[Maru]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

Hmm... I get what he's saying, and I can imagine how frustrating it must be to consider yourself right wing, and being lumped in a box with more extreme people that you disagree with. But he goes from complaining about that to then doing exactly the same thing with his comments about the left.

"The left is a bunch of bullies"
"intellectually stifling PC culture of the left"
"they want riots and book burnings"
"regressive left"

His opening statement even says that the only reason he needs to vote for Trump is because of his feelings towards the left. And I continue to have a problem with this rhetoric...

"Trump’s comments are at best reflective of the type of talk that goes on among men all too frequently."

Of course people are entitled to their own opinion, but this is so deflective because it's not offering any kind of explanation/justification for Trumps comments, it's not giving a personal opinion on his comments, it's suggesting instead that the reason it's ok is because everyone does it, and it's just a frustrating point to try and argue against because there's nothing to say really except, "you're wrong!" lol.

"It is the type of speech I have heard often and have never been comfortable with,"

The problem a lot of people had with Trumps comments wasn't just that he was being crude generally, it was specifically the way he talked about sexually assaulting women, and it's not the same type of thing. I've talked crudely with my friends when I've been drunk... and my first job was in a restaurant and I remember the kitchen staff would talk about women generally and some of the female waitresses in the most derogatory, crude, sexually explicit ways. But as a man I resent the constant suggestion that keeps cropping up that talking crudely/sexually is the same as bragging about how we've sexually assaulting people (and whether Trump actually did it or not, he still bragged about doing it and that shows his mentality on the subject).
"I want to do xxx to someone" and "I do xxx to people against their will"... sound quite similar and have a lot of the same words, but people need to stop getting confused by that because they're completely different mentalities.


And this...

"So, while most of my fellow Ivy League conservatives virtue signal their way leftwards in a giant show of appreciation for themselves and in an effort to gain the affections of “the party of love,” I’m voting Trump. I want to do what I believe is right, not what will allow me the platform to bask in a cesspool of back-patting about the divine limits of my own morality."

"I'm right and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong/bad/selfish" pretty much. Anyone voting for Hillary must be doing it for negative reasons, whereas he's voting for Trump because he's doing what's right? He's putting himself on quite a pedestal here and all that does is highlight the irony of the statement (considering it's the 'superiority' of Hillary voters that he's commenting on).


Anyway, overall this seems to mostly be why he doesn't like the left, why he doesn't like Hillary, and an offering of defenses for some of the things Trump has said in the past and defenses of being right wing (and like I said before I understand that and the frustrations of feeling like he needs to do that and he shouldn't have to, but he also doesn't have to attack the left either and contribute to the very mentality that has made him feel that way). It's a shame that it's like that, rather than it being a case of weighing up the positives of both candidates and choosing who's best... not that that's his fault, it's just because of the fact you have the 2 candidates you've got

You've outlined some of the misgivings I have about his writing style... it went from a blog to an article and then back. He at least did get to these points and they were clear enough... but the things in the first bold you quoted, he didn't need to write that. However I think this was supposed to be somewhat a personal anecdote/personal synopsis of events that affected his reasoning... I think full disclosure, this is fair. We've all had these run-ins in the US with these movements and it's affected the landscape around us in very significant ways. Unless you're hiding indoors 24/7, you can't leave the house without seeing signage or some other weird phenomenon brewing in the streets... especially if you live in the city as I do. I went to college in MD (a very blue state) and I can only imagine the conversations there now that I am gone back to TX... still, I wouldn't vote for Trump. Though I can understand where it would push many people to do so. I do agree with him that there are some things about the left movement(s) that are anti-intellectual, just like there are on the right... that for me is key to staying sane this election.

I did appreciate the other points he made that supported his reasoning based on those personal anecdotes (can't stomach left-wing propaganda, etc). It weakened his eventual arguments to pivot that direction, but I think he could've made his points fine without those explicit blanket statements. Not fair statements to make, but it is part of an explanation, so I guess full disclosure... he's had some bad history... I don't think a persuasion piece is the intention of this 'article' (which I'm not sure if it is a article or a blog given the writing style) ... given his distaste of the opposing arguments there... which personally, I feel are fair given the amount of hypocrisy and propaganda being generated by this election from both sides. It's hard to not have a strong opinion on those matters... as they are meant to speak to the individuals in this country and force confrontation between the two opposing views.

An aside, I personally felt his response on the sexual comments... it did deserve a little bit more than just a nod. Especially for someone like myself, a woman I want to know why it's OK to touch my body parts without my consent. There's so much written on it now, you either agree or disagree it's a tell-all of a sexual predator... because men do exaggerate in these discussions... after all, he is surrounded by women who would welcome it because of his wealth, so there's potential with more context the statement could change meaning... still ... I've been groped, in the waters in the Gulf of Mexico of all places where I am surrounded by a few men and no friend in sight (it was at the beach), with no way to swim away. I was terrified. It brings back unpleasant thoughts for many women like myself and I don't think these statements are funny or amusing, in light of the potential seriousness of that matter... though I do appreciate (and agree) the argument that it shouldn't be tried in the media... that said, personally I can't think I could vote someone president who speaks in this manner... not given my past experiences.

It's an amazing thing to behold, living in the US, a first world democratic country in modern times... but I think this election is something that will be talked about for many years to come and many books and textbooks will probably more succinctly cover it's developments and the social issues will get a more scholarly approach as time goes on (again... one can only hope!)... which I look forward to receiving in a more digestible format than "Secure our borders!" "Lawsuits!" "Racism and sexism is everywhere!" "OMG, it's Weiner!"

Cue the medieval heckler.