No, they don't equate, not normal can be a shitlod of variations but not all of them are bad, as a matter of fact many are better than normal. But they could be perceived as a threat by normals and even different non-normals.

Of course, nothing exacerbates the national divide like the two Presidents who lost the popular vote, and had the lowest electoral college victory of any other presidents since Reagan, right?

What about a guy who repeatedly claims he has the HIGHEST electoral college victory (almost exactly opposite the truth) and when called on it, says, "Uh, well, that's what somebody told me. I heard that somewhere." ƒUCKING LITERALLY HE SAID THIS.

But, of course, the snowflake libtards are just being hysterical, in both cases, right?

Bad, bad, horrible example, UT.

When most people don't want that President, don't like that President, and didn't vote for that President, they push back. Calling it hysterical is asshole-ish gaslighting.

Oh, that! We failed to notice how torn it was to begin with. We didn't notice how we relentlessly and deeply despise the opinions of the half of the country that grows all our food and trucks all our stuff in. We didn't notice that we fought the very infrastructure that makes our cities, and hence our liberalism, possible in the first place.

Trump isn't encouraging it so much as opening the wound. I can't tell whether this may not actually be beneficial. Like I said before, this may need to be something we go through - something to get to another side that we can't see and can't predict.

If you're scared, get a dog. Also, if you're not scared, get a dog, because dogs are cool.

Yes, I would be losing my shit about Cruz. I'm not Christian, and don't want to be a 2nd class citizen because of that.

BUT in 2012-- I voted for MITT ROMNEY, a REPUBLICAN who was NOT batsh!t ƒucking insane. Who was a businessman, a leader with experience, a STABLE "dad" figure.

What does you condescending theory say about that??

Is it that "ANY" Republican is a good target, or is it just SH!TTY Republicans??

Is it that "coastal elites" just "hate" middle America, or is it that Republican POLITICIANS have become increasingly divisive and extreme??

You get a dog, stupid face.

I don't think so, no. They'd be throwing around the "fascist" label, because everyone likes to throw around labels at the other guy, and that's stupid for all the reasons that you've brought up. But there would not be mass protests at the airport, or riotous town halls for state politicians that people couldn't even name last year. It wasn't like this when Bush II was president, not even close. Shame on folks for thinking they had it bad back then, but that doesn't mean it's fair to brush off what's happening now.

The working class has been stigmatized and mistreated and unfairly condemned, yes. But it has largely suffered this from the rich, not the liberal, two demographics that I think overlap 50/50 at best.

Let's not drag half the country into this. The election numbers say <1/4 is saying it about <1/4. Both parties are guilty but the rest of us? Maybe we're guilty of not calling bullshit before the parties foisted a non choice on the rest of us.

Beautifully put.



What I really don't like, and it's something I saw over here too, in the run-up to Brexit, is the equating of educated, and/or liberal, with elite and out of touch -v- less educated and/or working class as salt of the earth, 'real' people (unless they're unemployed in which case they're scum)

It's a false divide and it is dangerous. The generations that made America and Britain great places where opportunities existed for the many valued education - valued critical thinking - valued art and philosophy and science and also valued employment and hard work.

The disparagement of 'experts' to the point that the word has effectively become an insult and political code for out of touch and fundamentally untrustworthy is not healthy. The overweening sense of personal entitlement that fosters as assumption that every opinion is equally valid, and should be equally weighted in public discourse, regardless of knowledge, expertise, or evidence is dangerous.


It's also fucking stupid. I have a doctorate and am a left-wing liberal, pro-europe and anti-nationalist. Does this mean I'm in the elite?

I'm pretty sure I wasn't a member of the liberal elite when I was trying to prove to the job centre that I had made sufficient job applications that week to not have my benefits sanctioned - or when I was going into the housing benefit office to show them my wage slips from my part-time, work from home, zero-hour contract telecanvassing job.

I have never owned property and most likely never will.

I'm not off in a white tower and out of touch, I am just as fucking 'real' as the people who voted for Brexit.

You know who always asks me about the so-called divide between working class people and liberal elites? It's disgruntled working class people, whom I respect 100% and have no pre-existing disagreement of any kind with, whom somehow divine from my appearance that I voted differently from them, and accordingly start instantly accusing me of "hating their way of life" although I've made no indication that I do, and insist that this is not the case.

The FALSE NARRATIVE that I must disrespect them is SO INGRAINED that they simply cannot ever grasp the concept that we could talk things through as two people whom mutually respect each other.

Do you understand, Undertoad? The "divide" you speak of is being exacerbated because people (like you) INSIST it exists, and therefore it does. NOT because of how *I* actually feel about anybody. There's a barrier there that THEY can't get past, because someone else* told them it exists. It's stupid, it's wrong, it's corrosive to society, and ƒuck you for feeding it.

This is my anecdotal experience.



*someone who has political gains to be made by dividing people

It's not a class divide at all! It's entirely political.

It wasn't like this in the past, because it wasn't like this in the past! That is to say,

People weren't batshit insane in Carter/Reagan because they didn't divide along political lines for the most part.

People started to get batshit insane in Clinton Bush because they started to divide along political lines

The divide is now complete and becoming utter, and the consequences are dire;

It didn't express itself during Obama because, amongst other things, race changed the nature of the divide and prohibited the media's involvement; this in fact caused it to "bubble under" until excited by the viability of a true outsider candidate, whose personal style of gamesmanship encouraged it; and here we are.

All this is just a silly wild-ass guess on my behalf because I am not everyone.

However, here's the thread with the documentation of the political polarization from Pew Research Center.

ETA you've seen it you were in that thread

I agree, there was a bubble under Obama. A terrible, society-ending bubble.

Sadly, it appears that we are now back-lashing against positive accomplishments of the last eight years that a majority of people were happy with.

It is, by definition, a class divide when you describe it this way. You are causing the problem by describing the problem.

You don't know any more than I do about history, because I wasn't there and you weren't either. You just gathered information from those elite experts, whom I know better than to trust. If it hadn't been for that damn Newton we wouldn't have to worry about shit falling on us.

Is that it? :lol:

What is observed today is how German opinions changed in the late 1920s and early 1930s. They were even told to "disparage the bourgeoisie and intelligentsia". No intent was to say anything that made sense. Logic was totally irrelevant. Lies and deceit were good as long as it inspired emotion. Since emotion (not informed knowledge) portrayed in soundbytes was why so many Germans changed by in 15 years.

Change is that subtle. How many notice large numbers who support Trump even when he says things that contradict their long held personal beliefs? Mistake is trying to understand this logically. And yet I keep citing how so many adults think - like children. Trump can lie all he wants - and be popular. Because emotion is how he inspires - religiously - that 19.x%.

They will even ignore their own knowledge to believe (worship) what he says. Just like 1930 Germany. Similarities between late 1920s Germany and this current political environment is stunningly similar. Worse, most have no idea how similar.

Trump is discussed everywhere today. Hitler was discussed constant (same) in late 1920 and early 1930 Germany.

Trying to understand all this logically only creates puzzlement and despondence. Opinions based in emotion cannot be understood logically. Understand why his game works. So many do not think in an adult manner. Only their emotions are relevant. Worse, too many adults do not even understand the difference between emotion and logical thought. Have never really learned how to think (step by step) through a problem. Will even get angry when a reply does not provide an immediate answer.

Why did so many remain to their death in Branch Davidians (in Waco)? They were not unique. A large number of adults are that easily manipulated. The more educated (logical) among us have difficulty understanding that so many adults are that easily manipulated only by soundbytes. Again, well over 60% of Americans *knew* smoking cigarettes increased health. None of this makes sense if trying to understand it logically.

Does anyone here represent and agree with Trump? Friends who voted straight Republican for 40+ years are even disparaging Trump.