Trump Is a Racist. If You Still Support Him, So Are You.

[PUB78 1,358]

On 7/17/2019 at 7:17 AM, kd4au said:

Well when you cover for Hillary, start spying on all things Trump, start an investigation that ends with no collusion or obstruction, the economy is booming, then really all you have left to fall back on is the race card, that the dems love to play constantly against anyone not a demonrat.

For some people, it is always 1965.

[japantiger 4,051]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

It's hard to engage you seriously when you make blanket exaggerations like this.

The two elected officials from the DSA are AOC and Rashida Talib ... the DSA is the largest socialist organization in America.  They believe that the only problem with Socialism is; wait for it; "it hasn't really been tried the right way yet".  I think jj3Jordan got it right...

What is Democratic Socialism?

Democratic socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives.

Democracy and socialism go hand in hand. All over the world, wherever the idea of democracy has taken root, the vision of socialism has taken root as well—everywhere but in the United States. 

https://www.dsausa.org/

 

[TitanTiger 20,479]

4 minutes ago, japantiger said:

The two elected officials from the DSA are AOC and Rashida Talib ... the DSA is the largest socialist organization in America.  They believe that the only problem with Socialism is; wait for it; "it hasn't really been tried the right way yet".  I think jj3Jordan got it right...

What is Democratic Socialism?

Democratic socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives.

Democracy and socialism go hand in hand. All over the world, wherever the idea of democracy has taken root, the vision of socialism has taken root as well—everywhere but in the United States. 

https://www.dsausa.org/

 

Which, despite whatever misgiving I may have about that political philosophy, is not "chang[ing] the form of government from a constitutional republic to socialism."

Thanks for the back up.

[japantiger 4,051]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Which, despite whatever misgiving I may have about that political philosophy, is not "chang[ing] the form of government from a constitutional republic to socialism."

Thanks for the back up.

Uummm, I don't think those words mean what you think they mean....

"To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed"

[TitanTiger 20,479]

Just now, japantiger said:

Uummm, I don't think those words mean what you think they mean....

"To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed"

Still not getting the difference in socialism and democratic socialism or social democrats.

[homersapien 11,371]

14 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

They were doing a little more than criticizing. Theirs is blatant dislike, disrespect, and a desire to change the form of government from a constitutional republic to socialism.

You still aren't getting the word correct. He said if they don't like it they can leave. He did not tell women of color anything. He spoke to elected members of congress who hate this country as founded and as currently operating. Like the former is Trumps fault, and the latter is somehow bad.  You can't listen to omar or Thalib and not feel their dislike for all of us and Israel.  He is merely pointing out that people who's families emigrated here for the improvements should not be holding on to the environment that made them leave.

Sometimes Homer, you can analyze issues logically, but with Trump, you are unable to evaluate any issue without losing your mind.  You just sound like the media. 

I think that is just BS you are repeating like a parrot.  How about quoting the worst of what they said about America and let's start there.

 

[homersapien 11,371]

27 minutes ago, japantiger said:

Uummm, I don't think those words mean what you think they mean....

"To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed"

"Radical transformation" doesn't equal socialism.

You apparently classify any criticism of how things are as a call for "socialism" (by which I think you really mean communism).   It's a Manichean phobia to progress.

[homersapien 11,371]

On 7/16/2019 at 10:20 PM, ArgoEagle said:

Yea, he's a little too outspoken. Bottom line is he puts the interests and well being of the U.S. nation and it's citizens 1st. Those 4 idiots he called out; that's what he called them out for. It's obvious they are anti-American and he called them out for it. I wish they would pack up, get out, and take their radical idealisms with them wherever they choose to go. So now all the libs on here can label me a racist too. Whatever, I'm up for it Salty my friend.

That would be option #2 for trying to resolve your cognitive dissonance:

 

".......Cognitive dissonance, first described by the psychologist Leon Festinger in the late 1950s, occurs when conflict emerges between what people want to believe and the reality that threatens those beliefs. The human mind does not like such inconsistencies: They set off alarms that spur the mind to alter some beliefs to make the perceived reality fit with one’s preferred views.

 In the case of Trump’s remarks — when absorbed by his supporters who do not consider themselves racist — those inconsistencies can be summarized in a sort of syllogism: (1) I do not support racists. (2) I do support President Trump. (3) President Trump has just made a racist remark. Those three facts simply don’t fit together comfortably in the mind. 

 Just as a hungry person will seek food to alleviate hunger, Festinger argued, people who experience mental discrepancies of this sort will work to put them in accord, to reduce the dissonance. And they will often go to extraordinary lengths to do so: Resolving cognitive dissonance often takes considerable mental gymnastics.

Supporters of Trump who experience cognitive dissonance over his remarks essentially have three psychological options to resolve it, altering in various ways the three beliefs that are in tension. One is to change the belief that they do not support racists. This response is unlikely, however, because it would require a massive overhaul of the view of the self, placing the person in a category he or she knows is morally dubious, not to mention socially vilified. Very rare is the person who will resolve psychological dissonance by saying, “Actually, I am a monster.” 

Another option (2) is to introduce new beliefs that bolster support for Trump. This does not address the conflicts among beliefs head-on but rather lessens the impact of the inflammatory statement by considering positive information about the president. One approach along these lines is to emphasize the awfulness of the policy positions and statements of the congresswomen Trump attacked, thereby casting the president as a defender of decency (and perhaps as a victim himself, not an aggressor). Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), for instance, described Democratic Reps. Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) and Ilhan Omar (Minn.) as “a bunch of communists” who “hate Israel” and “hate our own country.” Relatedly, Marc Short, Vice President Pence’s chief of staff, played up Trump’s lack of racism in other contexts, noting that his transportation secretary, Elaine Chao, was born in Taiwan. As reasons for supporting the president grow — either his sterling qualities or the negative characteristics of his opponents — it becomes easier to overlook a single misstep.

A third route to resolving dissonance, in this specific case, is to flatly (and boldly) reject the consensus that telling someone to “go back” to their family’s country of origin is racist. Rep. Harris — with his revisionist argument that Trump wanted the women to go back to their districts — is probably the most striking example of this. But Fox News analyst Brit Hume may also belong in this category, with his hairsplitting statement that Trump’s comments were “nativist, xenophobic . . . and politically stupid” — but absolutely not racist, “a word so recklessly flung around these days that its actual meaning is being lost.” If Trump is just the latest in a long parade of people falsely accused of racism by liberals, that, too, makes it easier to take his side. (“Xenophobic” is not too far from “racist,” definitionally, but it does not carry nearly the same moral charge, so reframing the accusation that way may well ease psychological tension.)

 Since the uproar, Trump has proclaimed that many people agree with his controversial statement and that indeed, “a lot of people love it.” But decades of behavioral research suggests that not all the people refraining from condemning the president support his attacks. Instead, they’re doing mental contortions to explain away the ugliness, to justify their continued support of him — and to maintain their positive views of themselves."....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/the-psychological-phenomenon-that-blinds-trump-supporters-to-his-racism/2019/07/18/29789344-a8ac-11e9-ac16-90dd7e5716bc_story.html?utm_term=.8e593698d1e2

 

[japantiger 4,051]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

Still not getting the difference in socialism and democratic socialism or social democrats.

There is none.

[japantiger 4,051]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

"Radical transformation" doesn't equal socialism.

You apparently classify any criticism of how things are as a call for "socialism" (by which I think you really mean communism).   It's a Manichean phobia to progress.

This is from "purpose statement" of the Democratic Socialists of America.  You are fast approaching Fifty's density.

[SaturdayGT 719]

Homer, are you studied in Psycology? I just notice a lot of reference to Psychology in your posts.

[homersapien 11,371]

29 minutes ago, japantiger said:

This is from "purpose statement" of the Democratic Socialists of America.  You are fast approaching Fifty's density.

Do they have a copyright on the term "radical transformation"?  Can the rest of us talk about radical transformation or do we have to pay them a fee?

Is "radical transformation" necessarily a bad thing or do you think everything is perfect as is?

You come across like one of those people who are afraid of black helicopters full of UN troops.

Or maybe this guy:

 

 

 

[homersapien 11,371]

11 minutes ago, SaturdayGT said:

Homer, are you studied in Psycology? I just notice a lot of reference to Psychology in your posts.

Depends on what you mean by "studied in".  I don't have any degrees but it's always been an area of personal interest and have read a lot of books on various aspects of society and human behavior.

I am currently reading:  "Conscience - The Origins of Moral Intuition" by Patricia S. Churchland

I highly recommend it.

Or try my last one: "The Republican Brain - The Science of Why They Deny Science - And Reality",   by Chris Mooney   (Hint: it has to do with authoritarian personalities.)

[SaturdayGT 719]

I was just curious if you studied at Auburn. My older sister went and studied Psychology around the time Bo Jackson played! 

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

1 hour ago, SaturdayGT said:

Homer, are you studied in Psycology? I just notice a lot of reference to Psychology in your posts.

Brother Homer frequently post articles by so called psychologist. I find them easier to digest by laying on the sofa and reading them out loud. 

[japantiger 4,051]

10 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Brother Homer frequently post articles by so called psychologist. I find them easier to digest by laying on the sofa and reading them out loud. 

While inhaling helium, right?

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Depends on what you mean by "studied in".

Well, FYI,  I took two psychology courses at Auburn.

[japantiger 4,051]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

That would be option #2 for trying to resolve your cognitive dissonance:

 

".......Cognitive dissonance, first described by the psychologist Leon Festinger in the late 1950s, occurs when conflict emerges between what people want to believe and the reality that threatens those beliefs. The human mind does not like such inconsistencies: They set off alarms that spur the mind to alter some beliefs to make the perceived reality fit with one’s preferred views.

 In the case of Trump’s remarks — when absorbed by his supporters who do not consider themselves racist — those inconsistencies can be summarized in a sort of syllogism: (1) I do not support racists. (2) I do support President Trump. (3) President Trump has just made a racist remark. Those three facts simply don’t fit together comfortably in the mind. 

 Just as a hungry person will seek food to alleviate hunger, Festinger argued, people who experience mental discrepancies of this sort will work to put them in accord, to reduce the dissonance. And they will often go to extraordinary lengths to do so: Resolving cognitive dissonance often takes considerable mental gymnastics.

Supporters of Trump who experience cognitive dissonance over his remarks essentially have three psychological options to resolve it, altering in various ways the three beliefs that are in tension. One is to change the belief that they do not support racists. This response is unlikely, however, because it would require a massive overhaul of the view of the self, placing the person in a category he or she knows is morally dubious, not to mention socially vilified. Very rare is the person who will resolve psychological dissonance by saying, “Actually, I am a monster.” 

Another option (2) is to introduce new beliefs that bolster support for Trump. This does not address the conflicts among beliefs head-on but rather lessens the impact of the inflammatory statement by considering positive information about the president. One approach along these lines is to emphasize the awfulness of the policy positions and statements of the congresswomen Trump attacked, thereby casting the president as a defender of decency (and perhaps as a victim himself, not an aggressor). Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), for instance, described Democratic Reps. Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) and Ilhan Omar (Minn.) as “a bunch of communists” who “hate Israel” and “hate our own country.” Relatedly, Marc Short, Vice President Pence’s chief of staff, played up Trump’s lack of racism in other contexts, noting that his transportation secretary, Elaine Chao, was born in Taiwan. As reasons for supporting the president grow — either his sterling qualities or the negative characteristics of his opponents — it becomes easier to overlook a single misstep.

A third route to resolving dissonance, in this specific case, is to flatly (and boldly) reject the consensus that telling someone to “go back” to their family’s country of origin is racist. Rep. Harris — with his revisionist argument that Trump wanted the women to go back to their districts — is probably the most striking example of this. But Fox News analyst Brit Hume may also belong in this category, with his hairsplitting statement that Trump’s comments were “nativist, xenophobic . . . and politically stupid” — but absolutely not racist, “a word so recklessly flung around these days that its actual meaning is being lost.” If Trump is just the latest in a long parade of people falsely accused of racism by liberals, that, too, makes it easier to take his side. (“Xenophobic” is not too far from “racist,” definitionally, but it does not carry nearly the same moral charge, so reframing the accusation that way may well ease psychological tension.)

 Since the uproar, Trump has proclaimed that many people agree with his controversial statement and that indeed, “a lot of people love it.” But decades of behavioral research suggests that not all the people refraining from condemning the president support his attacks. Instead, they’re doing mental contortions to explain away the ugliness, to justify their continued support of him — and to maintain their positive views of themselves."....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/the-psychological-phenomenon-that-blinds-trump-supporters-to-his-racism/2019/07/18/29789344-a8ac-11e9-ac16-90dd7e5716bc_story.html?utm_term=.8e593698d1e2

 

Or, we could just all agree with him.  You know, the most obvious answer.  

 

[AUFAN78 3,894]

2 hours ago, japantiger said:

This is from "purpose statement" of the Democratic Socialists of America.  You are fast approaching Fifty's density.

And he unfortunately is not alone.

[AUFAN78 3,894]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Depends on what you mean by "studied in".  I don't have any degrees but it's always been an area of personal interest and have read a lot of books on various aspects of society and human behavior.

I am currently reading:  "Conscience - The Origins of Moral Intuition" by Patricia S. Churchland

I highly recommend it.

Or try my last one: "The Republican Brain - The Science of Why They Deny Science - And Reality",   by Chris Mooney   (Hint: it has to do with authoritarian personalities.)

[AUFAN78 3,894]

52 minutes ago, japantiger said:

While inhaling helium, right?

sensimilla

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

3 hours ago, SaturdayGT said:

Homer, are you studied in Psycology? I just notice a lot of reference to Psychology in your posts.

No. He's just paraphrasing from someone else. 

[kd4au 1,145]

4 hours ago, homersapien said:

Is "radical transformation" necessarily a bad thing or do you think everything is perfect as is?

That's what Obama was going to do, radically transform the country. I didn't like it so much.

[homersapien 11,371]

15 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

No. He's just paraphrasing from someone else. 

Well, since I personally didn't do the research, yeah.

[homersapien 11,371]

14 hours ago, kd4au said:

That's what Obama was going to do, radically transform the country. I didn't like it so much.

BS.  Obama pretty much was an institutionalist when it came to the economy and Wall Street.  Even the ACA was a hybrid that incorporated for profit insurance companies.