CNN Poll: Percentage of Republicans who think Biden's 2020 win was illegitimate ticks back up near 70%
CNN Poll: Percentage of Republicans who think Biden's 2020 win was illegitimate ticks back up near 70%
The share of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who believe that President Joe Biden’s 2020 election win was not legitimate has ticked back up, according to a new CNN poll fielded throughout July.
The share of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who believe that President Joe Biden’s 2020 election win was not legitimate has ticked back up, according to a new CNN poll fielded throughout July. All told, 69% of Republicans and Republican-leaners say Biden’s win was not legitimate, up from 63% earlier this year and through last fall, even as there is no evidence of election fraud that would have altered the outcome of the contest.
You're viewing a single thread.
As a conservative, this is mind boggling to me. In my head I think it's just a far right crazy conspiracy theory, but between this and the huge amount of support trump gets, I'm just baffled. I'm on the west coast, and none of my friends or family still support Trump or are election deniers.
Maybe the mid west republicans are just 100% trumpers? It's wild.
Maybe the mid west republicans are just 100% trumpers? It's wild.
MAGA is basically like a religion out here. They avoid any information that contradicts their belief system and gravitate towards media that reaffirms it. The constant drumbeat of whataboutism coming from trump, fox news, AM radio, etc really has poisoned their brains. Support of trump, embrace of his lies, and hatred of his "enemies", has become their entire identity.
Back when Trump was President, a friend of mine (who's a Trump supporter) was arguing with me about whether or not Trump said something.
I did what I always did and checked Google. I quickly found a video of Trump saying the thing and sent it to my friend. He replied that it was fake news.
My friend wasn't claiming that the video was actually faked or taken out of context. Instead, he was saying that it was fake news because it was hosted on CNN's servers. He didn't care what the content was, just whether it was on a right wing outlet's server or not.
You could have Trump come out and say it to him directly and he wouldn't believe it anyways. Your friend chooses to believe what they believe the way a fanatic believes in their delusions. It only serves to reaffirm their belief structure, and nothing else. If Trump pulled a 180 tomorrow, these people would simply claim that he has been brainwashed or that he's a paid imposter, or anything else.
They avoid any information that contradicts their belief system and gravitate towards media that reaffirms it.
Isn't that the same with twitter, reddit, CNN MSNBC? It's a more broad media problem. When was the last time most people watched or read any media that directly conflicted with their beliefs?
I watch and read fantasy all the time, but I require it to be entertaining.
This isn't so much a mystery, but more of a reaping of what was sown.
Right Wing media sources such as Breitbart and Fox News, have been nurturing many lines of thought, mostly in order to fire up the conservative base, versus providing useful information.
When you want your base to be an angry mob, and spend considerable resources to keep them angry, ill informed, but likely to vote, this is what you get.
This is a well trained response.
I mean, isn't that the media as a whole? The whole media is about outrage, it's not about reporting news.
I'm pretty conservative, so is my pa, and we used to watch CNN's news coverage back in the early 00's. Now, try watching CNN, MSNBC and FOX, it's all 'political commentary.' There's no news, there's outrage.
We've dimished knowledge into 140 characters with a screenshot attached. No context, no actual reporting or knowledge of the whole situation. Just some quick 1 liners to rile up their base. The republicans have chosen their demi-god because they've been losing, but I can't say that if the dems were losing that they wouldn't do the same thing.
The republicans have chosen their demi-god because they've been losing, **but I can't say that if the dems were losing that they wouldn't do the same thing. **
Why do you believe that?
"Both Sides are the Same" rhetoric is a tactic that accomplishes quite a bit. It stops loyal party members from independently evaluating the other platform. It's an excellent way to get people to not vote. It's a way to excuse unacceptable behavior within one's own party.
I am immediately suspicious of any Both sides are the same messaging. If it is believed, all sorts of critical thinking gets pushed off to the side.
The both sides message is particularly insidious because it takes a real criticism and then equates it with something that is potentially much worse. It does nothing but limit options, and breeds nihilistic cynicism and nothing more. The worst part about it is that it is based on an absolute lie: the idea of both sides being the same doesn't make any fucking sense, because in this world nothing is the same. If it was the same, it wouldn't need to have a distinction. It's an argument against progress, and therefore a wholly conservative viewpoint in that it states that rather than choosing the best of the two options to not bother at all. To stay the same, or even revert.
It's totally dystopian and reminds me of Russian propaganda, which is designed to erode faith in everything, so that the people in power can make the decisions while the people feel helpless.
Why do you believe that?
Because I don't believe those who vote republican are inherently more evil or stupid than those who vote democrat.
Because I saw the movement Obama made, and although he is much much much better than Trump, he was borderline Demi-god status to the left. Because throughout history, there are evil far left leaders that misled people and far right people that misled people.
Do you think the left in the U.S. are immune to tactics that have worked throughout human history in countries throughout south america, europe, asia and africa?
It stops loyal party members from independently evaluating the other platform. It’s an excellent way to get people to not vote. It’s a way to excuse unacceptable behavior within one’s own party.
Or it tells people that party loyalty is trash, that both parties are capable of good and evil and have good and bad candidates, regardless of the letter by their name.
Saying 'My political side is different, it is objectively better than the other' is the problem. The beneficiaries of the division are, as you probably know, the rich. Show me a democrat that doesn't take rich folks money to help their campaign.
I am immediately suspicious of any Both sides are the same messaging.
Do you think only the right is capable of electing and following bad political candidates?
If it is believed, all sorts of critical thinking gets pushed off to the side.
As I stated above, the 'my side is objectively better' rhetoric does that. Thinking that both sides are capable of good things and bad makes you think about and consider which policies each are pushing that's good and the ones that are bad. Staying dug into your side is what keeps you in an echo chamber.
I'm not American, so I have no emotional attachment to either of your parties. I just see what I see.
There is exactly one party in the US that gerrymanders. There is one party that pushes heavily on voter suppression of non white voters. There is exactly one party that shreds child labor laws. There is exactly one party that strives to strip basic human rights from marginalized groups. One party that seems to attract Nazis.
None of the above is being hyperbolic. All of it is synonymous with one party. This isn't a comprehensive list.
Now here's the crux of it: I haven't named the party. If you and I were talking about some other country, where neither of us had any personal stake, the description I laid out should evoke a sense of "how cartoonishly evil and undemocratic can they possibly be?".
Why would you ever feel obligated to defend or make excuses for the unconscionable? Are those your personal values, or is that the sort of stuff that you're supposed just go along with?
There is exactly one party in the US that gerrymanders.
You're showing how little you know about politics in the US then. Both do, and both constantly debate about which gerrymandered maps they should use.
There is one party that pushes heavily on voter suppression of non white voters.
The republican party pushed for personhood of black people for 200 years. Democrats fought against ending slavery.
There is exactly one party that shreds child labor laws.
My friend lived with his brother and single mother, he was 14 and needed to work to make sure the bills for himself, his mother and brother could be paid. This isn't the case of every single fight against child labor laws, but it's not as objective as you'd think. Are you going to tell my friend that it should be illegal for him to work to help his family out?
There is exactly one party that strives to strip basic human rights from marginalized groups.
What rights are you talking about?
One party that seems to attract Nazis.
And one side that attracts communists. Nazi's tend to be traditional authoritarians, of course they're gonna be on the right. Communism has killed 100x as many people as Nazism. You singling out one authoritarian group just shows your bias.
None of the above is being hyperbolic
I'll let you read my responses then you can see how these are exactly hyperbolic and your bias is so prevalent you believe that your values are objective.
The republican party pushed for personhood of black people for 200 years. Democrats fought against ending slavery.
What is the current Republican attitude towards minorities?
Abraham Lincoln (R), whupped the Confederacy so badly that it ceased to exist. That's a very good thing.
The United States of America whupped Nazi ass so badly that Hitler had to shoot himself in the head. That was a very good thing.
Why does the current Republican party love the Confederacy, and feel very comfortable with a Nazi infestation?
What is the current Republican attitude towards minorities?
That we shouldn't care about race that much, we should be color blind and not prefer any race to another, but rather the content of their character. The current democratic attitude towards minorities is that there's a hierarchy of good and bad races. Unfortunately, I'm part of the bad minorities so I get penalties in basic things, like job interviews, and college applications.
Why does the current Republican party love the Confederacy, and feel very comfortable with a Nazi infestation?
To some, confederacy now is more about a state having the right to enact policies as it sees fit, as opposed to having a huge bloated federal government. I'm pretty much as north as you can get, I'm not waving a confederate flag, but if someone asks if states should have rights to enact policies their voters want, I'm gonna say yes.
I can't speak for all republicans, nor most, but every single individual I know that has voted for a republican does not like Nazi's. We aren't comfortable sharing any sort of label with racists. Do you have any satistics on how republicans 'feel comfortable' with Nazi's?
I think that you're in a bind, because you know what you stand for, and your party is currently infested with MAGA style personalities, who are under the influence of the Russians. I don't think that you like that very much, as you've pointed out your disdain for Trump.
I don't have any particular fondness for Joseph McCarthy, but if he was alive today, he'd go absolutely apeshit over how badly compromised the GOP has become. He would make heads roll, and probably remove a lot of prominent figures that you're probably embarrassed to have representing your party.
We aren't comfortable sharing any sort of label with racists. Do you have any satistics on how republicans 'feel comfortable' with Nazi's?
"The Jews will not replace us! The Jews will not replace us!" I bet you a cup of coffee that at least one of the tiki torch has a predelection for nazism. You know what the republican president's comments were.
I did a Google search of "Jan 6 nazi", which was enlightening. I'd suggest taking a look, and then reflecting on Republican rhetoric about that day.
Stephen Miller had an appointed position.
You described what you thought of the Republican party, I responded to every single one of your accusations, and after that you haven't been able to back up your list of the evils republicans commit.
If you'd like to respectfully continue the discussion, I don't see why you wouldn't try to back up what you stated.
I was appreciative of the earnest discourse until the southern strategy was ignored and you showed your own bias.
Also, even though it does happen on both sides, gerrymandering by the right is more prolific and undermines the balance of power.
The Senate already has disproportionate representation against the will of the populace because of rural states like the Dakotas, etc. (and, furthermore, it controls judiciary appointments).
Then gerrymandering creates an unearned advantage in the house, and thus the electoral College, which puts all three branches in favor of conservatives.
This is what people mean when they criticize the "both sides" argument. Yes, both side are capable of the same evil, but our system does not reflect that potential equally.
I was appreciative of the earnest discourse until the southern strategy was ignored and you showed your own bias.
Ahhh yes, please tell me more about how everything in history democrats have done were actually just republicans, because the parties switched or something.
Also, even though it does happen on both sides
So you lied your last comment?
The Senate already has disproportionate representation against the will of the populace because of rural states like the Dakotas, etc
Was it you that mentioned you aren't american? That makes sense why you would misunderstand it, the purpose of the senate is to have equal representation across ALL states. That was the agreement to create the union between the states. Senate is a fixed 2 seats, congress is based on population. Your misunderstanding of the three branches of government only shows your ignorance, it doesn't show a fault of the system
Then gerrymandering creates an unearned advantage in the house, and thus the electoral College, which puts all three branches in favor of conservatives.
How? It's a level playing field, just because you don't understand senate vs the house doesn't mean it's unfair. You should read up about the system of government.
Yes, both side are capable of the same evil, but our system does not reflect that potential equally.
Meaning that you just dislike one side and you think that they're evil? I'm sorry half the country thinks differently than you, but once again, that's not an inherent flaw of the system, it's actually a sign of a working system. That almost every election, we have close voting in congress and the presidency. It would be concerning if every election republicans got the trinity in the government or liberals did.
Can't tell if you're intentionally misunderstanding history or just never understood it.
I only made one comment, but it makes sense that you can't follow along with a timeline.
I know the purpose of the Senate. But It's purpose doesn't change the fact that there are representatives there whose constituency consists of more cows than people, by design. And they vote on the judiciary for the whole country including the Supreme Court.
Gerrymandering is a problem because it removes a level playing field. When combined with the other issues we've been discussing, and the modern times we live in, it becomes a much bigger problem.
I'm sorry you're so ignorant about your own government, obviously it's working perfectly for you.
It's less than half the country that "thinks differently", that's the point.
I know the purpose of the Senate.
You clearly don't.
But It’s purpose doesn’t change the fact that there are representatives there whose constituency consists of more cows than people, by design.
Yeah, almost like every single state gets....2 senators...ya know, what all the states agreed to when the country was formed.
And they vote on the judiciary for the whole country including the Supreme Court.
Yeah, almost like the agreement the states made to create the country was designed like this. If you want to change the rules, theres constitutional amendments.
Gerrymandering is a problem because it removes a level playing field.
Agreed, you haven't offered a solution.
I’m sorry you’re so ignorant about your own government, obviously it’s working perfectly for you.
It's funny that I explained everything very plainly to you, and you tell me I'm wrong, but can't tell me 1 thing in my comment that was wrong
It’s less than half the country that “thinks differently”, that’s the point.
And our country was designed to protect the minority from tyranny of the majority, that's the point.
Both parties are capable of the same things by definition, but there's no universal law that keeps them both the same amount of good or bad. If one party continues to push policies that are bad (for whatever criteria of "bad" you're using), it stacks up and affects their overall average position on things. This process is reversible but it won't stop itself by default.
Both parties are capable of the same things by definition
Exactly. I'm, in general, against blanket statements saying that one group of people is inherently worth less, is more stupid or malleable that another group of people. Germany fell into fascism, does that mean the German people are inherently worse people and that's why they followed the evil leader they did? No. The fact that England fought against these fascists, does that mean England is inherently better, good and would never follow an evil leader? No, they committed absurd atrocities throughout their imperialist rule.
If one party continues to push policies that are bad (for whatever criteria of “bad” you’re using), it stacks up
Unfortunately, what's been considered 'bad' is simply things we disagree with. I disagree with most liberal policies, it doesn't make the other side 'bad'
idk though like... voter disenfranchisement, election denial, pretty much everything Trump's done... opposing education, financial irresponsibility, disregard for the environment... some of these are debatable but do you actually like these things? It's only be worth it if you think their social policies regarding LGBT/race/gender/etc. outweigh all of that. I obviously disagree with that, and I think putting those opinioms above the health of the nation even if you do agree with them is irresponsible and dengerous. Don't take my word for it though-- don't listen to what people say, look at what they do. Just go find the most recent legislation passed or behavior observed for both parties and tell me they're the same. I wish they were, it's not healthy to only have one party choice because you feel like the other one is insane, but somehow that's where we are right now.
We've prevented criminals from voting for hundreds of years, how is that conservatives fault?
election denial
For the 4 years the left denied Trump won the election, then in 2020 when biden won, they claim that it was rock solid and there couldn't possibly be fraud?
pretty much everything Trump’s done
Trump was the first president in some 30+ years not to start a foreign military conflict. Are you pro-foreign military conflicts?
opposing education
Where did he oppose education?
financial irresponsibility
Our country is $30T in debt. Trump spent a lot, but if you want trash every president that has spent a lot, you have a long list.
disregard for the environment
What are you refering to?
some of these are debatable but do you actually like these things?
As you can see, just stating something doesn't make it true. Once again, Trump, just like every president, did some good things, and did some bad. Just like Obama, Just like Bush, just like Biden. You continuing to act like it's binary between being good and bad, and that republicans are all bad and democrats are all good is absurd.
I typed up a whole reaponse to this but Lemmy was down so it ate it. I'll summarize by saying: voter deregistration and closing voting centers, the left only mentioned the popular vote being lost which is not an accusation of election denial, obviously I don't like foreign conflict don't strawman me, he hired Betsy DeVos, yes we should do that, leaving the Paris Climate Accords and loosening railroad regulations which may have contributed to the train crashes recently (including the Ohio disaster).
I have stated multiple times that I don't think all dems are good or all repubs are bad, don't misrepresent me please. I evaluate all political actions based on my own independent criteria including self-consistency, likely consequences, benefits to Americans and the people that I care about, and overall effects on economics, education, culture, the world, freedom of options, etc. Republicans have consistently failed these criteria.
My tipping point was Covid. It would have been acceptable to say that the lockdowns weren't worth it. It was not acceptable to deny the reality of Covid's existence and the lives it ruined or ended. I can respect people who disagree with me. I cannot respect people who are elected to help us but have no desire to do that and in fact actively make our lives worse for their own personal benefit.
In light of seeing your fellow conservatives move farther right (and thus, kinda push the definition of the body of conservative beliefs farther right), on what grounds do you still identify as conservative? What does being a conservative mean to you?
(and thus, kinda push the definition of the body of conservative beliefs farther right)
I don't really agree with this. The republican party shifting doesn't mean the ideals of conservative ideology changes.
On the other side of the coin, just because democrats are starting to become more socialist, does that mean that liberal ideologies are changing?
I'm still a conservative because I believe in tradition, I believe in small government and a country that abides by the constitution is the best way to govern. I believe in the free market and put more emphasis on a states individuality rather than having a large federal government.
The "other side of the coin" in this instance is a fiction. The Democratic Party is in no meaningful sense of the word becoming "socialist".
The Democratic Party is in no meaningful sense of the word becoming “socialist”.
They have self proclaimed socialists in office, and I have a self proclaimed communist on my city council.
You're saying that socialists in this country are fiction because they don't know about it? I'm confused your stance.
They're saying that, as a party, it's absurd to think the democratic party is becoming more socialist. For decades now, it has been a big tent party of not-crazy and stupid assholes. If anything, it moved startlingly rightwards for years as it absorbed more and more not-crazy and stupid assholes from the other side. Every now and then, there is a punctuated moment where single elements of single policies might represent a brief skip leftwards and here and there you have examples of individual members claiming to be socialist, communist, fucking whatever. But it's foolish to think that's representative of the party as a whole.
I'll need any source you can provide to back what you're saying up. Here is a list of socialists in office, and as you can see, there are more now than any point in history in the U.S.
As a non-american, the idea that the Democrats are becoming more socialist is hilarious. At best, they're getting closer to the centre (from the right). Lemme know when they start proposing an end to health profiteering and stronger union protections :P
This is not a hostile comment, hats off to you for being able to talk openly about your ideas and hear differening opinions 🎩
Democracies around the world really need more of that.
And socialist countries are far right to communist countries, that's why we don't compare our political parties internationally.
There are more socialists currently representing people from the democratic party than ever before, and the party is moving more socialist, those are facts. Are you arguing against that?
I think many are simply arguing against your unconventional use of the term "socialist" to describe politicians who are definitely not socialist.
Well it seems that they have a problem with the democratic party incorrectly using the term socialist. They have been for awhile, they call scandinavian countries socialist when they're not at all. If some democrats claim they're socialists, and run on a socialist platform, I'll call them socialist.
I suspect conservative people like yourself no longer identifying as Republican may be a factor.
I have a couple former republican friends who are still very conservative, but aren't trumpers and voted libertarian or independent last election.
They do still have a bit of distrust around Jan 6th and criminal allegations because, well, they avoid looking into them deeper, so don't know who to trust. But they're not foaming at the mouth.
They love him in the southeast. I'm in VA which is purple and not even in a rural area, and he has tons of support here.
I was behind a truck the other day with a decal covering the back window stating the following:
"Me and my homies would have been stacking bodies by now. -- George Washington"
They're fucking crazy and they're everywhere around here. It makes my blood boil.
Even just north of y'all in Western MD where I recently vacated from, there are plenty of nutters. MD is seen as a pretty blue state but that's mostly just Baltimore and Montgomery County balancing out the crazy in the rest of the state. The more rural parts of the state are still full to the brim of your typical Trump wackos.
It's not just a mid-west thing. I'm in the PNW and I've yet to meet a Never Trumper republican.
Yup,
Strangest thing to me is that I know quite a few Asians that immigrated here that are super Trumpers. I just can't even grasp how.
Also, interestingly enough, I also happen to work in a very right leaning field, and the majority of the republicans here have been very quiet since the Jan 6 incident. There was only one who was pretty outspoken about it, and he quit recently.
Just based on Queens, NY, I think the republicans in NYC capitalized on some of the things Democrats “beat around the bush” or avoided talking about. The Asian American population in NY is very anti-crime, and the dems perceived inaction on Anti-Asian Hate created an opening some I think local republicans capitalized on. Even the current mayor is a former cop.
Now, how they got to be die-hard Trumpers is not something I understand. He did, after all, cause Asian Americans a-lot of grief with his whole “China Virus” BS during the pandemic..
Just based on Queens, NY, I think the republicans in NYC capitalized on some of the things Democrats “beat around the bush” or avoided talking about. The Asian American population in NY is very anti-crime, and the dems perceived inaction on Anti-Asian Hate created an opening some I think local republicans capitalized on. Even the current mayor is a former cop.
Agreed 100%, it seems like empty virtue signalling that the left will back off on if it's not the 'right' minority to defend.
Now, how they got to be die-hard Trumpers is not something I understand. He did, after all, cause Asian Americans a-lot of grief with his whole “China Virus” BS during the pandemic…
I can only speak for my asian community. But him calling it the 'china virus' was not a big deal to us. Him calling it the 'Kung Flu' will never fail to make me laugh.
Might be the same reason why Mexicans vote for Republicans as well. As a Mexican I've observed that there's plenty of racism and misogyny still going about, especially among the religious and ignorant crowd.
They cross the rope bridge going over the Rio Grande and then cut the rope once they're across. The amount of hate I've seen Mexican immigrants direct at Mexicans trying to immigrate is mind blowing. So it's no wonder that they flock to the republican party.
Latinos subscribe heavily to the machismo personality = good, and that any threat against it is a threat to their existence. They are raised religious with heavy incentive on strong family structures, something that conservatives use as a weapon to curry favor.
Yep, I remember seeing my ex brother in law seem upset for half a second at his baby gender reveil party when they popped a balloon and it was pink. The wife noticed and quickly unscrolled her blue parchment saying it was a lie and it was actually a boy. He wasn't a bad dude but there was definitely machismo there.
Asians tend to be extremely conservative, particularly Chinese immigrants. They grew up in an authoritarian world, and view the progressive policies of the West as antithetical to their own. They don't care if Trump is a racist, or blames them for the Kung Flu, because he represents their views on what a government should be.
Strangest thing to me is that I know quite a few Asians that immigrated here that are super Trumpers. I just can’t even grasp how.
I'm first generation so maybe I can lend another viewpoint here. Obviously there is the fact that they tend to come from more conservative, religious countries, but there's a lot more.
Asian immigrants tend to have a culture of being studious and working hard. This has led to a lot of success, and even surpassing the white folk in a lot of thriving metrics. We're told this is because white folk gave us special privileges to keep other minorities in check. The left has fought against protections for asian immigrants rather than treating them as they would other minorities. Affirmative action hurts asians, because asians tend to care more about grades. A lot of us feel we're being punished because of this.
Remember when the #stopasianhate stuff was going on? That was short lived, because it started to come out that the hate crimes were disproportionately committed by black perpetrators.
We're a minority when it's convenient to the left, and thrown away when it's inconvenient.
Asians also are more strict on immigration, actually almost every legal immigrant population tends to be harsh on illegal immigration.
Asian immigrants tend to be more socially conservative, and align with the right on that, and the right isn't actively working against the asian community.
That's a really fair point.
My wife is Asian and I definitely understand the conservative side of many Asian cultures, also the immigration policies as I lived in Asia for almost a decade.
Sometimes it can be hard to see the different viewpoints when you aren't directly affected. For one reason obviouly, not being Asian myself (mixed but I'm basically white), and two, even having many Asian friends but never actually really discussing politics with them.
I really appreciate the time you took to give some external viewpoints to things.
Yep, they're still flying Trump flags and hanging Trump signs in the areas of Oregon outside the larger cities.
Is that the only metric?
I voted for him in '16, same with my pa. Does someone have to be a 'never trumper' to be reasonable? I'm in the PNW too, I've seen a handful of Trump Trucks, but despite being from a more rural area (you know there are a lot of conservative pockets in the PNW), there isn't this widespread support of Trump, from what I've seen.
You must not get out much. Spend any amount of time in WA-3 and you'll see car dealerships running still running "TRUMP 2020, FUCK INSLEE" on their signs, tons of FJB flags flying from pickups, and knock-off Trump apparel in stores.
You must not get out much.
I'm pretty confident I'm very well traveled around the state, much more than the average Washingtonian.
Spend any amount of time in WA-3
Oooooh so you mean I must not be well traveled in this specific district you're talking about? Yeah, not that much, but the times I have traveled down that way to portland, the coast or other areas out there is what I was talking about seeing some Trump Trucks.
I do love that sign though, driving down I5 about inslee, that cracks me up every time.
I'm glad you're easily entertained. That's not the specific sign I was referring to, though, but thank you for adding additional examples, thus strengthening my point.
but thank you for adding additional examples, thus strengthening my point.
I don't get why you're acting like this is a fight you need to win. I said I'm from rural WA and don't see many Trump Trucks. That's a fact. You then told me that means I don't get out much? Which is an absurd conclusion based on one sentence of communication.
I didn't say there weren't any trump supporters, look back at my first comment. What I said is it's baffling to me because that trumper culture isn't prevelant out here, you're here saying 'well if you go to this specific district, in this area, there's this sign at this dealership' doesn't mean there's a big trump culture in washington.
Sorry for only providing three quick examples instead of listing off everything I see across the PNW daily. Should I keep notes and send you weekly updates so as to prove my point?
If there's a big trump culture, where are the rallies out here? Where are the protests? Trumpers are known for protesting liberal areas they don't like, where are the protests in bellingham regarding drag events at schools?
You've listed one area where you see some Trump trucks and signs. That doesn't prove that there's a big trump culture out here.There's 33% of Washington adults that call themselves republicans, where is the Trump culture that you're talking about? A couple signs? come on man. Prove your point or move on, don't get pedantic saying 'hey, go to this city in this road and on fridays there's a trump truck by a trump sign. If you wait for the new moon, you might see two trump trucks!'
https://www.theolympian.com/news/politics-government/article248312660.html
https://apnews.com/23287636c7df581ae2960667f2eccace
That was pretty easy. And these few I found are over the course of time, not just some little one-time event.
Homie, like 3 of those were from 2018, a couple from 2020.
The most recent article, which is from an reasonable 2022, is in Oregon, your AP source is Oregon, too. Another you linked is in Boise.
You're trying really hard to prove your point, but all you've done is dig up 5 year old articles of a couple hundred Trump supporters in different states.
I am pretty liberal, but I have a-lot of family members who are republican and live in the midwest and they feel like they’re in the same boat as you.
I do have to wonder where he gets all his support.
He gets his support from the belts. Bible Belt and Rust Belt.
The Bible Belt I can believe, though I am not sure about the Rust Belt. It may have been true in 2016, but I think the 2020 election paints a different picture.
When I think of the Rust Belt, I think of places like Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and St. Louis. Of those cities, it seems only Missouri is hardcore republican (despite St. Louis’s and Kansas City’s best efforts). Michigan seems to have swung pretty left (though there are definitely still red areas), Pennsylvania voted blue and Wisconsin is on the verge of undoing a-lot of republican gerrymandering. Ohio looks like a red-leaning mixed bag, but it doesn’t strike me as a republican bastion.
Granted, most of these are major battleground states with both parties in almost equal numbers, but their conservative populations don’t seem to be anymore Trump-oriented than other states.
I live in NY as does my father. He was a die hard Trump supporter until a few months ago when he switched to DeSantis - though he might have switched back to Trump. I try not to talk politics with him.
As recently as last year, he was telling me that the Republicans were going to impeach and remove Biden and Kamala and install Trump as President again. I pointed out that the House could definitely impeach, but removal would take two thirds of the Senate - a number the Republicans couldn't possibly reach. (This was before the midterms.) My father responded that the Democrats would vote along with the Republicans.
Yes, my father honestly believed that the Democrats would decide to ditch a Democratic President and Vice President so that Trump could come back to power. He was willing to make a bet that this would happen. I didn't take the bet only because I knew he'd either deny ever making the bet or would try to gaslight me what the bet actually was about.
It's baffling to me, every poll I see like this I'm just confused and sad
Yeah, it is very disheartening to see. I still remember going back and watching previous debates before Trump, and they were all so civil! Even in the most heated moments, the candidates were actually discussing ideas and policy!
I cannot wait for Trump to fade away from the political scene. It’s just so sad to see how he turns everything into a debate about him.
Yeah, it is very disheartening to see. I still remember going back and watching previous debates before Trump, and they were all so civil! Even in the most heated moments, the candidates were actually discussing ideas and policy!
Honestly, I think that was a huge problem and why the right got pushed so far out there.
McCain and Romney were incredibly civil reasonable candidates. But they got attacked constantly, magazine covers of McCain having sharpened teeth calling him a war monger, Biden yelled at everyone that Romney wanted to put black people back in chains.
The republicans saw this and were like 'wtf, no they're reasonable, why are they getting attacked?' then Trump comes along and he gets (rightfully) attacked, and the republicans were numb to it. For 15 years, as long as I can remember, every republican candidate was trashed by the media, and called racist, sexist everything-ist, that once someone who actually fit that bill came along, the republicans were numb to it.
Don't be fooled, the 2004, 2008 and 2012 elections weren't civil, despite most candidates being reasonable.
I actually agree with your assessment, though I was specifically referring to the debates, not the elections cycles themselves.
The democrats (and the left in general) had a propensity for hyperbole that labeled McCain and Romney as dire threats to democracy. At the time, I think thought of this as a viable tactic to win the election (in a way not too dissimilar from LBJ’s “Daisy” campaign ad against Goldwater). However, it essentially turned them into the “Boy Who Cried Wolf” when Trump came around, because huge swaths simply refused to believe them.
So, I do actually agree that democrats helped to create Trump, or at least helped to create an environment that allowed him to rise. How we stop Trump now though is beyond me.
Maybe now. The Republicans in my family left the party after 2016. Granted, they're still on my shit list for voting against LGBT stuff but at least they've recognized the error of their ways.
What anti-lgbt stuff did they vote against?
They voted for the Party that hates gay people. That's enough for me.
Hahah, see how quickly you back down from your comment?
'well, I lied before, but they might as well have!! Therefore, SHITLIST!'
Go ahead, tell me who they voted for that they're on your shit list because they vote differently than you do.
I didn't back down. They voted for Trump in 2016. The GOP platform is explicitly anti gay. Had my step dad voted for Trump in 2020 he wouldn't be invited to my gay wedding because Republicans want to overturn Obergafell.
I don't care who you vote for as long as they support gay rights.
I didn't lie. You just can't read.
I'm a single issue voter and that issue is queer rights.
You did. You literally said your parents are on your shit list because they voted against lgbt policies. Then I asked about those policies, and you said that they actually didn't do that....?
They voted for Trump in 2016
Trump was the first pro-gay marriage president that had ever been elected.
Had my step dad voted for Trump in 2020 he wouldn’t be invited to my gay wedding because Republicans want to overturn Obergafell.
Do you agree with every single policy every single democrat has ever discussed?
I don’t care who you vote for as long as they support gay rights.
"I don't care who you vote for as long as it's someone who agrees with me"
I didn’t lie. You just can’t read.
My bad, you didn't say "they’re still on my shit list for voting against LGBT stuff"?
I’m a single issue voter and that issue is queer rights.
And anyone that doesn't think exactly like you and vote exactly like you is on your shit list?
Lol, it's cute you think queer rights is just a simple disagreement.
I'm sure you agree with every single conservative plank when you vote.
Not sure what your "gotcha" is here. I had family who voted for him. They opened their eyes to the bs.
If someone votes for politicians with anti-queer policies then they need to deal with the consequences just like the rest of us do.
I don't have to associate with anyone and there isn't a rational argument against queer human rights.
Let's say you were my sibling and you plan on voting for Trump (or whoever the GOP nom will be). If you did then you wouldn't get an invite to my wedding. It's that simple. You had shown you don't support gay rights. Once you, as my sibling, abandon family for politics then you cut out.
Lol, it’s cute you think queer rights is just a simple disagreement.
What rights specifically are you talking about?
I’m sure you agree with every single conservative plank when you vote.
Nope, actually, I disagree on a lot of conservative views.
Not sure what your “gotcha” is here. I had family who voted for him.
You said they voted against lgbt policies and that's why they're on your shit list, but there's not one lgbt policy you can name they voted against
If someone votes for politicians with anti-queer policies then they need to deal with the consequences just like the rest of us do.
So you're for repercussions against people that don't vote in line with you?
I don’t have to associate with anyone and there isn’t a rational argument against queer human rights.
Of course, you have freedom of association listed out in our constitutional rights. What human rights do I, an asian male, have that queers don't? My girlfriend is queer, so I really want to know what human rights she does not have so I can fight for her.
(or whoever the GOP nom will be)
Oh, so an individual candidate's views doesn't matter, purely the party? Do you know anyone who voted for Obama in 08? They were voting for a man that was against gay marriage, you better cut them off. As I mentioned before, and you ignored, Trump is the first president to come into office being pro-gay marriage.
Cool. So your gf is queer. She can inform you.
Lastly, Trump isn't pro-gay marriage. He's just pro whatever gets him attention. Surrounding himself with a bunch of homophobes and transphobes doesn't make him pro-gay.
2016 GOP platform calls for a ban on same sex marriage. That's anti-gay. Voting for any Republican is anti-gay. Not sure how you can't understand that. Maybe, again, ask your "queer" gf.
Cool. So your gf is queer. She can inform you.
I'm just asking you to back up your comments, it seems like you are incapable of it.
Lastly, Trump isn’t pro-gay marriage
He ran on a platform that included being pro-gay marriage. If you want to stick to your single issue voting record, you should've voted for trump back in 2016. See how quickly your 'logic' falls apart, when you actually learn about positions of candidates? Once again, if you know anyone that voted for obama in 08, you should cut them out of your life.
That’s anti-gay.
Sure, I don't support their platform. I can support candidates, though.
Voting for any Republican is anti-gay.
Nope, plenty of republicans are pro-gay. I just showed you, Obama was anti-gay marriage, and Trump was pro gay marriage.
Not sure how you can’t understand that.
I keep showing you how you're wrong, but you keep pearl clutching. You don't want to have an informed vote, you want to yell at one side, which is fine, but stop trying to act like you're so holy when you can't even tell me what rights you're trying to preserve.
You refuse to answer the most basic question of your stance: What right do I, an asian man, have that my queer girlfriend (or if you don't want to compare me to her, you can use yourself as you've identified as queer) has.
As you requested, I have asked my queer GF, and she says we have the same rights. So I'm curious about the gap of understanding between you and her. Please clarify, because as a result of your wishy washy statements, your changing views and your persistence of saying that you don't have the same rights (or the rights are under threat), despite providing no back up to that statement, is extremely confusing.
Coming from the southeast, definitely still a lot of Trump banners and bumper stickers, though less so now. I expect them to be more common as the election gets closer.
Hard to call it far right anymore. Conspiracy theorists and hate are more or less the norm in conservative circles, so far as I can tell.
Conspiracy theorists and hate are more or less the norm in conservative circles, so far as I can tell.
I don't think they're conservative. I think republicans have given up on being conservative, and just now fight culture war and spend as much if not more than the dems.
I've been trying to be diligent about not conflating republicans and conservatives anymore, they haven't been conservative in awhile. Republicans have been overwhelmingly blindly following Trump, conservatives haven't.
Stop calling them conservatives. This level of ultranationalism has fascist written all over it.
Most midwest Republicans are actually populists, and populism is step one on the track to fascism. They have been used and abused by large corporations killing off local economies and greater macroeconomic forces which have determined that their labor is no longer worth a living wage. It's quite sad actually, but at this point the damage has been done. There's nothing left for reasonable people to do but get out.
the conservative party is gone. What's left is a theocratic loony bid. Anyone voting for that shit is completely out of the loop or doesn't care about the negative long term consequences to their continued science and data denial and constant conspiracy theory horseshit.
Agreed, my only hope is that Trump will absolutely fall so hard that there is no way people can support him still (at this point, it may take his death, but even then, what conspiracies would come from that?), and the 'right' sees a series of defeats that they are forced to re-brand, become more liberal on social issues and actually try to be the conservative party of fiscal responsibility.
the conservative party of fiscal responsibility.
The republican party has never been about fiscal responsibility. Every time the economy crashes, it's the result of republican fiscal policies of spend like crazy but lower taxes so we can't afford to pay for it. The only thing republicans are "conservative" about is social issues like should LGBTQ people be allowed to live.
Every time the economy crashes, it’s the result of republican fiscal policies of spend like crazy
Our last recession, the great recession, was mainly caused by clintons repeals of housing regulations.
Clinton repealed necessary regulations of the glass steagall act
Clinton force subprime loans in the name of equity
Sounds like you just have a bias and don't actually know anything about economics.