[FEDERALIST] Why Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Could Be The Left’s Donald Trump

Yes. It's very real. A nice recent example.

InfoWars App Surges In Popularity After Alex Jones Banning

9% say it is "acceptable" to hold Neo Nazi views. I'm one of those nine percent. It's acceptable to hold any view you want, because that is part of living in a free society. So I'm not sure this poll is worth anything in terms of gauging white nationalist numbers.

I'd say the more damning statistic is the 10% that "support" the alt-right. That's a bit high for my taste. Perhaps when the Charlottesville event was happening you had a bit of tribalism at play and the alt-right wasn't as directly associated with the white identitarian movement like it is now. We'd like to see the "fringe" of our politics occupying a space under 5%, ideally.

That being said, if the best the white nationalists have to offer is a few dipshits who can barely afford a bus ticket to DC then I'd say they're safely confined to the margins of our society.

 

Well, I'd like to see that 10%'s split in the second graph of how many of them equate alt-right with neo-nazism. If 39% of them equate the two, that means only 4% of total respondents support alt-right as neo-nazis. And drilling down into their data, that looks about right. Of responses to whether it is acceptable to hold neo-nazi views, 3% answered "strongly acceptable" (if you were answering this survey from the position that all political viewpoints are acceptable, would you have selected "strongly acceptable" or "somewhat acceptable"?). Meanwhile, that 10% support for alt-right is 4% "strongly support" and 6% "somewhat support". While the 50% opposed breaks down to 40% "strongly oppose" and 10% "somewhat oppose." What that implies to me is that you have a small minority of 3-4% that are clear-eyed racists, with another 5-15% that are perhaps sympathetic but not engaged. But you have 40% on the other end engaged in opposition to the alt-right. What I don't like is that there is a large well of people with no opinion (41% don't know where they stand on the alt-right, 39% don't know if they have neo-nazi views). With some good marketing, alt right can win over some of those people before the political positions calcify.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-abc-news-poll-aug-16-20-2017/2235/

 

Ben must be just furious that a 28 year old latina woman has just exceeded anything he has done in his life.

I must say that I am shocked that Ben went to Harvard Law. I thought he was just another Trumpanzee. Ben is a good example of why the S. CT should have lawyers who did not go to Harvard or Yale, but have life experience and values that will help make the US a better country. If necessary you can hire the Ben Shapiros to do grunt research and write the briefs.

 

First, you continually proclaim wo evidence that your right wing opinions are "truth". lol

Obama played a role in "identitarian"politics? Why? Because he is black? I never remember him saying: "vote for me because I am black."
The whole right wing went nuts culminating in the white nationalist TRump, still supported by close to 90% of Repubs, because of Obama. Your whole immigration xenophobia I suppose is also due to the mild mannered, cautious centrist Obama.

 

delete

 

He played a role in the rise of identitarian politics because he not only refused to speak out against them, he decided to chime in multiple times when it comes to highly charged cases and he always seemingly sided with the BLM types. That not only boosted their numbers, but was used to boost the recruiting for opposed identitarian movements. Dylan Roof pointed to Obama's comments when it came to the Trayvon Martin case as the incident that led to his radicalization. In situations where the BLM types embarrassed the hell out of themselves by rioting in the streets over guilty criminals that were rightfully shot by innocent police officers, Obama sent in his DOJ to find something, anything, to go after those police departments since there was no wrongdoing when it came to the incident in question.

Again, he finally spoke out about identitarian politics once he was out of office, but if he had done so from the start, perhaps things never get as bad as they did. Hell maybe there's no Trump if Obama did the right thing instead of play into identity politics.

The good news is that that type of thing seems to be dying. BLM is no longer rioting in the street every time a black criminal is rightfully shot while attacking the police, just a few years ago, they'd never miss an opportunity. On the other side, you had "Unite the right 2" and they couldn't even get a couple hundred people to show up to it.

Even when you get situations that would have been really bad in the past, like recently in Portland when a right wing group called "Patriot Prayer" held a rally with several hundred people and had Antifa show up with a couple hundred people.....a few years back, that would have gotten out of control, instead the police did their job and the violence and destruction that Antifa was able to manage was kept to a minimum.

Things really do seem to be changing, and for the better.

 

If you call Obama divisive for Trayvon Martin, etc... then what should we call Trump???? All his racist, divisive comments toward minorities, immigrants, the disabled, women, etc.

You voted for Trump. He's adding gasoline to the fire (and then some), and you're sitting here blaming Obama.

 

The thing about Shapiro is that he isn't a Trump dick rider. He has enough self awareness to understand that Trump is an idiot but he'll let many of his obvous flaws fly becasue of the Supreme Court nominiees, deregulation and tax cuts .

 

This alt-right, neo-nazi thing is incredibly murky because a genius move was to identify the alt-right as Nazi but then call everyone to the right of McCain alt-right. I don't think there is a clear public consensus on the characteristics of alt-right.

 

Well I think you exaggerate that everyone right of McCain gets called alt-right (besides which I wouldn't say it is right or left of McCain, but different on a separate dimension, thus alternate), but I do agree with you that the definition is murky. Some people called themselves alt-right and the term went mainstream so that people who identify as alt-right lose control of the definition and the masses who end up defining it have no nuance for the tenets. Like all other political labels, alt right is doomed to be more useful as a pejorative than it will be as a shorthand for a political philosophy.

 

The popularity of something isn't the support of something though. It makes complete sense that the app would surge, his viewers, which was a very large audience, had nowhere else to go. Jones always had a huge audience...for whatever reason. Surely some new eyes went there as well, but my argument is that giving these people platforms gives them a chance to actually proudly display their views. I've always thought of this effect more like curiosity like we've had banned books or games and people want to experience them because they are banned but it doesn't mean people are endorsing these things. We'll see how Jones does on his own, one thing is that people will download an app but don't interact with it, it's just something people download randomly in the day...check out...and put down, but that's another topic I suppose.

So I'll concede that it exists but I really don't care that Alex Jones is banned. Like, I give 0 Fs about it.

And no one is legitimatizing Alex Jones. You don't see him on political panels, you don't see him in debates, you just see him ranting and raving on his own show.

What i'm arguing against is that people like Spencer should be given the stage to showcase their views. This is dangerous, if you put Spencer on political panels on CNN what you are saying inherently to your audience is that "His views may be different, but they are rational." and they are not. My position in this thread is that people like Spencer should not be debated, that he should be ignored, not that he should be banned.

When you start letting him debate his racist views with say...biologists or anthropologist...you then are saying "His views have some merit to them..." and the idea that well the scientist will just have facts on their side, so easy win just doesn't apply to people like that. People like Spencer don't use the facts, they twist the facts they think they can twist or manipulate and makeup what they can make up to make it sound rational. So debates don't actually dispose of people like him, they just give him more of an audience and thus more exposure to people who may be willing to fall into his dogma.

My whole point is that arguing against people like this is of no use and is actually harmful, not that Spencer should be banned, that he should be ignored completely and when he does poke his head out into the public space, like a college tour (which he planned to do but, in his own words, cancelled because of 'Antifa') should be mocked relentlessly.

I think it's troubling for the reasons @JuanValdez mentioned.

Also, on this last point, the WN movement didn't show up to Ch'ville this time mainly because people ridiculed them back into the shadows. They, as I joked then, found out why the KKK wears hoods. Many of them lost jobs and who knows how it affected their personal relationships to be outed like that. There was a pretty strong effort from people to ID those people and get them fired, I know some people feel that was an unfair tactic but it seemed to have worked. According to some of them, VICE reported, they just realize that they have to move a lot quieter and will probably, hopefully, be limited to trolling anonymously on the internet.

 

How is socialism working in Sweden? Are they still the rape capital of Europe or have they come to their senses?

 

1. Sweden wasn't the rape capital of Europe.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/crime-sweden-rape-capital-europe/

This is just one actual truth from the linked article.

2. Do economic systems cause rape to increase or decrease? How would that be linked to the economic system of socialism?

 

Here we go again...

Voting Democrat = Socialism which = communism which = rape

(And a bunch of hot blonde white people Im guessing... wait I thought we wanted that ... crap... I’m confused)

 

All I literally had to do was go to the Swedish statistics website to see what's up:



Get use to this thing called data. You may as well call it William, because it's damn-good at conquering your counterpoints. And here is the data on sex offenses:



Only in Sweden, and in defense of Sweden, could someone act like there is "nothing to see here".

 

No -ism is perfect.

 

Where did that say Sweden is the rape capital of Europe and that immigrants were responsible? When you use quotations is that because you're quoting something or is it because you're making something up that no one said?

 

That's not all you had to do because you got it wrong again. You obviously didn't read the article which references these exact graphs. You are off base here, and I'm not sure if you care about the truth.

I'll mention a little about the information you posted which was in the SNOPES research which you either didn't read or understand. Those graphs aren't specifically for rape. They are for all sexual offenses which include minor things as well as major things like rape. Then there is also the fact that the definition used to define what rape is in Sweden was expanded. There is more than even that, but I will let you go back and read the SNOPES article again and hope that this time you are able to comprehend it. That is if you are actually interested in the truth.

 

It's like the time the dumb@ss posted an article in defense of global warming from the 1920s and used it as evidence against global warming. He doesn't even accurately read what he posts. I'd wager he gets a paragraph in and if his gut tells him it fits his narrative he copy/pastes on here. Classic Cohete posting behavior.

 

lolwut? Socialism causes rape?