Trump supporters, how do you square this?

[Hawkboys]

You can make a very good case that Obama started it. But clearly the biggest culprit is social media and the way it promotes click bait from the media.

Billy Joel would argue otherwise!!

 

[Hay Man]

Once again, there are many countries that have the same issues as this country has.

Anxiety
Video Games
School bullies
Political disagreements
Social media

The list goes on and on about our similarities.

We have way more guns and laxer laws on how we deal with them.

You can have a million inquires as to why these shootings are happening, but the government will never do anything about it as long as the NRA and billionaires continue to run the government and our country.

Money and power drive everything and always will.

Our government doesn't give two shits about you or me....

 

[Westernhawk]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to discount the importance of ease of access to guns, I just feel that too many are so focused on guns that they blind themselves to the broader picture.

We need a system that keeps the 2nd amendment intact but greatly improves the vetting process and ups the requirement bar for both the purchaser and seller.

IMO, that should include certification of successful completion of at least a basic gun safety course, proof of implementation of a secure storage system, character references from adult non-family members and a waiting period while experts review social media posts (by IP address, not name). Those services are popping up everywhere and are being increasingly retained by employers. I'd also advocate for increasing the legal age to 21.

I'm not convinced that "banning" certain weapons, such as AR-15 style rifles and handguns would have nearly as much impact as people think. If someone is determined, a lot of people could be killed in a very short amount of time with a 12-gauge pump shotgun and pockets loaded with shells. Would those then be banned? It's a slippery slope.

In regards to other countries, the data is eye-opening, but I would question if there is an element of false equivalency to a degree. There's a lot about American history and culture that makes us a different animal, and not necessarily in a positive way.

Great post. I totally agree that we need to keep the 2nd Amendment intact, but allow for reasonable vetting processes to own guns. It's easier to get a gun than Sudafed right now. But, political forces have led to almost no vetting (NRA lobbying and the like). We've actually become less restrictive over time in this regard.

You make a good point about different countries, and that's also worth studying. Unpopular opinion: we are a violent people, and likely always have been. Combine that with unfettered access to lethal means, and we get what we get. Again, this is my opinion only.

After a brief look on the interwebs, it appears most gun deaths are via handgun. AR-15s and the like are much, much lower (to your point).

 

[Westernhawk]

Once again, there are many countries that have the same issues as this country has.

Anxiety
Video Games
School bullies
Political disagreements
Social media

The list goes on and on about our similarities.

We have way more guns and laxer laws on how we deal with them.

You can have a million inquires as to why these shootings are happening, but the government will never do anything about it as long as the NRA and billionaires continue to run the government and our country.

Money and power drive everything and always will.

Our government doesn't give two shits about you or me....

My belief (so I'm not citing any data so shoot me, pun intended):

All of our politicians want us to fight about social/cultural issues. They effectively use partisan media to divide us.

As they do this, they can get people who make $75K a year to vote against their self interest. Ever wonder why Elon Musk is just so darn interested in politics?

There are (not including Drumpf), ELEVEN billionaires joining his administration. It's all about money. Both parties.

While we're at it, perhaps one of the things driving social upheaval and violence is the ongoing widening of the gap between the rich and the poor. The rich are getting very, very rich. If we want to get excited about something and fight for something, maybe folks should rightfully consider social warfare vs class warfare (using the term warfare hyperbolically).

 

[thedukeofearl]

No Worries

tRUMP is merely Elon's puppet anyway

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

I believe that the societal division, with the resulting violence, racism, sexist attitudes, dangerous conspiracy theories, blatant lies that gain acceptance through Repitition, coupled with growing stupidity, are directly created by Donald Trump, the MAGA, and now by the majority of Republicans. Just take a hard look at the pre and post Trump America.

Sorry, Huck, but I have to push back on this sweeping statement.

I'm not a Trump fan or supporter, and never voted for him, but painting with that kind of broad brush is narrow-minded, and the kind of hyperpartisanship that breeds contempt and further division. Fry got it right - politicians by their very nature are all basically grifters.

To the contrary, I would argue that the Biden-Harris administration has been the most divisive and authoritarian regime that we have seen in modern history.

Trump stoked division, yes, but mostly by his very presence. Half the country decided before he made his first executive decision that he was a racist arrogant megalomaniac intent on destroying the moral fabric of the country. Ergo, anything that came out of his mouth, or any decision that he made, was to automatically be interpreted through that lens.

There was no allowance or tolerance for critical analysis - if Trump said or did it, it automatically was bad and/or a blatant lie, and anyone who didn't go along with that narrative (and wasn't willing to turn a blind eye to the obvious twisting of facts or lack of proper context) was to be demonized and shunned along with him. If that meant working with the MSM and social media platforms to control the narrative so be it - the end justified the means...

When Biden decided to acquiesce to the far left of the democratic party, he ushered in a system intent on controlling through fear and intimidation. The agenda was hyper-focused on a forced moral high ground, prioritizing gender identity, pronouns, DEI, income redistribution, open borders, delegitimizing parental rights, etc., all while promoting an oppressed versus oppressor mindset.

Those that questioned the intent, effectiveness, potential consequences, etc., of any of the above were labeled transphobic, homophobic, racist, sexist, xenophobic, white supremacist, etc. They were then summarily cancelled. In a weird irony, it's basically a type of McCarthyism in reverse - either your a communist or transphobe, but the intent is the same.

Again, sorry, but the divisions eating away at our society right now go way beyond Trump.

 

[Westernhawk]

Sorry, Huck, but I have to push back on this sweeping statement.

I'm not a Trump fan or supporter, and never voted for him, but painting with that kind of broad brush is narrow-minded, and the kind of hyperpartisanship that breeds contempt and further division. Fry got it right - politicians by their very nature are all basically grifters.

To the contrary, I would argue that the Biden-Harris administration has been the most divisive and authoritarian regime that we have seen in modern history.

Trump stoked division, yes, but mostly by his very presence. Half the country decided before he made his first executive decision that he was a racist arrogant megalomaniac intent on destroying the moral fabric of the country. Ergo, anything that came out of his mouth, or any decision that he made, was to automatically be interpreted through that lens.

There was no allowance or tolerance for critical analysis - if Trump said or did it, it automatically was bad and/or a blatant lie, and anyone who didn't go along with that narrative (and wasn't willing to turn a blind eye to the obvious twisting of facts or lack of proper context) was to be demonized and shunned along with him. If that meant working with the MSM and social media platforms to control the narrative so be it - the end justified the means...

When Biden decided to acquiesce to the far left of the democratic party, he ushered in a system intent on controlling through fear and intimidation. The agenda was hyper-focused on a forced moral high ground, prioritizing gender identity, pronouns, DEI, income redistribution, open borders, delegitimizing parental rights, etc., all while promoting an oppressed versus oppressor mindset.

Those that questioned the intent, effectiveness, potential consequences, etc., of any of the above were labeled transphobic, homophobic, racist, sexist, xenophobic, white supremacist, etc. They were then summarily cancelled. In a weird irony, it's basically a type of McCarthyism in reverse - either your a communist or transphobe, but the intent is the same.

Again, sorry, but the divisions eating away at our society right now go way beyond Trump.

I think you make some fair points, and I think we've been on an unfortunate, divisive trajectory for over 20 years. Personally, I think partisan media (Fox, MSNBC, etc) really exacerbate the problem.

My inlaws used to be what I would call reasonable republicans. Now, at holiday dinners, they aggressively bring up inflammatory social issues and want to argue all day. It's no coincidence that they watch Fox TV in their home several hours per day.

I also disagree with your statements on Trump. I think he's the most divisive political figure in modern times. He's a convicted criminal, an adjudicated sex abuser, a race-baiter, and someone who encouraged the Jan 6 insurrection (the first time rioters ever entered the Capitol building like this). Now we have over a dozen billionaires and Elon acting as a quasi VP or something. That's some really divisive stuff, in my opinion. You are quite welcome to feel otherwise. Here's a fun link that discusses the names and net worth of the super wealthy people that are interested, in my opinion, in keeping the proles fighting with each other:

Trump has tapped an unprecedented 13 billionaires for his administration. Here's who they are

President-elect Donald Trump has assembled the wealthiest presidential administration in modern history, with at least 13 billionaires set to take top government posts.

abcnews.go.com

 

[thedukeofearl]

I believe that the societal division, with the resulting violence, racism, sexist attitudes, dangerous conspiracy theories, blatant lies that gain acceptance through Repitition, coupled with growing stupidity, are directly created by Donald Trump, the MAGA, and now by the majority of Republicans. Just take a hard look at the pre and post Trump America.

Just take a hard look at the pre and post Trump America.

 

[Westernhawk]

Can anyone tell me how DEI efforts at universities and companies have been harmful to you? Be specific. I know folks claim DEI is divisive, which is curious to me. I'm honestly interested in where that hurt you. It certainly helped some. I work in a very diverse setting with people from all over the world. I should note that Iowa is well over 90% white.

Does one's perspective of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts depend on the culture in which you live? If I'm in a rural area that is all white, I'd probably struggle to find utility in it as well.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'm curious how it made people so agitated and offended.

 

[PCHawk]

Just take a hard look at the pre and post Trump America.

You can trade Trump's name out with Obama and see the exact same thing.

 

[PCHawk]

Sorry, Huck, but I have to push back on this sweeping statement.

I'm not a Trump fan or supporter, and never voted for him, but painting with that kind of broad brush is narrow-minded, and the kind of hyperpartisanship that breeds contempt and further division. Fry got it right - politicians by their very nature are all basically grifters.

To the contrary, I would argue that the Biden-Harris administration has been the most divisive and authoritarian regime that we have seen in modern history.

Trump stoked division, yes, but mostly by his very presence. Half the country decided before he made his first executive decision that he was a racist arrogant megalomaniac intent on destroying the moral fabric of the country. Ergo, anything that came out of his mouth, or any decision that he made, was to automatically be interpreted through that lens.

There was no allowance or tolerance for critical analysis - if Trump said or did it, it automatically was bad and/or a blatant lie, and anyone who didn't go along with that narrative (and wasn't willing to turn a blind eye to the obvious twisting of facts or lack of proper context) was to be demonized and shunned along with him. If that meant working with the MSM and social media platforms to control the narrative so be it - the end justified the means...

When Biden decided to acquiesce to the far left of the democratic party, he ushered in a system intent on controlling through fear and intimidation. The agenda was hyper-focused on a forced moral high ground, prioritizing gender identity, pronouns, DEI, income redistribution, open borders, delegitimizing parental rights, etc., all while promoting an oppressed versus oppressor mindset.

Those that questioned the intent, effectiveness, potential consequences, etc., of any of the above were labeled transphobic, homophobic, racist, sexist, xenophobic, white supremacist, etc. They were then summarily cancelled. In a weird irony, it's basically a type of McCarthyism in reverse - either your a communist or transphobe, but the intent is the same.

Again, sorry, but the divisions eating away at our society right now go way beyond Trump.

I think the argument against Trump would have a lot more merit if there was even a tiny bit of time between him getting elected and the storm that came after him. It was a coordinated attack from day one. How he was treated and talked about before becoming a politician and after was like a switch going off. People either don't know that or for some reason find a way to justify it.

 

[thedukeofearl]

You can trade Trump's name out with Obama and see the exact same thing.

 

[Westernhawk]

You can trade Trump's name out with Obama and see the exact same thing.

Lol not at all.

Things Obama didn't do that Trump did: Commit fraud, sexaully abuse someone, incite an insurrection. Wait for it... your whataboutism is hilarious. I get it, you dig Trump. I stand firmly by my position.

You may disagree with Obama's politics, but he is a decent human. Well-spoken, a good family man, a very well educated man, and someone with a pretty darn spotless record in terms of his character and behavior.

I know we are in different times, and people are willing to vote for someone with low moral character. I'm not interested in comparing Trump with anyone, really. This isn't a left-right thing for me. Trump is a variant unlike anyone we've ever seen. I would choose virtually any other regular republican over Trump, and I'm not a registered Republican.

 

[CP87]

Lol not at all.

Things Obama didn't do that Trump did: Commit fraud, sexaully abuse someone, incite an insurrection. Wait for it... your whataboutism is hilarious. I get it, you dig Trump. I stand firmly by my position.

You may disagree with Obama's politics, but he is a decent human. Well-spoken, a good family man, a very well educated man, and someone with a pretty darn spotless record in terms of his character and behavior.

I know we are in different times, and people are willing to vote for someone with low moral character. I'm not interested in comparing Trump with anyone, really. This isn't a left-right thing for me. Trump is a variant unlike anyone we've ever seen. I would choose virtually any other regular republican over Trump, and I'm not a registered Republican.

The thing about Obama being divisive that is funny is that many Black Americans wanted him to be the first Black President, and they came away from his Presidency disappointed because he did not lean into his Blackness. Instead, in their minds, he ran away from racial issues in the name of placating white folks. But to hear it from those white folks, he was the most divisive, race-baiting figure in the history of politics.

 

[CP87]

When Biden decided to acquiesce to the far left of the democratic party, he ushered in a system intent on controlling through fear and intimidation. The agenda was hyper-focused on a forced moral high ground, prioritizing gender identity, pronouns, DEI, income redistribution, open borders, delegitimizing parental rights, etc., all while promoting an oppressed versus oppressor mindset.

Those that questioned the intent, effectiveness, potential consequences, etc., of any of the above were labeled transphobic, homophobic, racist, sexist, xenophobic, white supremacist, etc. They were then summarily cancelled. In a weird irony, it's basically a type of McCarthyism in reverse - either your a communist or transphobe, but the intent is the same.

I definitely agree that the divisions go well beyond Trump, and the Left is not beyond reproach.

But I just am not buying the statements in the above 2 paragraphs, at all. You can hammer the administration on its border policy, but those other things seem like social media fodder, not anything actually related to the Biden administration's legislative or executive moves. Just because Holier-than-Thou people on social media claim things in the name of the left, that doesn't mean you can pin them to Biden. And who got cancelled, and how specifically was Biden implicated in that cancelling?

 

[HuckFinn]

With Donny in mind, who is the flag waver for the Left. In fact, who is the Left? In fact, what is the Left?

yes, my statement was a broad brush. Why? Because Right and Left have become broad brushes, of course. Duh.

 

[Hay Man]

With Donny in mind, who is the flag waver for the Left. In fact, who is the Left? In fact, what is the Left?

yes, my statement was a broad brush. Why? Because Right and Left have become broad brushes, of course. Duh.

I don't think the left has one and really haven't had one since Obama.

That whole side has been lost for a leader for a while. At some point, someone needs to step up, but it probably won't happen until 3 or 4 years from now. If at all.

Needs to be someone under the age of 60, if not 50.

 

[kicker22]

100% this. The question is what drove this teenage girl and other school shooters to carry out such a horrific act? I think suicides are on a similar level that need investigated. They’re both extremely selfish acts but what is causing these young people to get to this point. With one daughter graduating from HS next week and the other in 10th grade I find social media and phones to be so toxic on our young generation. We held off on phone til our girls were 13. Wish we could’ve been strong enough to hold out longer. Social media is such a toxic place. I recall middle school being an extremely hard time. I just can’t imagine what it’d be like to go through middle school w/ social media. It takes bullying to an insane levels. Middle school girls are ruthless. And from my experience they’re ruthless from 5th grade to around 10 grade where they start maturing.

Late to the conversation and not saying I disagree with you, but be careful about referring to suicides as an "extremely selfish act". I understand the logic behind that statement, but I've known survivors who attempted and they were far from selfish. Their mentality and self worth were so down, that they saw themselves as unimportant or an inconvenience to those that care about them and they're doing everyone else a favor. Some hurt, so much and knew how it impacted those around them that they felt it would not only end their suffering but that of their loved ones that they cared about.

I'm not trying to call you out, but in my line of work I see the other side and it's something that needs to get out there as much as possible. We have no idea what they're going through on the inside and while it may seem selfish to us it may be selfless to them.

 

[kicker22]

I completely agree with you that we need to understand the motivations of shooters. I would love for a solid, longitudinal study being done that looks at similarities of both shooter characteristics and motives over time, to see what kinds of things might be worth pursuing.

With that, the sheer volume and unfettered access to guns is an obvious issue to many (including most anyone not from the United States... they think we're nuts).

I agree that this is a multifactorial problem, but unless we are willing to honestly look at all of the factors and aggressively pursue solutions (including limiting access to those who shouldn't have guns), we are simply saying "thoughts and prayers" and shrugging our shoulders while children die.

I'd like to think everyone here on this board cares about this issue. I'd ask that folks be open to all of the facets of the problem. To say it's just the guns, and the guns only, is wrong. To say it's only about things like mental health or drugs... also limiting. We need to be open to looking at all of these.

Full disclosure, my area of expertise is in mental health and population health. I deal with the violence and suicidality on the front lines and I'm acutely aware that there are many factors at play. I would love to see much more robust mental health resources for people, but many in our country think people are just weak and should pull themselves up by the bootstraps. We, as a culture, are more anxious, depressed, and hopeless than previous generations. We are arguably a violent society, with unfettered access to lethal means. We also have a lot of substance abuse problems. Lastly, the income disparities between rich and poor are growing very quickly. Not a recipe for calm, IMHO.

I appreciate everyone hanging in there for this conversation.

Glad to know I'm in good company. I'm a court appointed mental health advocate.

 

[PCHawk]

Lol not at all.

Things Obama didn't do that Trump did: Commit fraud, sexaully abuse someone, incite an insurrection. Wait for it... your whataboutism is hilarious. I get it, you dig Trump. I stand firmly by my position.

You may disagree with Obama's politics, but he is a decent human. Well-spoken, a good family man, a very well educated man, and someone with a pretty darn spotless record in terms of his character and behavior.

I know we are in different times, and people are willing to vote for someone with low moral character. I'm not interested in comparing Trump with anyone, really. This isn't a left-right thing for me. Trump is a variant unlike anyone we've ever seen. I would choose virtually any other regular republican over Trump, and I'm not a registered Republican.

I don't think history will be kind to Obama. He is well spoken tho.