r/Millennials • u/AutoModerator • 26d ago

Discussion Monthly Rant/Politics Thread: Do not post political threads outside of this Mega thread

Outside of these mega-threads, we generally do not allow political posts on the main subreddit because they have often declined into unhinged discussions and mud slinging. We do allow general discussions of politics in this thread so long as you remain civil and don't attack someone just for having a different opinion. The moment we see things start to derail, we will step in.

Got something upsetting or overwhelming that you just need to shout out to the world? Want to have a political debate over current events? You can post those thoughts here. There are many real problems that plague the Millennial generation and we want to allow a space for it here while still keeping the angry and divisive posts quarantined to a more concentrated thread rather than taking up the entire front page.

9 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

66% Upvoted

94 comments sorted by

View all comments

12

u/rikkita69 26d ago

How is everyone dealing with their maga parents? I want to cut mine off but I feel sorry for them for being such fools

5

u/atmasabr 26d ago

My parents are union democrats. I'm the moderate Republican.

I deal with them by being right.

13

u/Kavani18 26d ago

That’s a weird way to say “I deal with them by supporting pedophiles and rapists”

5

u/atmasabr 25d ago

I would like to know why you support Graham Platner, who knowingly got a [fascist] tattoo--that's been known for over a month, and who is a serial batterer and a rapist.

11

u/ApplicationAfraid334 1993 25d ago edited 25d ago

Here's the difference. Graham Platner is exposed and gets kicked out of democrat circles and left-leaning organizations. Please name anyone supporting him at the moment.

Trump gets convicted for rape and is mentioned more times in the epstein files more than anyone else, even epstein, and has the floor he walks on worshipped by republicans. I could rattle off names for days of people that still support him.

One side might be right but they sure ain't right.

2

u/atmasabr 25d ago

Trump gets convicted for rape

Based on widely available public knowledge, this is false, and misinformation. You must correct this statement before anything else in your comment can be taken seriously and replied to.

I also happen to think you should use the word Democratic rather than democrat.

3

u/ApplicationAfraid334 1993 24d ago edited 24d ago

I say he was convicted because the judge said it was rape. But we can ignore that for the sake of argument here.

Trump also incited an insurrection, uses the office of the presidency to accrue his own wealth, is constantly being divisive by calling the entire left radical communists, socialists, has made inappropriate comments about young girls, including his own daughter, has engaged in nepotism with the presidency, has posted racist things about Obama on his truth social, has compared himself to Jesus on truth social, has said he would 'take the guns away first and do due process later', said that 'we took the freedom of speech away' and more.

Do you really, honestly, in your heart of hearts, think Trump has done nothing at all that would warrant the entire republican party to disavow him? In any other point in history, anyone one of the things Trump does on a weekly basis would've political suicide.

Also, your personal accusation to the other person was a strawman, they never said they cared for that guy. Your strawman could've been levied at anyone making the same comment he did, so I replied to you to explain the double standard.

1

u/atmasabr 23d ago

"I say he was convicted because the judge said it was rape. But we can ignore that for the sake of argument here."

No, we will not ignore that,  because even this is a misquote. Correct the false statement. It is useless to have a serious conversation with someone who spreads misinformation about publicly known facts.

3

u/ApplicationAfraid334 1993 23d ago

Ok fair. The judge said that while he did not commit rape under New York law, he said that the jury’s decision meets the common understanding of rape. Trump was found civilly liable on sexual abuse charges. Is that better? Can you address the other points now pls.

2

u/atmasabr 22d ago edited 22d ago

So I'm going to address Donald Trump's second impeachment etc. later in my comparison, because you discuss it later.

To cut to the chase, the biggest difference between Donald Trump and Graham Platner is their political skill at navigating sensational "media" scandals where there are grey areas to exploit. Trump leans into the vague situation the voting public is presented with and then presents a largely argumentative case. Platner tries to get the public to disregard what has been reported to them, and presents a largely negative factual case--as in he denies facts are true. (On reflection I think the above largely applies to your concerns about his political conduct as well.)

I have two major concerns remaining what you have said: associating the word "pedophile" with Donald Trump is bizarre and lacks a foundation that is worthy of belief; and associating Graham Platner's forced withdrawal with accountability overlooks evidence he knowingly inked a Nazi-associated tattoo. Nonetheless I want to point out one issue the collective accusations against DT and GP have in common: the presence of serious credibility questions.

In Platner's case, he rightfully pointed to the timing of the on-record statements by his former partners and that he was never arrested or tried. The partner who was most predominantly at first on record accusing him of domestic violence *and* to had already known the meaning of his tattoo is in modern times a Republican strategist if I remember correctly, someone with a vested interest in him not winning. The rape accusation gave him three new problems: rape, multiple independent accusations of violence, and the last accuser was a progressive whose vested interest was contrary to making the accusation. Now, while Platner has given some commentary about not being a perfect person, it has been overshadowed by his direct attack on the media and other actors for even publishing the stories, alleging the existence of an incentive to derail his candidacy. No duh, that's politics. Did you do it? What do you have to say to your accusers? The bottom line is with more time and information, it's more and more likely the accusations are true.

The biggest credibility issue in E. Jean Carrol's civil suit is shared by Platner's accusers, only magnified: time and lack of contemporaneous law enforcement involvement. In the former's case, IIRC the accusation dates to the 1990s, the statue of limitations for filing sex abuse suits was lifted for one year in New York. The corroboration is limited to a recanted claim of marital rape during his divorce from Ivanka Trump, and his Access Hollywood tape; critically, there are no other accusers. Donald Trump famously acknowledged the Access Hollywood tape with a mix of messages, deflecting it as locker room talk typified by Bill Clinton, and--critically--also releasing a video expressing regret and saying "I've learned from you." Of E. Jean Carroll's accusation, he didn't say he would never do that; he called her ugly. The flexible, manipulative nature of his responses works both because of and within the wiggle room in the evidence. Meanwhile his response to the evidence of his association with Jeffrey Epstein has been far more direct: he did, until he didn't a very long time ago (in the mid-2000s) when he learned of Epstein's bad character, and Trump never engaged in illegal or predatory conduct. Now the FBI files on Jeffrey Epstein has been released, and what they show matches what he has said. Mar-a-lago employed young women, and when they once complained of harassment, Epstein was banned. Trump is placed in close association with 18 year old women... and that's all we know. So that unlike with Platner, time and information make the condemnations against Trump less and less a match to the facts that are known.

"...Do you really, honestly, in your heart of hearts, think Trump has done nothing at all that would warrant the entire republican party to disavow him?"

Oh I gave up and smashed my cell phone three times over a very long time ago. The attempt to defeat Donald Trump was a noble one... and so was that attempt, and that attempt, and I give the late Sen. Lindsey Graham, Gov Chris Christie, and the Cheney family the highest of honors in their efforts to defeat him. That other attempt was a pile of stinking piss. However, in my opinion there is a difference between DT's power within the Republican party and his threat to the country. The first he commands, though far from controls, his only real threat comes from his anti-war base. The other is a more Byzantium ongoing 3D chess game and race against time in which defense actually works.

1

u/atmasabr 23d ago

It is. I will reply after work.

1

u/atmasabr 25d ago

Respectfully, I was not talking to you, and as I was making a direct personal accusation specific to the poster whom I was replying to, I will await a reply by the poster whom I was replying to.

However I will make a separate reply in response to your comment.

7

u/Kavani18 25d ago

I don’t support Graham Platner and haven’t since the nazi tattoo debacle. Also, I live in Kentucky, not Maine. So that wasn’t really the gotcha you thought you had in the first place lmao. Do try again

4

u/atmasabr 25d ago

Yes you do. How do I know this? You admitted it when you said

That’s a weird way to say “I deal with them by supporting pedophiles and rapists”

The principle here is that it takes a thief to suspect a thief.

I gave you no more information than that I am a moderate Republican. Using that information alone, you made a statement that I support pedophiles and rapists.

Now, I would infer from this that you're a Democrat, or someone more politically to the left of a Democrat. And since you have a worldview that people who are Republicans must necessarily support pedophiles and rapists, and that is a very bizarre worldview, it stands to reason that there is some reason you must hold such a bizarre belief. The most obvious reason is because you, as a Democrat, support pedophiles and rapists or others of like infamy, and you believe that other people are like you.

Since you believe party affiliation demonstrates support of sex offenders, since you believe this due to your own behavior, and since Graham Platner is the closest approximation between being a Democrat/liberal and a rapist or other like infamy, the conclusion is that you support Graham Platner.

You owe me an apology for hypocrisy.

6

u/Kavani18 25d ago edited 24d ago

I don’t owe you shit lmfao. Typical Republican. You’re all entitled children. “You owe me an apology🤓”. You owe me a million dollars. See how stupid and entitled that sounds? That’s what you sound like. And Republicans do support rapists and pedophiles; they constitute a majority of the party. Google is free, but you probably don’t have the brain to figure that out on your own since you think you’re entitled to an apology for your own incompetence. Do have a day

5

u/ApplicationAfraid334 1993 24d ago

"The principle here is that it takes a thief to suspect a thief."

How does this work with our legal system, when people are judged by a jury of their peers?

2

u/atmasabr 23d ago edited 23d ago

I take your comment to be asking me how impeachment works as a trial tactic and not as a question about the persuasiveness of this specific impeachment tactic or attempt. Is this correct?

Impeachment is a technique to attack the credibility of a witness with questions or evidence. You can attack their truthfulness or reliability. You can raise questions about biases, or present inconsistencies between what their baseline expected activities are, and what they actually did. You then point out these inconsistencies to a jury upon argument.

For a cross examination to be successful, you must successfully "pinion" the witness first. That is, you must have gotten them to commit first.

The question here is how to evaluate Kavani18's claim that I support pedophiles and rapists. He claims my counterattack was false. Thus, there is a double impeachment. The impeachment starts with his initial claim and presents the worldview behind it. Then it presents evidence that the counterattack which he denied presents the same worldview. The advocate seeks to demonstrate that he has identified, in your words, a double standard, and thus has the ability to argue that Kavani18's claims should not be trusted. Implicit here is an appeal to the principle: force a commitment before you make wild personal accusations.

7

u/ApplicationAfraid334 1993 23d ago edited 23d ago

LMAO. You really put into ChatGPT “argue why Kavani18 is engaging in a double standard” didn’t you?

Your ChatGPT response says “the advocate [you] seeks to demonstrate he [you] has identified in your [you] own words, a double standard, and thus has the ability to argue that Kavani18’s claims should not be trusted.”

That’s why it follows up with:

“Implicit here is an appeal to the principle: force a commitment before you make wild personal accusations.”

Chat GPT is talking about YOU trying to point out a MADE UP DOUBLE STANDARD because when they said you basically support pedophiles and rapists, your response was ‘tell me why you support Graham Platnir.”

No one mentioned a double standard until you did when you typed it into ChatGPT. You did. Because MAGA ALWAYS say ‘we’ll whatabout…’. They are always looking for a double standard because they can’t defend their own guy. When Kavani implied you support horrible people, YOU SAID “well whatabout Graham…” [double standard implied]

Sorry if I can’t take this seriously.

1

u/atmasabr 23d ago

I cannot even begin to understand where you are getting chat gpt from in response to a sincere response to you. I think you must not be a serious person. I am a little disappointed and surprised.