This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It’s noteworthy that most of the extremist attacks this election have been anti-Trump, while a section of the population still believes that the Republican Party is the “radical”, “extremist”, “violent” party. This is despite Republicans having twice the gun ownership, and being out of office. Judge a tree by its fruits. Who is producing the most violent radicals? This shows (once again) that media propaganda can exist completely outside the realm of facts — propaganda doesn’t need facts to undergird it, you can genuinely just manufacture and shill it.
‘Violent’ and ‘extremist’ now have meanings no more connected to their actual dictionary definitions than ‘misinformation’.
I still want to hear someone using the term "far-right" make a distinction between that and just "right."
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I mean the last guy voted for Trump in 2016, though turned against him pretty sharply. So I am not sure that really supports your thesis here as to who is producing what.
Routh? No.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/09/17/ryan-wesley-routh-not-registered-republican-fact-check/75254525007/
He is now, but in his book and tweets from 4 years ago he said he voted for Trump in 2016 and deeply regretted it afterwards.
He was lying for clout. No records exist of him voting in 2016. Plenty of records of him donating to Democrats exist.
Saying that Trump was your choice, is not likely to get you clout as a Democrat in the current era. He tweeted at Trump that he was his choice in 2016 but was disappointed with him. Even if we allow that we don't have a record of him voting, that doesn't mean he was lying about being a Trump supporter back then. After all he also said he supported Gabbard, Vivek, Halley and Sanders at various points. He doesn't tend to stick with one party it seems, but he does seem to like outsider candidates.
He clearly had shifted towards Democrat's at the very least (though he believed Covid was a bio attack by the Chinese, so he was somewhat heterodox for a Democrat), but his statements that he supported Trump are indeed weak evidence that he did. People can change their affiliations and Trump did pick up many places Obama had won prior. Statistically there will indeed be many people today who voted for Trump in 2016 who are now Democrats. And indeed many people who voted for Obama who then became Republicans.
He lied about voting for Trump, so why do we immediately start believing the next-weakest claim, that he supported Trump? I have a hundred million dollars. No you don't. Ok, but I have 99 million dollars. Ok yeah.
Meanwhile, what radicalizes a guy to try shooting Trump? It doesn't happen in a vacuum. It comes on ten years of media calling Trump a threat to democracy, a traitor selling the country to Russia, a violent fascist thug who needs to be executed, take him out and beat him, put his severed bloody head on TV, talk about blowing up the White House -- what, I apologized, and Trump deserved it for all his violent rhetoric, I can't believe Republicans would try shooting him like this.
In that case, do you think that Trump and/or the conservative media ecosystem are responsible for the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, the El Paso walmart shooting or the Buffalo shooting in 2022?
What did Trump or the conservative media ecosystem say that lead to those shootings? I think that's a pretty wild comparison. Democratic officials and celebrities are literally calling for violence against Republicans and Trump. Republicans and Trump are not calling for, say, violence at synogogues.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Sure, but none of this in anyway indicates he might not have been a Trump supporter at some point who became disillusioned. You are in fact describing how that could have happened. If we are believing all his stuff about Ukraine and disliking Trump now, the most likely explanation is that his previous statements are also true. He did think Trump was a good choice, and then whether by Trump's actions or by the media, or by a mixture of both, he came to despise him.
There is no reason for him to lie about Trump being his choice all the way back in 2020 publicly. It doesn't impact what he tried to do now, other than, if it is true that disaffected ex-Trump supporters or ex-Republicans are more likely to try to kill him, because converts and those who feel betrayed are more zealous in their new belief systems, it might slightly shift who needs to be watched more carefully.
If both Crooks and Routh were ex-Republicans or ex-Trump supporters who turned against him then that is important information when trying to keep Trump alive. It doesn't say anything about the morality of current Republicans or Trump supporters. I'm not trying to make a political point or to shift blame, rather than observing than if both attempted killers were currently Blue affiliated, but seemed to previously not be, then that is really important information if you are a Trump supporter or do not want him killed. 1) Because stopping that happening seems pretty important generally, and 2) Because it shifts the profile of likely further attackers.
Again, he lied about voting for Trump! Why should I accept this frame that his violence is right-wing when the proof that he's right-wing was a lie?
If we want to stop political violence and assassination attempts, the obvious play is to specifically call out the people making violent threats. That includes a number of top Democratic officials.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
People keep saying this as if it's gospel, but it's based on a tweet where he was being critical of Trump. The format basically being "I thought you were different man but it turns out you were a fraud this whole time! I voted for you in 2016 because I didn't think you were a total complete fraud but it turns out you a fraud and always have been and people should vote for my lord and savior, Kamala Harris! Or he Republicans, you should support Nikki Haley!"
People lie. Especially delusional people on the internet when they're trying to push an agenda may lie about things like who they voted for 8 years ago.
Meanwhile he's been donating to Democrats since 2012, has Kamala stickers on his truck, and obviously champions Democrat causes.
It's an absurd level of cope to try and claim that the guy who has been donating to Democrats, litearlly volunterring in Ukraine, putting Democrat stickers on his car, and trying to murder Donald Trump is somehow mysteriously a Trump voter.
His self-published book also said he voted for Trump, and there isn't a lot of reason to disbelieve that. He clearly turned sharply away from Trump and did indeed donate to ActBlue etc. So i am not saying he is a Trump supporter now, but it appears he once was.
A person who feels betrayed by their own candidate or side can often become more vicious than a standard believer. Converts and dissidents are famously more zealous. See also Rick Wilson who also clearly hates Trump.
He didn't vote in 2016. He was lying.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Wasn't the guy who shot Trump in the ear a registered Republican?
He had donated to ActBlue and attempted to kill the Republican incumbent. A Republican would not do this, but a Democrat would have a motive to vote in a Republican mid-term.
There are Republicans who hate Trump (see Rick Wilson for a start), so I don't think we can say a Republican never would.
Indeed quotes from his school mates also paint him as conservative:
According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, former classmates remember 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks as a mild-mannered right-winger. “He was definitely a conservative,” said Max R. Smith, one of his ex-classmates.
When remembering Crooks, a classmate described a debate in American history class. “The majority of the class were on the liberal side, but Tom, no matter what, always stood his ground on the conservative side,” Smith said. “That’s still the picture I have of him. Just standing alone on one side while the rest of the class was on the other.”
So he registered as a Republican, his classmates say he was conservative, and he donated to a Blue PAC and presumably watched GunTube. At the very least he clearly wasn't a standard Democrat.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
He also gave money to a leftist political group. In any case, both would-be assassins pattern match for mental illness more than they do any coherent political viewpoint. Why should we care about what particular flavor of crazy they were?
The bigger issue for the second attempt is the media downplaying and even justifying it.
More options
Context Copy link
In states with closed primaries (like Pennsylvania), there are plenty of reasons to register as a member of a party you don't really agree with completely to vote in the primary. As a voter in an open primary state, I tend to choose which primary to vote in to maximize the volume from my vote, not because I consider myself a member of a partisan group.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link