit of time reading up on the Third Reich over the last forty years.

History is definitely a useful study, and I sure wish more people engaged in it, lest they opt to "gamble" their vote chasing a siren song of rhetoric designed to put them off from rational thinking.

For what it's worth, I think every vote for Trump was a stupid one. Who in their right mind believes a "populist" billionaire? Who in their right mind chalks race-baiting and appeals to xenophobia up to politicking? Those were your warning signs, and you ignored them.

And don't forget the obvious calls for violence against protestors at his rallies, intimating he'd cover their legal costs. There should be a legal consequence for that alone. If shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre is irresponsible as well as illegal, how much more so was what Trump did again and again during the election. That too was solid evidence that the man lacked judgement.

It would be great if everyone would learn from history but those of us who have lived through more of it have an advantage there. Everyone makes mistakes but good for recognizing one and learning from it, wallym.

[The Grand Nudger]

I think America needs wealth.  We lose that, and shit is going to go downhill in a hurry.  Probably goes for all 1st world countries.  We've got a bit of a standard of living bubble, and if that pops, things could go very south very fast.

Sure, though I'm not sure how, exactly, you expected Trump to secure that wealth.  Pretty sutre that the travel industry wasn't all that pleased with the travel ban.  The healthcare industry will take a massive hit from this wealthcare bill.  So will we, the american people for having even less access to what was already very little access to taxable wealth.

To the 2nd part, that's the conundrum of american politics.  Shitty people's votes count to.  If you don't try to get shitty people's votes, you don't win.  I made the example with Obama in '08 coming out against gay marriage.  Democrats I talked to all say the same thing.  They said he didn't really believe it, and he was just trying to get the homophobic left's vote.  I agree.  

Meh, I'd rather lose without the help of the nazi wing of american politics than win with them.  Not that I have to worry about that much, since I don't have a political party to do any wining for me anyway..winning being sooo damned important that it, apparently, justifies becoming collaborators......

If Obama comes out for transgender rights in 2008, McCain would've been president.  That's just how the game works, and it puts the voters in a real tough spot trying to suss out what's real, and what's politics.

You reckon a significant portion of Obamas voters were bigoted enough to defect?  LOL, so do I.  Clearly there were enough bigots in america to squeek your boy out on an electoral victory. The majority of voters, otoh, didn't seem to be fooled......

[Pat Mustard]

Well, there is something to the point that if Trump is so freaking bad, how in the world did you guys lose to him?

You mean, how did they lose to him -other- than the whole russian thing....and the voter suppression thing, and the vast swathes of (allegedly) surprising american bigotry thing? Gee, who knows.  One would imagine that a corpse could run against a trump and win...but otoh, if a certain dead jew had been the dem candidate you'd have still went trump...so.....?

Fuck it, even if Supply Side Jesus was the Dem candidate the Republitraitor amadáins and óinseachs would not have voted for him.

[henryp]

And I don't think my vote was stupid.  It was definitely a gamble, though.  We'll see if it was a mistake in hindsight in a few years.

He has an idea or two that I don't disparage, but his behavior throughout the campaign called the parallels to my mind immediately and certainly influenced my decision to not vote for him. Of course, I've spent a bit of time reading up on the Third Reich over the last forty years.

History is definitely a useful study, and I sure wish more people engaged in it, lest they opt to "gamble" their vote chasing a siren song of rhetoric designed to put them off from rational thinking.

For what it's worth, I think every vote for Trump was a stupid one. Who in their right mind believes a "populist" billionaire? Who in their right mind chalks race-baiting and appeals to xenophobia up to politicking? Those were your warning signs, and you ignored them.

I think a nationalist billionaire is believable.   And it's a tough question on who's more likely to be a populist.  Obviously Bernie was the guy.  But the Obama's and Clinton's weren't obscenely wealthy coming into the presidency.  They made/will make their cash after the fact.  Their future wealth is tied almost entirely to post presidential 'donations'.

Is it a wink and a nod from Goldman Sachs that they'll hook you up with the 250k speaking deals when you're done being President?  Is that different than giving you the 250k before you're President, if it's implied?