Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 28, 2018 18:39:42 GMT -5
I polled my extended family (as we were together) and the consensus was similar to what you've described here, with the same caveats. We tentatively agreed that if an individual consistently supports a liar, even a politician, this individual is inherently less trustworthy. There was no consensus on whether this extends to those who support a politician for policy reasons or those who are "voting against" another politician they believe to be the greater evil. Everyone did agree with me that you're overgeneralizing. Many (most?) of a given politician's supporters fall into these "policy reasons" and "lesser of two evils" categories, and don't hasten to defend everything the politician does. The "less trustworthy" profile applies to supporters who do hasten to defend indefensible acts (proven beyond a reasonable doubt, not merely alleged). Hence we can draw no conclusions about any one supporter, e.g. Colton Haab or his father, without knowing why they support Pres. Trump, and to what extent. Your comments about Christians overlooking or countenancing Pres. Trump's misbehaviour are a true criticism, as many scriptures make it plain that a man who countenances evil is as guilty as the man who commits it (one of the major contentions in the Oregon Bakery threads, transgenderism threads, "morality of nationalism" threads, etc.). Having said this, scripture also condemns gossip, prying into others' personal affairs, thinking evil of others (i.e. assuming the worst; pronouncing judgment without compelling evidence), and speaking evil of leaders. Furthermore, Christians are to judge by God's standard, not society's standard. (I can't rightly count how many times members have called a particular judgment 'Christian' or 'unchristian' out of ignorance.) Taking all of this into account, however, your criticism is true: many self-proclaimed Christians routinely defend misbehaviour by Pres. Trump that is "public business" and ought to be starkly condemned. Mostly because they're caught up in the left-right dialectic. I'm not sure why you think I am over-generalizing. Did I not say that I am still optimistic that the number of blind supporters of the man are a minority? It sounds like your extended family agreed with me pretty much down the list. For the record, though, and in the specific case of Glenn Haab, I would suggest that anyone who will specifically create a lie and then go out of his way to perpetuate that lie (or compel another to do so) on a vast public forum to further a Trump agenda qualifies as a "true believer" in the worst sense of the term. All in all, I'll take the win. I believe our confusion is this: The sum of my knowledge on the Haabs as of Reply #3 was that they were (for all intents and purposes) randomly selected Americans, and probably supportive of Pres. Trump. This was the context of my comment, "It turns out even teenage victims of school shootings can't be trusted to speak truthfully these days," and also, I presumed, of your comment, "But what do you expect from a Trump fan?" In this context, the criticism is too general. However, you were apparently referring to this "true believer" cohort, which you claim counts Mr. Haab as a member. I assume there's some additional evidence to support Mr. Haab's status as true believer. Otherwise we're assuming he's lying because he's a true believer, and assuming he's a true believer because he's lying, which I suspect involves a touch of circular logic.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,191
|
Post by tallguy on Feb 28, 2018 19:22:17 GMT -5
I'm not sure why you think I am over-generalizing. Did I not say that I am still optimistic that the number of blind supporters of the man are a minority? It sounds like your extended family agreed with me pretty much down the list. For the record, though, and in the specific case of Glenn Haab, I would suggest that anyone who will specifically create a lie and then go out of his way to perpetuate that lie (or compel another to do so) on a vast public forum to further a Trump agenda qualifies as a "true believer" in the worst sense of the term. All in all, I'll take the win. I believe our confusion is this: The sum of my knowledge on the Haabs as of Reply #3 was that they were (for all intents and purposes) randomly selected Americans, and probably supportive of Pres. Trump. This was the context of my comment, "It turns out even teenage victims of school shootings can't be trusted to speak truthfully these days," and also, I presumed, of your comment, "But what do you expect from a Trump fan?" In this context, the criticism is too general. However, you were apparently referring to this "true believer" cohort, which you claim counts Mr. Haab as a member. I assume there's some additional evidence to support Mr. Haab's status as true believer. Otherwise we're assuming he's lying because he's a true believer, and assuming he's a true believer because he's lying, which I suspect involves a touch of circular logic. It is inferred rather than stated, but sufficient to persuade me. First, there is the targeting of CNN and the attempt to convince people that they are in fact a "Fake News" organization. There is ZERO need to do this if one is not attempting to align himself with Trump who has made them a continual target. Whether Haab was convinced previously that CNN was fake as a result of listening to Trump, or was actively trying to promote that idea as a way to promote Trump, it remains true that he actively tried to disparage CNN and their integrity. His explanation that the editing was unintentional is not credible. Neither is the idea that Colton would have gone on and lied without coaxing from his father. He was clear and understanding enough in his own e-mails, and certainly knew that it was his own question CNN was telling him to stick with. Second, we have the "borrowing" of Trump's signature phrase on the four-page statement that Glenn wanted Colton to read. "MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN" I am assuming here that Glenn had at least significant input on the statement, but even if not Colton likely picked up his beliefs at home rather than at school. A person not a supporter of Trump would never use any variation of that phrase except in jest. As I said, inferred rather than stated. Seems pretty clear though.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 28, 2018 20:54:20 GMT -5
This would seem to confirm that Mr. Haab is, at the very least, a Trump sloganeer. That is, on the Trump support warning level chart: LESSER-OF-TWO-EVILS SUPPORTER The supporter tolerates Pres. Trump solely because (s)he can't stand the Democratic Party and its policies.
POLICY-LEVEL SUPPORTER The supporter endorses Pres. Trump's policies while condemning his foibles, failures, character flaws, and outrageous behaviour.
TRUMP SLOGANEER The supporter endorses Pres. Trump's policies, overlooks his less consequential personal flaws, and sanctions his most controversial rhetoric, perceiving him as a maverick who gets things done. (S)he sees Pres. Trump and his administration more as a standalone "brand".
CONSUMMATE SUPPORTER The supporter denies the existence of most of Pres. Trump's flaws, and tolerates others due to tu quoque. (S)he abhors Democrats and Democratic policies so greatly that (s)he's willing to play the hypocrite (suspend moral standards) as long as Pres. Trump remains a true and effective enemy of the Democrats. (S)he generally considers non-supporters to be ignorant or unpatriotic.
TRUE BELIEVER The supporter considers Pres. Trump to be America's last chance, and believes this crucial end justifies the gravest of means. (S)he either denies the existence of Pres. Trump's flaws or considers them to be virtues. (S)he considers non-supporters to be enemies of the republic.
Of course, the more relevant chart to YMAM is the "Trump derangement warning level chart" for Trump opponents, but we'll leave that for another time.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,191
|
Post by tallguy on Feb 28, 2018 21:01:47 GMT -5
This would seem to confirm that Mr. Haab is, at the very least, a Trump sloganeer. That is, on the Trump support warning level chart: LESSER-OF-TWO-EVILS SUPPORTER The supporter tolerates Pres. Trump solely because (s)he can't stand the Democratic Party and its policies.
POLICY-LEVEL SUPPORTER The supporter endorses Pres. Trump's policies while condemning his foibles, failures, character flaws, and outrageous behaviour.
TRUMP SLOGANEER The supporter endorses Pres. Trump's policies, overlooks his less consequential personal flaws, and sanctions his most controversial rhetoric, perceiving him as a maverick who gets things done. (S)he sees Pres. Trump and his administration more as a standalone "brand".
CONSUMMATE SUPPORTER The supporter denies the existence of most of Pres. Trump's flaws, and tolerates others due to tu quoque. (S)he abhors Democrats and Democratic policies so greatly that (s)he's willing to play the hypocrite (suspend moral standards) as long as Pres. Trump remains a true and effective enemy of the Democrats. (S)he generally considers non-supporters to be ignorant or unpatriotic.
TRUE BELIEVER The supporter considers Pres. Trump to be America's last chance, and believes this crucial end justifies the gravest of means. (S)he either denies the existence of Pres. Trump's flaws or considers them to be virtues. (S)he considers non-supporters to be enemies of the republic.
Of course, the more relevant chart to YMAM is the "Trump derangement warning level chart" for Trump opponents, but we'll leave that for another time. And here you were doing so well too....
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 28, 2018 21:20:00 GMT -5
What could you possibly object to in my previous post?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,191
|
Post by tallguy on Feb 28, 2018 21:59:24 GMT -5
It WAS a respectful conversation. Your last line seemed to change that. Even if it was meant to suggest it be more relevant here because of the relative numbers of Trump opponents to Trump supporters, the terminology is insulting. "Support" vs. "derangement?" Really?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 28, 2018 23:07:59 GMT -5
It WAS a respectful conversation. Your last line seemed to change that. Even if it was meant to suggest it be more relevant here because of the relative numbers of Trump opponents to Trump supporters, the terminology is insulting. "Support" vs. "derangement?" Really? Referring to "Trump derangement syndrome". I didn't invent the term. If you're not familiar with it, it refers to the spectrum of unreasonable, obsessive, hypocritical, etc. behaviours that plague the anti-Trump movement, roughly analogous to the way the behaviours in the "support" spectrum plague Trump supporters. Most P/CE regulars would rank in the more passive end of the chart, just as most YMAM members who've expressed support for Pres. Trump at some point rank in the more favourable end of the "support" spectrum. But I'll tell you what: if I ever put it up, I'll call it the "opposition warning level chart".
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,191
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 1, 2018 0:16:48 GMT -5
It WAS a respectful conversation. Your last line seemed to change that. Even if it was meant to suggest it be more relevant here because of the relative numbers of Trump opponents to Trump supporters, the terminology is insulting. "Support" vs. "derangement?" Really? Referring to "Trump derangement syndrome". I didn't invent the term. If you're not familiar with it, it refers to the spectrum of unreasonable, obsessive, hypocritical, etc. behaviours that plague the anti-Trump movement, roughly analogous to the way the behaviours in the "support" spectrum plague Trump supporters. Most P/CE regulars would rank in the more passive end of the chart, just as most YMAM members who've expressed support for Pres. Trump at some point rank in the more favourable end of the "support" spectrum. But I'll tell you what: if I ever put it up, I'll call it the "opposition warning level chart". I am aware of the term. I know you didn't invent it. Hard-core and alt-right Trump supporters did. They are also the only ones who consider it legitimate usage. "Opposition" would be better, since it is analogous to and neutral as "support."
|
|
mollyanna58
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 5, 2011 13:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,672
|
Post by mollyanna58 on Mar 1, 2018 16:15:23 GMT -5
Someone called me "deranged" on Facebook because I posted something objecting to Trump's proposed military parade. I was unaware that he was parroting an alt-right term.
|
|