Republicans

[Seabass]

[pErvinalia]

Poor cunt. His whole family think he's shit.

[Hermit]

Burrrrrrrrrnnnnnn!

[Joe]

I just watched a couple of interviews with this guy. He's an excitable boy.

[Tero]

Republicans finally coming to grips that Kavanaugh and Nov election are going to be a huge #metoo vote of no confidence on Trump. Hillary could not be a metoo candidate due to Bill and his penis.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/republica ... itter_page

[Brian Peacock]

Why do you keep having to raise Bill's penis?

[Svartalf]

because his sticking it wherever he could, and her improper reaction to that made her unworthy in the eyes of many... bad values, lost her a lot of conservative votes that thought better frump than that

[Tero]

No raising! Penises at rest now!
Get with the program! Old white men out! #metoo is the theme for Trump (mushroom penis! Now resting) no confidence election.
Pence will take over. Nobody has seen his penis since high school gym class. Not even his wife.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Not a surprise. I think that the author of the article overstates the case, but the phenomenon described by Smith and Hanley in their paper is difficult to deny, given the data they used which lead them to draw particular conclusions. A summary of the data can be found here.

'Donald Trump, Brett Kavanaugh and “hostile sexism”: A concept that shapes our moment'

Despite all of the disproved narratives about the "white working class," it has been repeatedly and conclusively shown that Donald Trump in fact won the White House because of racism and nativism. But sexism was a key element in Trump's victory as well. These values, beliefs, and behaviors interact with one another. New research by University of Kansas sociologists David Smith and Eric Hanley demonstrates how a socially combustible mix of racism and sexism, in combination with anger and bullying, put the United States on a path to authoritarianism.

Writing in "The Anger Games: Who Voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 Election, and Why?", which appeared in a recent issue of the journal Critical Sociology, Smith and Hanley summarize their new research:

We find that Trump’s supporters voted for him mainly because they share his prejudices, not because they’re financially stressed. It’s true, as exit polls showed, that voters without four-year college degrees were likelier than average to support Trump. But millions of these voters — who are often stereotyped as “the white working class” — opposed Trump because they oppose his prejudices. These prejudices, meanwhile, have a definite structure, which we argue should be called authoritarian: negatively, they target minorities and women; and positively, they favor domineering and intolerant leaders who are uninhibited about their biases.

...

The bottom line is that bullying rhetoric won tens of millions of white votes in 2016. That, not financial worry, is the reality we face. We can’t explain away the fact that, after nearly two years of insults and abuses – children in cages, excuses for white supremacists, the Muslim travel ban and so much more – nearly 90 percent of Republicans support Donald Trump.

[laklak]

Nobody has seen his penis since high school gym class. Not even his wife.

Altar boy? He is Catholic.

[Tero]

Pence insisted the priest do it in the dark.

[Seabass]

Not a surprise. I think that the author of the article overstates the case, but the phenomenon described by Smith and Hanley in their paper is difficult to deny, given the data they used which lead them to draw particular conclusions. A summary of the data can be found here.

'Donald Trump, Brett Kavanaugh and “hostile sexism”: A concept that shapes our moment'

Despite all of the disproved narratives about the "white working class," it has been repeatedly and conclusively shown that Donald Trump in fact won the White House because of racism and nativism. But sexism was a key element in Trump's victory as well. These values, beliefs, and behaviors interact with one another. New research by University of Kansas sociologists David Smith and Eric Hanley demonstrates how a socially combustible mix of racism and sexism, in combination with anger and bullying, put the United States on a path to authoritarianism.

Writing in "The Anger Games: Who Voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 Election, and Why?", which appeared in a recent issue of the journal Critical Sociology, Smith and Hanley summarize their new research:

We find that Trump’s supporters voted for him mainly because they share his prejudices, not because they’re financially stressed. It’s true, as exit polls showed, that voters without four-year college degrees were likelier than average to support Trump. But millions of these voters — who are often stereotyped as “the white working class” — opposed Trump because they oppose his prejudices. These prejudices, meanwhile, have a definite structure, which we argue should be called authoritarian: negatively, they target minorities and women; and positively, they favor domineering and intolerant leaders who are uninhibited about their biases.

...

The bottom line is that bullying rhetoric won tens of millions of white votes in 2016. That, not financial worry, is the reality we face. We can’t explain away the fact that, after nearly two years of insults and abuses – children in cages, excuses for white supremacists, the Muslim travel ban and so much more – nearly 90 percent of Republicans support Donald Trump.

From the article:

That’s a critical point. A great deal of research, including ours, shows that personal financial worries did not distinguish Trump voters from others. All voters, across the spectrum, expressed similar pocketbook anxieties, so anxiety isn’t what defined Trump voters in particular.

It’s also relevant to note that Trump’s base was more insulated from global competition than the rest of the electorate, despite what people often guess about this. So your question is fundamental: Why does the anxiety myth linger, despite evidence to the contrary?

One key reason, I think, is that many liberals are reluctant to believe that large numbers of people are as mean-spirited as their words and actions might suggest. They want to think that fear, not vindictiveness, drives support for vindictive rhetoric and policy. That’s generous, but I think it’s also a special kind of blindness.

In fact, we seem to have two opposite forms of emotional blindness. Many liberals can’t believe that large numbers of people are vindictive while many conservatives scoff at the idea that liberals are not vindictive. Liberals often make excuses for people who show signs of intolerance. Right-wingers, in contrast, often laugh at claims to “feel your pain.”

These attitudes shouldn’t be ignored. Right-wingers who hate liberals are problematic, and liberals whose reflex is to forgive them are problematic too.

Ain't that the truth. Pre-Trump, I really didn't want to believe that Republicans were truly as awful as they seem. Then they put Trump in the White House. Fuck.

[Animavore]

No shit it was spite and vindictiveness. The same shitty little trolls who've been commenting disgusting, racist, sexist, homophobic shit on the internet the last few years all voted Trump. From 4chan to Gamergate arseholes to the scum on every Nazi website.

[Cunt]

Calling everyone racist, sexist and homophobic so often means I don't care who ends up accused anymore.

The quality of criticism of the republicans is what makes me reluctant to support any democrats.

[Tero]

But Republicans ARE 70% assholes, Democrats only 50%!