Pretty obvious that this guy is a stupid asshole, so makes sense. Congrats to his daughters for telling him to fuck himself. I had a parent who said incredibly stupid shit like the “liberalism is a mental disorder” line I would not talk to them either.
Idk who needs to hear this but:
Your children don’t owe you self assurance, if they chose to cut contact with you fully then that’s their right.
Ah the classic:
“Your behaviour has harmed me, so I do not wish to see you anymore”
“No, wrong, it is YOUR behaviour in saying this that has harmed ME”
Slightly off topic:
When my parents divorced, I was bummed out that I had to attend two thanksgiving dinners. The second was not turkey. We charred hot dogs over an open fire (lived in the midwest at the time) and made smores. It was pretty great.
This had nothing to do with the election. It’s just a nice memory.
bummed out that I had to attend two thanksgiving dinners
I’m not skinny enough to understand this sentiment
I, too, choose this guy’s second dinner.
Check out this random story from some guy.
I don’t know why my memory of hot dogs on an open fire and smores doesn’t appeal to you. We’re different.
“I let them”
Dudes showing internally he thinks he controls their votes. That he could’ve not let them had he chosen so.
So his daughters should be thankful for such a benevolent patriarch. /S
He clearly said in context “I let them vote in peace without objection or argument frome me”. Kind of like how I can either let your comment go or choose to respond without claiming to have control over you. The man is still ignorant AF though.
Your explanation is accurate, but your undercutting the importance of the statement. If you don’t have the power, then you don’t “let people” do anything.
Which is to say, he was contemplating being a giant a****** and pressuring them to vote the way he wanted, but he decided to use common sense, to not be a jerk, and now he’s asking for a prize for doing what most of us do all the time everyday.
This doesn’t make him a horrible human being, but it certainly doesn’t make him a good one. In his mind, special rules apply only to him.
I’m sorry, I think I misunderstand you. Are you suggesting you’d be an a****** for trying to persuade your friends and family to vote the way you want them to by voicing your objections, opinions, and making arguments?
You are contriving crap out of thin air here.
Well it’s kind of semantics. The symbolism behind this is not the hill you’d want to die on. Letting somebody do something can either be allowing it or simply not disallowing it. I hate Trump and his low IQ followers, but that sentence does not imply anything.
can either be allowing it or simply not disallowing it
Exactly.
When I go take a shit, did you allow it, or not disallow it? Neither, because you have no agency over me, so it’d be a stupid fucking sentence.
I’m not saying he thinks he owns his daughters like some 16th century inbred minor noble.
But connotations and implications can exist even when they weren’t particularly intentional by the writer (or speaker.)
I let you waste my time but somehow I’m implying I own you.
Sure buddy.
You’re welcome for not disallowing you to post this. I will also allow you to reply with something snarky if you like.
Sure buddy
Just to be clear; I let you say that. /s
I’m very thankful for that
After reading my tweet, the turkey escaped from the oven. The whole animal kingdom is sick. It’s sad.
“I just supported taking away your rights. Why are you mad at meeeeee???”
To be fair, he might have not supported taking their rights… he might have just loved a rapist, criminal so much he was willing to overlook taking away their rights.
The leopards, they hunger
I hope the three girls organise their own thanksgiving dinner and invite their mom.
I mean white women also supported Trump…
Not all of them
yeah, but more of them voted on Trump than on Harris
Your point?
my point was to point out that most white women (that voted) voted on Trump, I’d argue it’s more valid than “Not all of them”, of course not all of them voted like that, that’s what democratic voting is all about, majority won, majority of white women voters voted for Trump
We should probably assume all 3 of his white daughters who voted against Trump are Trump supporters as well then. (Assuming the post is even legitimate)
“I voted for the idea that women aren’t people, now the women in my life don’t like me.”
“Childish and rude”.
Kinda reminds me of someone.
Oh nonononono - you see, when Trump does it, he gets the good words: HE is “good at nicknames”, “strong” and “tells it like it is”. When anybody Trump doesn’t like does the exact same thing, then they are being childish, rude and it is altogether absolutely inacceptable.
merely because they believe my one vote…
He thinks his vote doesn’t contribute or something?
With lines like “[your political opinion] is a mental disorder”, why is he surprised they aren’t coming?
what would you call trump voters?
Ignorant or malicious
but the right says the same about the left
I’d call Trump voters Trump voters. I’m not sure I understand the question.
I’m just pointing out that both sides think the other is dumb.
And I don’t think either side is correct.
You think I’m unaware that some Harris voters would say “Conservatism is a mental disorder”? Is that your point?
Touché
It’s kinda sad that we ended up in this political division. It’s also sad that increasing hate and and anxiety (and missing education and reasoning) fuels this dumpfire of societal development. That doesn’t really increase hope in the future, as stuff like climate change further accelerates this…
I don’t see it so much a political division as it is that most of the world is simply not very intelligent.
It’s both, and not a contradiction? But I’d say the USA is indeed more progressed with this. Like both sides. They got really intelligent people but a lot of dumb people. Compared to other western societies, more, the toll of slowly erroding education and the split between poor and rich is progressing harder. Same with things like obesity which as we know of research is bad for brain development (rather the food that leads to this).
Yes I think intelligence is a spectrum and that neither side is more “correct” than the other.
I think there’s good and bad ideas from both sides depending on your perspective, and we have to concede that nobody has all the answers, and that we don’t know what we don’t know.
Probably… For me it’s more about the things that should be obvious, like burning fossil-fuels will extremely likely lead us in a worse state. But it seems that a big percentage of the western population doesn’t want to believe facts and logical reasoning anymore and I think this is a very dangerous thing, as we have seen in 1920-1945.
“Liberalism is a mental disorder” These people are very telling how they treat people who they think legitimately have mental illness.
Conservatives 🤝 Liberals
“The political positions I dislike are caused by mental illness”Socialists: "Hey guys maybe we could try not denigrating mental disorders? Maybe we could try building a left wing that welcomes and accepts the neurodivergent and marginalised?
Liberals: “Fuck you, we’ll never accept psychopaths like Trump!”
Socialists: “I never agreed with you that Trump is a psychopath. We don’t have to accept Trump in order to treat ASPD folks with dignity!”
Liberals: “You’re disgusting, enabling abusers like that. If we treat psychopaths with basic dignity, they’ll only use it to abuse us!”
Yeah, that definitely sounds like a real conversation.
Oh, so now they’re delusional too?!
/S
And even if it were, we should totally go to the extreme of tolerating psychopaths
The name of that socialist? Albert Einstein.
And everyone clapped.
Words like psychopath have a common usage for people not in psychology/psychiatry. I’m sorry that we’re not meeting the clinical definition that you want, but I don’t think ranting about it all over Lemmy is going to help anything.
When the average nonspecialist individual thinks “psychopath” they think of someone like Hannibal Lecter, who is dangerous and must be locked up to prevent them harming others, and that’s not going to change from a short form text post. It would take a semester of psychology.
Not having empathy should be cause for at least suspicion in and of itself
That’s a very vague statement. You didn’t specify which type of empathy. For example, cognitive empathy is the ability to intuit what other people are thinking. Autistic people tend to have less cognitive empathy, which is related to the poor social skills. It’s hard to participate in social situations when you have a clinically significant inability to read minds. Drag doesn’t think you want to treat autistic people with suspicion, so why don’t you work on clarifying your statement to an appropriate level of specificity?
Then we should make psychology a compulsory subject in high school.
Yeah drag, we probably should. More education is pretty much always good
Unfortunately, most Lemmy users are past high school age, so we’ll have to educate them ourselves.
Yeah, but remember the honey and vinegar metaphor.
Actually, flies love vinegar. It smells like rotting flesh, which is a great place to go lay eggs.
This unintuitive fact matches the truth that being rude to people is an important part of the process of personal growth. Getting people to change takes a carrot AND a stick. When they do change, they’ll remember the carrot more easily. But the stick is important too. You can see this politically with the fact that the government likes to praise MLK for his nonviolent methods, but Malcolm X is the one who got Reagan to pass gun control laws in California. MLK’s movement was threatening because the politicians knew that if they didn’t work with the nonviolent protesters, those protesters would join movements like the Black Panthers. Likewise, rude leftists encourage people to be more open to listening to the polite leftists in their lives. The rude ones raise the stakes.
Interesting that he phrased it as liberalism.
The American definition of Liberalism is the exact opposite of the original meaning, so maybe he was just being extra-oldschool?
What do you consider to be the original meaning?
You’ll get different answers from extreme right and left and neither of them know what the fuck it means
It means fuck nazis is what it means
🤡
Neo liberal / laissez-faire applies to both major parties in the USA.
Although, it’s certainly becoming less so with the GOP than the Democrats. IE: bailouts for farmers affected by their own tariffs, mass deportations which will affect business, etc.
Sure, and what ideological branch does a right winger who doesn’t follow liberalism fall under?
Is a “right winger” who doesn’t follow liberalism even a “right winger” at all, insofar as the term is used in modern US politics? Considering that without the central bird of liberalism there wouldn’t be a need for the division into right and left wing. Maybe I’m off the mark, though?
Ooooh, it was a leading question. I gotcha.
I agree with you 100%.
To be liberal was to be open an accepting socially. The americans have changed it to mean to allow anything economically which is then coupled with bigotry because division makes the rich richer, or at least stops them being lynched
Bro this is just wrong on the fine details, starting with the fact that the original liberalism, and using that term specifically tends to mean the founding ideology of the American and French Revolutions btw, allowed racial chattel slavery and ending with the reality that the “liberal” parties in most countries besides America are conservatives.
American liberals are not represented properly
You’re delusional.
His wrongness was so great, that it caused integer underflow and him saying something correct.
Or horseshoe theory.
