from the why-do-we-let-him-get-away-wiht-this-behavior dept.
Alexander Burns and Maggie Haberman write in The New York Times that, with his enormous online platform of six million followers, Donald Trump has used Twitter to badger and humiliate those who have dared cross him during the presidential race, latching on to their vulnerabilities, mocking their physical characteristics, personality quirks and, sometimes, their professional setbacks. Trump has made statements that have later been exposed as false or deceptive — only after they have ricocheted across the Internet.
For example, Cheri Jacobus, a Republican political strategist, did not think she had done anything out of the ordinary: On a cable television show, she criticized Donald J. Trump for skipping a debate in Iowa in late January and described him as a "bad debater." Trump took to Twitter, repeatedly branding Jacobus as a disappointed job seeker who had begged to work for his campaign and had been rejected. "We said no and she went hostile," Trump wrote. "A real dummy!" Trump's campaign manager told the same story on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." For days, Trump's followers replied to his posts with demeaning, often sexually charged insults aimed at Jacobus, including several with altered, vulgar photographs of her face.
It is not just that Trump has a skill for zeroing in on an individual's soft spot and hammering at it. It is that he sets a tone of aggression against the person, and his supporters echo and amplify it. Jacobus sent a cease-and-desist letter to Trump and his top aide, citing electronic messages that showed the Trump campaign had courted her and not the other way around. "I have been trashed and ruined on Twitter," Jacobus says adding that Trump's lawyers had responded to her letter, but that they had not yet reached a resolution.
This week, Trump sent out a menacing message on Twitter about the Ricketts family, a wealthy clan of Republican political donors, after it was reported that Marlene Ricketts donated $3 million to a group opposed to Trump's candidacy. "They better be careful," Trump wrote of the family, "they have a lot to hide!" "It's a little surreal when Donald Trump threatens your mom," Marlene Ricketts's son, Tom, later told reporters.
"At what point does it cross the line into something that's defamatory and might be actionable?" says Parry Aftab, a lawyer who leads the Internet safety group WiredSafety. "At what point does it cross the line into encouraging violence against groups and individuals?"
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @03:23PM
1) We're going to great things, believe me.
2) The other guys are dummies, believe me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @03:41PM
Trump: Incompetence you can believe in.
A good reason to vote for Trump is that his mishmash of liberal and conservative positions will keep the Republican portions of Congress fragmented and prevent foreign intervention or backsliding on social issues.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @09:30PM
his mishmash of liberal and conservative positions
It's no secret that Trump contributed monetarily to Hillary's previous runs.
Some have speculated that Trump is only running now (spouting the most demagogic stuff anyone could imagine) in order to draw out the most lame-brained among the Right and driving away true Conservatives; in the process, he is completely marginalizing the Republican Party in order to throw the contest to the Blues.
Another guess is that he doesn't want to actually *be* President but is so competitive that he wants to prove that he can win the contest.
N.B. One wonders what would have happened if Trump had been in charge during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @12:38AM
"Trump is only running now (spouting the most demagogic stuff anyone could imagine) in order to draw out the most lame-brained among the Right and driving away true Conservatives; in the process, he is completely marginalizing the Republican Party in order to throw the contest to the Blues."
By drawing away votes from other republicans he prevents them from building their campaigns. By the time the republican nominee is chosen they would be far behind relative to how they would have been had Trump not ran for office which would lower their chances of winning. So what he is doing does make sense if Trump is trying to sabotage the republicans and jeopardize their chances of winning the election.
This is one of the issues with first past the post mentioned in these video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo [youtube.com]
The alternative vote explained
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE [youtube.com]
On the other hand I think the American people are sick and tired of the establishment which is one of the reasons that non-establishment candidates have been getting a lot more public support than before. In fact it seems that just being supported by the establishment (GOP and DNC) seems to now cost votes in many ways.
I, myself, and sick and tired of the establishment and was hoping that someone not supported by them would win. Unfortunately Trump is not really an ideal alternative.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @03:14AM
drawing away votes from other republicans
Exactly.
...and let's not forget that, the more bombastic Trump's statements get (with Fox so-called News covering those intently), the more that the rest of the clown car of junior legislators and wannabes with books to hawk are convinced that they have try to out-Trump Trump.
The distance between that lot and the Totally Fascist corner of the graph is approaching zero. [politicalcompass.org]
the American people are sick and tired of the establishment
...so they're looking to Fascists??
Trump is not really an ideal alternative
None of the other occupants of the Republican Clown Car are the answer either.
I, myself, [am] sick and tired of the establishment
I expect Gary Johnson to be on the Libertarian ticket again this time.
If you are a Capitalist business owner, see if he suits you.
If you work for a living (and don't have employees), look at presumed Green Party candidate Jill Stein; the phrase that pays is Green New Deal.
This advice is based on the assumption that you aren't stuck in the loop of having to vote for 1 of the 2 worst parties.
If you're stuck there, at least look at who Bernie's supporters are.
Why Surprising Numbers of Republicans Vote for Bernie Sanders [googleusercontent.com] (orig)[1] [commondreams.org]
[1] The really good stuff starts at "Americans overwhelmingly agree with Bernie".
...and I'm sure those folks would like Dr. Stein even better than Bernie--if Lamestream Media hadn't colluded with the corporate parties to make her invisible.
The alternative vote
Yeah. Ranked voting is definitely the way to go.
Only countries that are headed for the trash heap of history still do first-past-the-post elections.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @03:45PM
1) free shit niggas
2) not hillary
(Score: 3, Touché) by CortoMaltese on Sunday February 28 2016, @03:59PM
1) Whatever you want fam
2) See above
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @05:58PM
1) Liberals are evil.
2) Repeal everything Obama has done.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:00PM
1) Everything all the other GOP candidates are saying except Kasich.
2) Hey man, I'm Latino! No really, I am!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @10:15PM
Who the hell is Kasich?!
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday February 29 2016, @02:48PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kasich [wikipedia.org]
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Sunday February 28 2016, @07:19PM
I'm still waiting for his health care plan, aside from the talking point of ending ObamaCare. Is he going to address the lack-of-access problem, that the medical guilds like the AMA promote extensive education to the point that the supply is strangled and prices are insane?
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Funny) by goody on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:44PM
Well, he's going to hire great people who know healthcare and insurance, and they're going to do great things. :-)
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @10:14PM
If he's a true Republican, he has binders full of them. [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @03:41PM
It is time to vote for Donald Trump for president. He will Make America Great Again! We will build a wall and Mexico WILL pay for it. Middle class taxes will go down greatly. The poor will pay zero income tax. We will prevent jobs being given to foreigners. It is all yours by voting for Donald Trump.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @03:57PM
Here's some fun. If you build it using traditional labor techniques, then Mexcian labor, which will be cheap and plenty at the border, and you can hardly stop anyway, you can make the case that Mexico has subsidized it's construction. If you build it, ironically, yes, Mexico will pay for the wall.
As far as the jobs given to foreigners... you can't stop globalization, really it's only America's freedoms that are keeping the big companies based in the U.S. So, really, America is already great, or at least better than the alternatives... all of that said, if it was within the power of the office of president to cancel the H1B visa program, and I believed Trump would do it if he were president, then yes I would vote for him, even though he's a big rich buffoon.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @04:44PM
all of that said, if it was within the power of the office of president to cancel the H1B visa program, and I believed Trump would do it if he were president, then yes I would vote for him, even though he's a big rich buffoon.
Great, so all of his other authoritarian policies wouldn't matter to you. What matters is The Jobs. Censoring the Internet? Mass surveillance? Forcing companies to defeat their own security schemes? Yeah, that's real freedom. Good economies are worthless if the country is not free.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:40PM
While true, if people can't eat etc. because they can't get work, they tend to focus on that and all sorts of crazy shit can happen (do I really have to godwin myself here?). You just can't eat freedom.
The establishment on the GOP and DNC sides have been exporting American jobs for decades now, and profiting handsomely, while the rest of the country gets hungrier. It is inevitable that there will be a break at some point and then we'll be getting what we get. I'd prefer it be a Sanders style orderly walk-back of establishment policies, but considering how powerful that establishment is, and how well it can prevent any real change, it will probably end up coming from a radical like Trump.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Sunday February 28 2016, @07:37PM
Seems to me that there is less actual hunger, simultaneous with greatly increased fear of falling into a circumstance where you lose your house, car and ability to feed the family, as compared to the late 1960s through early 1980s in the USA.
Would be nice to ratchet down the culture of fear a bit, I think it's bad for everyone's health (but, then, good for the medical industry, so....)
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Monday February 29 2016, @09:31AM
You just can't eat freedom.
That's like saying "you can't eat a farm". The ONLY thing that prevents people from having enough to eat is a lack of freedom. People starve in Africa because their governments steal the food. People go jobless in America because regulations make it hard as hell to create a business, and patents/copyright usually make it illegal.
There is enough food for people, and there is enough sympathy for those who really can't provide for themselves. There isn't enough freedom for people to work to obtain it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @07:45PM
Nope, it's just that this is what matters to me, and Trump happened to be peddling it. If Rubio, Hilary or Sanders show up on the ballot, and they give some tough talk about the H1 situation, they can get my vote too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:43PM
Then you're a worthless fool and should never vote, because you will surely elect the worst kinds of authoritarians.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @10:22PM
The Anonymous Coward's Democracy: People Who Vote For People I Don't Like Shouldn't Ever Vote
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Trump
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:43PM
The Anonymous Coward's Democracy: People Who Vote For People I Don't Like Shouldn't Ever Vote
Yeah, that would be nice. Or are you saying that you want people you don't like to be elected?
My position is that people who do not respect the constitution are not fit to be judges, presidents, or politicians. Which means a grand majority of republicans and democrats are not fit to be in power, Trump included. By voting for Trump, you vote for censorship, more surveillance, the government stealing people's property and giving it to the rich, and a number of other horrid policies he has claimed to support. That makes you a fool. Fools like yourself should not vote.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @01:02AM
Seems like you have bought Trump's rhetoric, why should be be able to do what he says he can? He's a bullshitter. He just happens to bullshit better than the politicians he's running against, from an empirical point of view.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @02:05AM
I don't necessarily think he will do everything or even most things he says he will, but anyone who would claim to support these types of policies is a scumbag and shouldn't be voted for. I also don't think he's a better bullshitter.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @01:12AM
> Then you're a worthless fool and should never vote, because you will surely elect the worst kinds of authoritarians.
That's freaking hilarious. You think you don't vote your pocketbook too? At least the first AC admits it. The second tries to lie about their intentions; THOSE are the worst kinds of authoritarians.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @02:11AM
Maybe you don't care one iota about freedom, but others do. Don't tell me what my intentions are.
(Score: 2) by BK on Monday February 29 2016, @12:43AM
Do you think Hillary will be any different? It's one thing if it's Sanders, but if it's not, then reforming the H1B program might be all that's really at stake.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @02:08AM
Clinton is a worthless authoritarian scumbag and I would never vote for her. I'll be voting third party, as usual. Anyone who votes for republican or democrat authoritarians is complicit in overthrowing our constitutional form of government.
(Score: 2) by Anne Nonymous on Monday February 29 2016, @03:18AM
> Censoring the Internet? Mass surveillance? Forcing companies to defeat their own security schemes?
I'm no Trump-Humper, but the current regime (and the one before that) have a pretty abysmal record in these areas.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @05:36AM
That's why you shouldn't vote for any of them, either.
(Score: 2) by Anne Nonymous on Monday February 29 2016, @05:39AM
Thank you Captain Obvious.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:23PM
Don't worry if Trump is elected both Mexico and Canada will build their own walls.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Monday February 29 2016, @10:11AM
Interesting idea. If the EU and Africa then built a giant Atlantic wall and Asia & Australia built a Pacific one, and if all four walls were joined up, watertight and sufficiently high, the US would be immune to rising sea levels caused by global warming.
TRUMP WILL STOP GLOBAL WARMING!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @09:10PM
And he'll put an end to crony capitalism, abuse of the immigration system by greedy businessmen, and moving money offshore to avoid paying taxes. Of course you can believe him - that's why he is YELLING SO LOUDLY!
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @04:07PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/28/politics/donald-trump-white-supremacists/ [cnn.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Bot on Sunday February 28 2016, @04:26PM
Trump 2016 campaign is exactly like Berlusconi 1994.
Warning, if you keep copying us, in 20 years the premier is not going to be chosen by elections.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday February 29 2016, @12:10AM
What makes you think s/he is chosen by elections now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 4, Insightful) by dbv on Sunday February 28 2016, @04:38PM
He's forth it, just for pissing off the corporate oligarchy and their media. The more hit pieces they print, the stronger he gets. What you "lefties" don't understand is that most people are sick and tired of endless bailouts, cronyism, wars and globalism. Their lives just aren't getting any better.
(Score: 5, Touché) by maxwell demon on Sunday February 28 2016, @05:06PM
If that's the only consideration when choosing for whom to vote, then one day they'll wish their lives would just not be getting any better.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:19PM
If that's the only consideration when choosing for whom to vote, then one day they'll wish their lives would just not be getting any better.
Who should they be voting for again?
(Score: 3, Funny) by maxwell demon on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:42PM
That depends on their political position. But there's no political position for which Trump is the correct choice. Well, unless your political position is that America deserves to suffer. ;-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 28 2016, @10:21PM
But there's no political position for which Trump is the correct choice.
Well, looks like millions of people disagree.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @12:04AM
Millions of people are idiots. Your point?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 29 2016, @12:09AM
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday February 29 2016, @12:14AM
Yeap. The same people that took "House prices never go down" hook line and sinker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 4, Insightful) by deimtee on Monday February 29 2016, @12:12AM
The menu today is:
- Horseshit on Toast
- Excrement in a Bun
- Cowshit on Toast
- Pigshit on Rye Toast
- Feces in a Wrap
Or you can say fuck them all, kick over the table, and walk away.
Sometimes a Pyrrhic Victory is the best you can do.
I am not a USian, so I don't get to vote anyway, but from outside looking in, Trump doesn't seem worse than the other candidates.
They are either cynically corrupt sociopaths or batshit insane religious nuts. Or both.
No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday February 28 2016, @10:38PM
I don't comprehend. Of all the things that hit working people the hardest, "endless bailouts, cronyism, wars and globalism" make up a substantial portion.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Sunday February 28 2016, @07:17PM
He's forth it, just for pissing off the corporate oligarchy and their media. The more hit pieces they print, the stronger he gets. What you "lefties" don't understand is that most people are sick and tired of endless bailouts, cronyism, wars and globalism. Their lives just aren't getting any better.
What you don't understand is that Trump *is* part of the corporate oligarchy and a crony capitalist who loves corporate welfare and bailouts.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday February 28 2016, @10:14PM
Like we've been so free of that bunch for the last 8 years.....
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Monday February 29 2016, @03:12AM
So then why is the establishment so desperately scrambling to get him out? The words "Cognitive dissonance" come to mind. The corporate oligarchy has spent literally hundreds of millions of dollars trying to get him out.
In the same way that the litmus test for Sanders is that the establishment Dems hate him, the same holds true for Trump. As far as I'm concerned, the enemy of my enemy is more my friend than the friend of my enemy (Clinton, Rubio, Cruz)
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Tuesday March 01 2016, @03:52PM
Never was Maxim 29 more true: http://schlockmercenary.wikia.com/wiki/The_Seventy_Maxims_of_Maximally_Effective_Mercenaries [wikia.com]
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Tuesday March 01 2016, @05:41PM
Try again. I am typically careful when I speak. What I said was, quote, "As far as I'm concerned, the enemy of my enemy is more my friend than the friend of my enemy[emphasis added]."
Do you disagree?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:11PM
What you "lefties" don't understand is that most people are sick and tired of endless bailouts, cronyism, wars and globalism.
You mean Republican policies in general,or just the Bush administration? Heck of a job, Brownie! The Bush "TARP" program put forth by someone known only as "Tarpman"? Two countries invaded and the perpetrator of 9-ll not captured and tried? People are sick of Cheney. So they will go Trump, which is just Cheney with less brains and more hair, but almost the same amount of craven cowardice and paranoia? I for don't understand it. The only explanation is that a substantial portion of the American electorate is just bone-deep dumb. Sorry. I wish it wasn't so. Reagan's education policies worked!
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday February 28 2016, @10:49PM
Yeah except trump is on record as saying the Iraq war was stupid.
As a liberal, if it came down to Hillary or Trump, I'd vote for Jill Stein -- I'm not afraid of Trump. Honestly, he's way less scary than any of the evangelical GOP and if I understand him correctly, he's willing to engage in a little economic nationalism which after decades of offshoring is something we really need if we are going to ever have an economy that isn't based solely on building houses, moving money, flipping burgers, or stocking shelves at Walmart. Is there a lot of shit he says that irks me? Sure, but if it comes down to a blowhard with some policies I agree with, compared to neocon warmongering wall-street-loving liar like HRC, hands down I'll keep my fingers crossed that HRC loses. Hopefully, I'll get to vote for Sanders, but as a realist, I'm going to hope Trump beats HRC and I _really_ hope that all of us Stein voters and Sanders write in voters will be seen as spoilers.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday February 29 2016, @04:24PM
You appear to be the "bone-deep dumb" person here.
Trump has gone on record, and pissed off his GOP competitors in the race, by saying the Iraq war was stupid. Jeb particularly was mad about that. Of course, Jeb is out of the race now.
By comparison, Hillary was in favor of the invasion (she voted for it), and Rubio and Cruz were in favor too. Sanders is the only other candidate who is and was against the Iraq war, but at this point it appears unlikely that Sanders will get the Dem nomination; the DNC is making damn sure of that.
Therefore, if you think the Iraq war, and other wars like it, are a bad idea, your best choice for candidate at this point appears to be Trump (though if you identify as left at all, I would encourage you to get to the polls and vote for Bernie in the primaries, there's still a chance he could win if Dem-voters get their asses out in sufficient numbers).
My prediction: Trump will become President. Too many Americans are sick of people like you telling them to vote for pro-war establishment candidates like Rubio and Hillary, and after the DNC/Hillary machine shuts down Sanders' campaign and Trump wins the GOP primaries, it's going to be a race between Trump and Hillary. So you'll have a choice between a war-hawk Democrat in the pocket of Wall Street and the insurance companies, or someone who's against wasting money on stupid wars in the middle east and will likely just let Russia waste their time over there.
But don't take my word for it, look at what Ralph Nader [nader.org] has to say about Hillary, since I'm guessing she's your pick.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:47PM
I'm also tired of censorship, violating the constitution in the name of stopping terrorism, the drug war, terrorism fearmongering, cronyism, and preemptive warfare. All of which Trump supports.
So why the fuck would you love Trump? The only ones who could possibly like him are authoritarian conservatives. Libertarians and "lefties" will almost certainly hate him.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:50PM
Ah, and let's not forget about the government stealing private property to give to rich people for private use. Trump also loves that.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by EvilSS on Sunday February 28 2016, @04:53PM
How DARE HE call someone a dummy! How dare he! TRIGGERED!!!
Really though, has it come to this? Are people so thin-skinned that this bullshit is news? The world at large and the internet in particular is not a safe-space, and the rest of the world does not have an obligation to not offend you. Grow the fuck up. If some blow-hard is hurling insults at you like it's recess on the playground, don't stoop to their level and run off to tell teacher! Act like an adult and respond like one.
For the record I'm not a Trump supporter. I think if it comes down to Hillary vs Trump, I'm going to write in "None of the Above" on my ballot, build a bunker, and maybe poke my head out in 4 years to see if there is a country left.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @05:06PM
LOL - when I see or hear "trigger", I want to say, "Bend over bitch, and see if you can trigger THIS!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:32PM
see if you can trigger THIS!"
I always wondered what people meant when they said that some prick was "rapey".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 07 2016, @09:58AM
There's a great use of the word "rapey" in this movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1245492/ [imdb.com] (don't worry, SFW)
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Kilo110 on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:24PM
I don't think you appreciate the full impact of what he's able to do. He can singlehandedly drum up a lynch mob on demand. These kinds of attacks have real life consequences for people. I read this article a few months ago that followed the lives of a couple of people that had social media turn on them. It's an interesting read and shows that even internet posters an ruin lives if enough of them band together. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html?_r=0 [nytimes.com]
It's common to accuse leftward social justice types of using these types of tactics to shame people into falling into lockstep with their ideology. Would you so disregard that if this type of behavior was coming from that camp? That's exactly what's happening here, but it appears the right is just as capable of doing so. This type of behavior shouldn't be condoned or ignored by anyone coming from any direction.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @07:13PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html?_r=0
Going to SoylentNews. Hope I don't get negative karma! Just kidding. I'm Anonymous Coward!
(Score: 2) by BK on Monday February 29 2016, @12:56AM
Soooo what you're saying is that we should fear Trump because he effectively uses the same tactics as his political opponents? And because he's good at it? Shame on you. Shame on us.
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=14/04/03/1939248 [soylentnews.org]
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:33PM
People on twitter think the rest of us give a shit about it. For some reason.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:56PM
For someone mocking the new "trigger" fad it sure seems it is what just happened to you. Nowhere is the word trigger mentioned, or any reference to offensive speech. The closest I could find seemed quite reasonable:
Defamation is not a new concept, and what reaction did Jacobus have which you consider childish?
I would say Trump is the childish one here, he reacts to minor criticism with lies and school yard bully tactics. Public figures are always held to a higher standard, and baseless name calling has always been looked down upon.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Monday February 29 2016, @03:15AM
It's because they can't stump him on real issues. That's why they're constantly attacking how he says things almost as much as they attack what he says. This can't be an issues-based race for the GOP, because the other two guys are jokers who can't hold their own without their script and puppet masters.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:11PM
It sounds like the Swift Boat-ers are now the Swift Boat-ees. It's all fun and games when that kind of stuff is pointed at the Democrats, but the GOP is now finding it a bitter pill to swallow now. They can go over have a drink in the corner and commiserate with Dukakis and Kerry if it will make themselves feel better.
The only silver lining in this whole Trump thing is that the many many nihilistic whiners, many of whom prattle on around here, can't say shit anymore about how "the man" has everything stacked against them and their vote doesn't matter. Feeling smug now by being proud of NOT engaging in the political process ("I'm too cool to vote")?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Kilo110 on Sunday February 28 2016, @06:26PM
The right has been brewing this pot for decades now. I'm glad it finally boiled over onto them, it was inevitable.
It's a shame the country has to suffer. But I do believe it needs to get worse before it gets better. I just hope I see a better political era in my lifetime.
(Score: 5, Touché) by digitalaudiorock on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:06PM
This. Guys like Carl Rove apparently thought getting votes by any means necessary, from literally anyone, by telling them literally anything, is all that matters, and have spent decades inviting nut-jobs to the party...and now it's suddenly such a surprise that they're braking the china. They continue to worship people like Reagan in a day and age when he'd be a snowball in hell in the primaries.
I'd say the reality here is that real Republicans who want any semblance of what their party is supposed to stand for may be faced with a history making crossroads, much like the Democrats did when they lost the Dixie-crats over civil rights. The only other choice will be to accept the likes of Trump, and to try to believe it'll be better than a Democrat.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by BK on Monday February 29 2016, @01:44AM
If Trump wins the general election, we may well see the birth of a new party(s). Right now there are really three political groups:
We have the Globalists typified by Hillary and Jeb who believe in full on cynical borderless corporatism and who pay lip service to the middle class.
We have the Borderists led by Donald who think the way to help the middle class is to pee on the borders and control access to the USA economy.
We have the Socialists led by Bernie who think that the best way to help the middle class is to attack corporations and transfer their wealth directly to those not working.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Monday February 29 2016, @04:31AM
I'd describe it more along the lines of reversing existing policy that pro-actively redistributes wealth the the wealthy. We've just had that for so long that everyone thinks it's normal.
(Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Monday February 29 2016, @09:47AM
I have never heard Bernie Sanders once mention a single legal privilege that is exploited for wealth that he would eliminate. Patents? Government funded research? Regulations that prevent new companies from forming? Simplified tax code? Not a damn word.
All he says is "tax the rich more so that the poor will be richer". All he wants is more money for his political party to spend. He has demonstrated no concept of economy.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Sunday February 28 2016, @07:16PM
So twitter ragemobs have been destroying people now for years and mostly cheered on by the left. Trump aims his erratic floating hostility at a few damsels in distress and the White Knights are out in force.
But don't worry overmuch, as soon as he gets the Republican nomination sewn up Twitter will be nuking his account and the TV networks will be a lot less happy to provide unlimited free airtime.
Now to the general subject of Trump.
If you don't like Trump you should go talk to the Establishment wing of the Republican Party since they are basically the only faction still free to act.
This race has become Rock, Paper, Scissors. The twist is that in a three way Trump wins. However it is the two way pairings, after the next elimination,that are interesting and make my point.
Trump beats Rubio because too many of Cruz's voters have Trump as their second choice because they are anti-establishment or anti-amnesty. Meaning Cruz isn't an actor right now in the sense he can't influence events.
Rubio beats Cruz because that is how establishment vs outsider races always go. See 1976, 1996, 2000, 2008, 2012. But Trump is the frontrunner and ain't going to be the next to drop out. This is the only scenario where the establish wins outright and they refuse to see that it is closed to them.
Cruz beats Trump because Rubio voters are mostly good establishment Republicans who would obey orders to unify behind Cruz. But the Establishment would rather Trump, Clinton, Bloomberg, or even a brokered convention and chaos before submitting to their hated base.
In other words, by accepting they can't win outright and instead choosing to throw in with one of the other factions (now Cruz, although I guess they could also board the Trump Train) they would at least get a seat at the table instead of being cast into the wilderness. National Review did a whole "Against Trump" issue, all 'brand name' elders in the Party say stopping Trump is priority one; their actions provide zero evidence they believe a word of it. To quote Rush (the band), "If you choose not to decode, still you have made a choice."
The best way to visualize the situation is they are in their ivory tower looking out at the mob of pitchfork and torch wielding peasants chanting, "Trump! Trump! Trump" and sneering down at them saying "You wouldn't dare."
Let. It. Burn.
We can survive President Trump. He can't really be worse than the last eight years and the shattering of the Republican Party almost makes it worth it. If we also get a wall out of the deal it makes it a good bargain.
Trump 2016.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @07:47PM
> If we also get a wall out of the deal it makes it a good bargain.
I assume you meant the wall around Mexico, but I immediately thought of the memorial to the Vietnam War (aka the American War) [thewall-usa.com].
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Sunday February 28 2016, @09:29PM
The twitter ragemobs you talk about exist on the left and the right. The problem here is that a major public figure is engaging in defamation and promoting misinformation. Its one thing for "the internet" to do so, its another thing entirely for a presidential candidate to behave this way. It sets a dangerous mood for our country which will only encourage bullies to force their will on others .
I haven't liked the last eight years myself, however it could get a LOT worse. I think you've been blinded by Trump's BS, he will only increase the corporate corruption while promoting seriously dangerous policies which will only solidify the world's opinion that the US is an imperialistic bigoted country. Also, expect a "real" war. Trump is the Putin of the US.
For your edification, though I know you'll disagree, history has shown the pattern of humans bonding together in larger and larger groups. From tribes to city states to countries. Globalization is the next step, and instead of being the typical fearful conservative who wants to wind back to the idealistic past you should be working out how to make it come about in the best way possible. The US has a good track record for ideologies, but a weak record for implementation.
You think a wall will be a good thing, keeping "them" out and "us" safe. Such attempts never work in the long term and create more problems in the future. Your desire is actually anti-freedom, but I'm sure you justify that with the us vs. them mentality which makes you want to defend your country. It is actually more along the lines of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall [wikipedia.org]
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:14PM
The twitter ragemobs you talk about exist on the left and the right.
Ok, name a victim of a right wing ragemob. You made the assertion, lets see if you can back it up. Other than Trump of course, being in his own category.
I think you've been blinded by Trump's BS...
Not at all. I realize exactly what he is. I simply do not care. Let. It. Burn. I see Trump as the chosen form of the Destructor, a la Ghostbusters. Trump is our vengeance weapon. Which is why all of the usual arguments do not work on his supporters. We know. We don't care.
Also, expect a "real" war.
Obama and Clinton's idiocy has already brought the world to the precipice of WWIII. War is all but certain, whether the small fires flare into a world wide conflagration is the only serious question at this point. Don't see where Trump is any worse on that front vs. Clinton, Sanders or Rubio. The Republican Establishment vetoed my first choice of Cruz.
Globalization is the next step,
Except most of the world is fleeing in terror from your Sunny Uplands of History about now. Nationalism, breakups of large States, are the current trend.
Scotland trying to flee the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom set to vote on fleeing from the EU. Spain trying to break up. Greece wanting out of the EU. Iraq shattering, countries in Africa breaking in two. Most of Europe searching for a way to escape Mad Merkel's plan to remake Europe into the Caliphate. Breakup in the U.S. being about the only peaceful way to have Red and Blue America avoid another shooting war. The U.N. increasingly being seen as ineffectual at best, outright evil as the their more typical state. No my Progressive friend, it is your turn to be standing athwart History and yelling "STOP!" Didn't work for Bill Buckley.
You think a wall will be a good thing, keeping "them" out and "us" safe.
Milton Freidman was right when he said you can have a Welfare State or Open Borders, but not both. Ending the welfare state is much farther outside the Overton Window than actually implementing existing immigration law and building a wall already authorized by Congress. You are welcome to advance a counter argument that I'm wrong on that assessment. I won't hold my breath though.
Everything South of the U.S. border, with only a couple of possible exceptions, is Socialist. Look up the history of the Mexican Revolution. Why do you think Progressives want to hand them voter ID cards so badly? Texas goes blue and you can open your American History book to the last page and in big fancy calligraphy write "The End" on it. A new story starts that day, a very dark and dystopian one. Immigration is therefore the whole game, no compromise is therefore possible.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:41PM
Ok, name a victim of a right wing ragemob.
Obama.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by jmorris on Monday February 29 2016, @12:00AM
Forgot that one, we certainly No Platformed that loser. We even cost him his career. Poor bastard was forced to live in a sleeping bag under an overpass. Yup, we are so proud of that action, some of our very best work.
[/sarcasm]
Spin again AC.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @12:28AM
(Score: 1, Troll) by jmorris on Monday February 29 2016, @12:48AM
The first 'birther' came from the Clinton camp. I know she was a "Goldwater Girl" but are you really tainting her for life on that one?
Seriously, the birther thing was a red herring thrown to mislead the more gullible into missing the elephant in the room. Just from Mr. Obama's (ghostwritten) sorta autobiography we know his Father was never an American citizen and never entertained the notion. Meaning that on the day Obama Jr. was born he had Kenyan and by extension UK citizenship to go with American through his mother. Adopted by his Indonesian stepfather (again, just relying on Mr. Obama's own account) he acquired Indonesian citizenship. Upon exit from the White House next January he could walk to any of those nation's embassy and ask for papers; by the laws of all three of those nations, fully recognized by our own laws, he would be cheerfully served and welcomed home. The Natural Born Citizen clause was clearly intended to prevent those with divided loyalty from assuming our most important office. If a quad nationality citizen of the world like Obama qualifies the clause clearly has no discernible meaning. But everybody ignored the obvious and went off chasing phantom rabbits of a miracle Kenyan birth. No, all the evidence points to the Seattle area and that is the U.S. last I checked.
his religion
Where is the evidence that he is a Christian? We know he was raised Muslim for several years by his stepfather and he won't stop telling us about the Dreams from his Father, who was a Muslim into converting to Communism. Reverend Wright certainly isn't one, he is a Communist pretending to be a Protestant minister and part of an unholy Trinity including Phflager pretending to be a Catholic Priest and Farrakan pretending to be an Islamic cleric.
As for Obama's ties to terror, the LA Times to this day admits it is sitting on video of Obama attending a dinner to honor one.
In short, the case against Mr. Obama was and is strong and mostly incontrovertible. His voters are like Trump's though and do not care.
But forget all that, attacking a legitimate political figure is not a twitter ragemob action. Ragemobs are when some poor bastard nobody has ever heard of says or does something that is suddenly deemed the crimethink of the day and destroyed.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @01:03AM
we know his Father was never an American citizen and never entertained the notion.
Trump's mother was not an American citizen. There are serious questions about Trump's eligibility [redstate.com] to be President.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @02:14AM
But forget all that, attacking a legitimate political figure is not a twitter ragemob action.
Wait... I don't understand. A group of people spend years repeatedly making assertions of questionable truthiness about Barak Obama with the express intent of making him lose his job, how does that not fit your definition of a rage-mob? Did you just put the "some poor bastard noone has heard of" as a technicality to cover your butt?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @02:40AM
some poor bastard noone has heard of
I don't know what Peter Noone [wikipedia.org] has to do with any of this!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @02:44AM
;)
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Monday February 29 2016, @05:32AM
You want to let it burn yet protect it with a big wall. You make the common mistake of thinking that the most recent popular trends are the problem when its the deep corruption that is the problem. The UN never had power, and regardless so often power is used by the corrupt for their own aims instead of for the purpose that power was handed out for. The regions that are breaking up are doing so due to corruption, that doesn't mean the world isn't in need of a centralized power like the UN that can step in and stop human rights abuses. This includes corruption that inhibits the people from affecting the course of their own countries.
The "real" war I mentioned is one that will be official and not military actions. I'm not partisan, I have no love for any of the politicians of the last many decades, so your reaction misses the fact that Trump would be a lightning rod for war.
I'm not surprised you just want to defend the idea of walls. While they can be effective in their stated goals, there are often side effects that make them bad ideas. You'll get an increase in smuggling routes, black markets for visas and papers, increased social unrest due to divisive policies such as blocking an entire region from all citizens.
I think the wall is a bad idea, but I can see that it would make it much more difficult for any foreigner to just walk right over. Yes, walls can be effective. I disagree with it being a good idea because there are many ways around it (ocean, skies, and underground), it would be extremely expensive, and I believe there are better methods to solve the various problems that occur due to immigrants.
One of the major aspects of a "progressive" attitude that many people (including many progressives/liberals) do not understand is that we need to solve the underlying problems. Throwing people in jail doesn't solve the problem with crime, fixing the socioeconomic problems does solve crime issues since the community has better alternatives than risking jail/death. Building a giant wall is basically a larger scale version. Part of the problem with Mexico has come from the foreign policies of the US, with the war on drugs (lawl) being almost directly responsible for the creation of the cartels.
There is a time and place for using punishment as a method to solve a problem, however it seems to be the primary course of action for conservatives. Causing division between the plebs of the world is the primary method of maintaining control by the powers that be. Cause chaos, push agendas sold through fear, make money and gain power by playing both sides.
With statements like: "Mad Merkel's plan to remake Europe into the Caliphate" it is clear you are more of a believer than a thinker. It is difficult to tell when your own brain is thinking emotionally instead of logically. "Emotional thinking" conjures images of extreme emotional sates, yelling, crying, wailing, etc. However it happens all the time and we don't have any idea that we are using emotional logic, because by the time we notice our emotions we are usually flying over the cliff and logic is not even really possible anymore.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 3, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:25PM
The irony is that, based solely on some recent rhetoric from the right, you almost wouldn't know that's a bad thing. No fucking wonder they're ending up with arguably the scariest candidate in our history.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @12:17AM
This leads me to a question: has there ever been a time in history when building a big wall has actually succeeded in keeping "us" safe and "them" out, for whatever definition of "us" and "them" seemed appropriate at the time? I can't think of any. Can anyone point to one example where this has worked?
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday February 29 2016, @01:57AM
For a current example you could look to Israel and how their wall brought their problems down to manageable levels.or to Europe's frantic attempts to throw up walls to stop the invasion. If you want historical examples, the Chinese seem to think their Great Wall was worth the investment.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday February 29 2016, @12:35AM
It is you who will pay for that wall. Is it still a bargain?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday February 29 2016, @12:49AM
Even at a trillion dollars. Survival overrides any concern for the price.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday February 29 2016, @01:07AM
"Wow. Just wow." indeed.
You seem quite convinced that you aren't going to survive without that wall.
That's telling about the power of influence Trumps has.
Or... are there any rational reasons that you can share with us for that belief of yours?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @03:43AM
If we also get a wall out of the deal it makes it a good bargain.
Trump has no intention of building that wall. Why do you think he keeps insisting that Mexico will pay for it? So there will always be a reason to push back the start of construction; the financing still has to be worked out, but he's got good people looking at it.
It's a big joke and the joke is on YOU, the "uneducated" Trump supporters. He treats you exactly the same as the people who paid him $35,000 for a worthless real estate "education" - as an easy mark.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Empyrean on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:09PM
Do you Americans really want someone who constantly hurls childish insults as your President? If a candidate (liberal or conservative) did that in my country they would be at the bottom of the polls in no time.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @09:02PM
That's why your country sucks.
U-S-A! U-S-A!
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:55PM
You didn't make the last meeting. Now we chant "Trump! Trump! Trump!"
It was hilarious watching that video of the protesters trying to break up Milo Yiannopoulo's speech and the crowd, without any apparent prompting, spontaneously erupted in "Trump! Trump! Trump!" and drowned out and eventually drove away the protesters.
We live in interesting times.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Sunday February 28 2016, @09:52PM
A large minority do, most are horrified that Trump is so popular. Personally I think a lot of the support stems from the fact that Trump is legitimizing the latent prejudice of many people, often the older generations.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:00PM
Trump is showing how shallow many of us have become, interacting with social media all day and clicking on celebrity news.
Of course, the ancient Greeks and Romans went through these kinds of cycles too, and that's why they didn't last.
(Score: 2) by BK on Monday February 29 2016, @01:28AM
So you're disqualified then?
Americans have always had a warm place in their heart for plain-spoken politicians. And European aristocracy has always looked down on this.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @01:58PM
So you're disqualified then
Are you suggesting foreigners are not allowed to participate in this conversation because we still enjoy a modicum of civility in our public political discourse?
(Score: 2) by BK on Monday February 29 2016, @02:26PM
Hardly. But if name-calling should be a disqualifier, then you should look to yourself first.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @08:34PM
When the Nazis conquered France, it was widely perceived as a brilliant victory. It gave Hitler the credibility he needed to attempt an ill-advised invasion of Russia. What Donald J. Trump has achieved on Twitter is just like the conquest of France. What will be his Operation Barbarossa, and how many millions or billions will die in it?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @09:06PM
What will be his Operation Barbarossa, and how many millions or billions will die in it?
Well, if Twittering is equal to conquering France, as you claim, than the equal to Operation Barbarossa is going to be Trump 'like'-ing a Facebook post about how you shouldn't eat Oreos. Millions will die because of that 'like'.
War. War never changes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:04PM
Trump 'like'-ing a Facebook post about how you shouldn't eat Oreos. Millions will die because of that 'like'.
Oh now, now! Surely you engage in hyperbole! Trump is no Oprah!
(See? If Oprah invaded France, it would stay invaded. And Jean-Marie LePen would be, um, in the pen.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2016, @11:11PM
For Oprah to invade France, all she has to do is walk up to the border of Belgium and let her body mass do the rest.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Zz9zZ on Sunday February 28 2016, @09:57PM
Trump is the rightwing version of Obama, making wild promises that hit people's emotions, thus making them throw out logic because they HOPE FOR CHANGE! Instead of a shitty affordable care act that fails in its promises we'll get a shitty wall that won't solve our country's problem.
I would laugh so much if a wall gets built and then the H1B program greatly increases. Then I would die a little inside as another method of tracking and controlling people is put in place and the selling out continues without the slightest pause.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @03:28AM
So in other words, Donald Trump is behaving like Twitter's Trust and Safety Council.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @04:04AM
Well, he inherited tens of millions from his dad, who was a substantial New York City real estate developer, as Rubio pointed out. But Trump is worth billions today... how did he do so well?
It turns out that Trump had help [thefederalist.com] and connections - to the mob, in Philadelphia, New Jersey, and New York. Nice background for the next President of the United States, eh? Sure, the country will do just fine after that stuff comes out.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday February 29 2016, @04:16AM
Donald Trump is 50 years of the Southern Strategy made manifest; he is a walking representation of the GOP's collective karma for the past half-century. The system is working entirely as it should, by its own rules; the elite are finding out that if you make people stupid for two generations, they will vote for someone just as stupid as them who talks a good game.
Being honest with you, Trump is the least awful of the Republicans. He's a slimy, cynical, narcissistic greedhead, but one thing he is not is a Dominionist. I'm still voting Sanders, but I do hope Trump takes the GOP nomination...or better, runs Independent and breaks the GOP base over his knee with the sound of a thousand supernovae.
Anyone else think we should be funding an Independent run for Trump? :D
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @04:41AM
Being honest with you, Trump is the least awful of the Republicans
Kasich
(Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Monday February 29 2016, @11:37AM
Rand Paul.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @12:43PM
Rand Paul is an isolationist in foreign policy like his dad. Does not work for the USA, the world's superpower.
(Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Monday February 29 2016, @07:13PM
Isolationist refers to government forcing no association with foreign parties. Japan was isolation before they allowed the Dutch into Nagasaki, for example. The USA is isolationist wrt to it's Cuba and former Iranian trade policies.
Non interventionist means not going to war to interfere with the internal affairs of other countries. Let them work their own shit out, for better or worse for them.
Ron Paul is non-interventionist. The people accusing him of being isolationist are the actual isolationists with their siege-like trade policies, which is probably where they managed to hear that 5 syllable word, when it was correctly being applied to them. Too bad they didn't learn the meaning too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @05:39PM
Donald Trump has used Twitter to badger and humiliate those who have dared cross him during the presidential race, latching on to their vulnerabilities, mocking their physical characteristics, personality quirks and, sometimes, their professional setbacks. Trump has made statements that have later been exposed as false or deceptive — only after they have ricocheted across the Internet.
Most of Trump's comments pale in comparison to the hateful, very personal attacks Bernie supporters routinely launch against Hilary Clinton's supporters on social media, including terribly misogynistic epithets against both the candidate and anyone who dares stick their head up in support of her (even when said support includes no mention, much less attack on, Bernie Sanders). Indeed, compared to Bernie's Bigots' regular and sustained attacks on regular Joes (and Janes) who dare make a positive comment about Ms. Clinton, Donald Trump is something of an amateur when it comes to online personal attacks, misogyny, and intimidation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 29 2016, @06:57PM
"Bernie's Bigots?" What's wrong, your #Berniebros hashtag didn't turn into quite the snarl word you expected?