To people upvoting the parent, do you really believe that the half of the population who don't have the same politicals views as you could only possibly be motivated by hatred? It's not possible for you to imagine anyone disagreeing with you might have a legitimate philosophical difference?

I definitely don't, but it doesn't change much to the parent's point; keyword I'd "blinded", not "hatred". There is a lot of hate but what is really appalling is how few trump supporters can be reasoned with. Or can see reason at all. The ones that could... are no longer Trump supporters. It is somehow easier to believe that it's just hatred misguiding people, because the alternative is worse.

Please do keep in mind that while it may be "half the US population" (it's not), it's definitely not half the world population. An absolute majority of the world is looking at the USA in utter disgust.

>There is a lot of hate but what is really appalling is how few trump supporters can be reasoned with. Or can see reason at all. The ones that could... are no longer Trump supporters.

This is literally the exact same thing Trump supporters say about Democrats, that they only reason with emotion and can't use facts or logic.

>Please do keep in mind that while it may be "half the US population" (it's not), it's definitely not half the world population. An absolute majority of the world is looking at the USA in utter disgust.

He's actually relatively popular in India (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/01/08/how-people-...), and also in China (can't find a better source than https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Trump-popular-in-China, but if you know many mainland Chinese you could ask them), which make up a significant chunk of the global population.

> This is literally the exact same thing Trump supporters say about Democrats

In the US it's generally true on both sides, because your politics are ridiculously "team" centric.

A lot of democrats can't be reasoned with, with regards to their party's policies. The major difference is that the Trump "camp" takes it to an absurd level of cognitive dissonance and at this point, either you know what I'm talking about already, or it's not worth my time and energy to explain it here (sorry).

Many voted Trump not because he is ideal but because he is a republican (on paper at least) or because he seemed to be somehow better than Hillary. And it will happen again. Here on HN many are upvoting not because of party affiliation (many of us are from outside US) but because of mans works. If Trump wants to pardon Assange on condition - to get material to fight against democrats - and not on principle, then you may get a picture of what kind of a person he is! He is (just) a trader, not a man of principle... (unless this principle is called trading)

I'm not even American, but it didn't take me long to find a list of his policies: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/trump-campaign-announces-....

I'll list some of the less fanciful of those that many Americans agree with.

-"Made in America" Tax Credits

-Return to [covid] Normal in 2021

-Make All Critical Medicines and Supplies for Healthcare Workers in The United States

-Tax Credits for Companies that Bring Back Jobs from China

-Allow 100% Expensing Deductions for Essential Industries like Pharmaceuticals and Robotics who Bring Back their Manufacturing to the United States

-No Federal Contracts for Companies who Outsource to China

-Cut Prescription Drug Prices

-Lower Healthcare Insurance Premiums

-Cover All Pre-Existing Conditions

-End Surprise Billing

-Provide School Choice to Every Child in America

-Teach American Exceptionalism

-Pass Congressional Term Limits

-Fully Fund and Hire More Police and Law Enforcement Officers

-Increase Criminal Penalties for Assaults on Law Enforcement Officers

-Block Illegal Immigrants from Becoming Eligible for Taxpayer-Funded Welfare, Healthcare, and Free College Tuition

-Mandatory Deportation for Non-Citizen Gang Members

-Require New Immigrants to Be Able to Support Themselves Financially

-Launch Space Force, Establish Permanent Manned Presence on The Moon and Send the First Manned Mission to Mars

-Stop Endless Wars and Bring Our Troops Home

-Get Allies to Pay their Fair Share

-Continue nominating constitutionalist Supreme Court and lower court judges

-Support the exercise of Second Amendment rights

Now you may say, those are just words, they mean nothing. Well during his term he did a reasonable job of sticking to his campaign promises: tax cuts, bans on Chinese companies like Huawei and Tiktok and higher tariffs with China, sanctioning Chinese officials in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, withdrawing troops back from the Middle East, negotiating pharmaceutical discounts, even building the stupid wall to limit illegal immigration.

Recently there are three issues in particular that attract many people to him compared to Biden: he's seen as anti-covid-lockdowns, he's not going to try and take away their guns, and he's pro law-and-order, so they think if he wins he'll send in national police to stop the ongoing riots.

>You are not an American and yet you are here, telling us what is accurate and important when assessing the words, actions and policies of the POTUS?

I'm sorry, does being American give you some special privileged access to American news that foreigners aren't allowed to see? I see the same news you do, interact with the same people online that you do. Facts don't change regardless of where you live; ethics doesn't change regardless of where you live.

>And using his own campaign site as fact???

The question was about his policies; what better source of his policies could there be than the actual site where he officially announces his policies?

This is quite the overreaction, and not a good look.

maybe the "followers" you know don't go into detail about policy because they can tell you just think they are motivated by hatred and bigotry and know that any detailed discussion with you will be pointless.

"don't cast your pearls before swine" and all that. Why waste the energy having a detailed discussion with someone who has preconceived biases and won't listen anyways?

the worst really? We've had a rapist or two. I don't know why anyone tries to pretend that there's a moral high ground in the American political landscape.

It is known that purity tests are ineffective in elections on both sides of the debate.

You are aware that something like 30 women have accused him of sexual assault, right?

Accusation is not conviction though. I really hope that law still has power and meaning

Trump has had multiple women accuse him of rape.

Really? I am so sick of people absolutely trashing Trump because of his personality. I mean yeah, his personality SUCKS, no question. He is rude, disrespectful, and a jack ass. But lets look at some facts. Obama, brought us from 2 wars/conflicts to 7. Obama, set a precedent for drone striking American citizens overseas. Obama approved fraking in the Artic. Obama started a drone war in Yemen (at the behest of the Saudi's) that has killed many innocent people. The Obama Administration used so many bombs the military RAN OUT OF FUCKING BOMBS! Trump helped negotiate 2 peace deals in the middle east. Reduced our troops in Afghanistan, and got us out of Syria. Let me be clear though, I am not a Trump support. Don't like the guy didn't vote for him. I have never voted for the "lesser of two evils". But if you were to force me to vote for the lesser of two evils, Trump would be the clear winner. Yeah he is loud mouth jack ass, yeah he has done some shitty things, but he has done less shitty things than Obama/Biden.

Please don't try to start flamewars here.

> People who it seems are too blinded by their hatred of others to notice their noses being cut off right in front of their own eyes...

You mean the people so blinded by hatred that they attack, burn and destroy the shops and residences of uninvolved parties? The people so blinded by hatred they can't even give the president credit for making peace between multiple middle eastern countries, and bringing back the soldiers that have been reponsible for thousands of innocent deaths there? The people who march down streets chanting "fuck you Jesus!"?

Hmm, do we really want to open this conversation to making broad generalizations about groups based on small groups of extremists within it? Neither side wins in a conversation like that.

>Hmm, do we really want to open this conversation to making broad generalizations about groups based on small groups of extremists within it? Neither side wins in a conversation like that.

I'd argue it's still a better outcome than if only one side is allowed to make broad generalizations about groups based on small groups of extremists within it, while the other side is silenced.

I don't think either side is being silenced. Both sides equally like to accuse the other of:

- Ignoring "facts and logic"

- Suppressing free speech

- Being hateful

- Blindly following mainstream media

- Being agents of foreign influence

>I don't think either side is being silenced.

Did you see the part where the person calling all Trump supporters full of hate was upvoted while the comments I made highlighting some hateful acts by non-Trump-supporters was heavily downvoted? Maybe not literal silencing, but seems people here would definitely rather only hear one side of the story.

Or, perhaps, they just disagree with you?

https://xkcd.com/1357/

There is a tremendous difference between silencing, disagreeing with someone, and only listening to one side of the story.

Dude, the moment you realize whose side neo-Nazis are on, you really don’t want that argument.

So we musn't support anything that's also supported by Nazis? Then we should oppose vegetarianism and bans on smoking, because Hitler supported them?

Isn't this taking things to a logical extreme?

No, my point is exactly the opposite: choosing the worst possible examples of someone who supports X to argue that's the norm is bad thinking. If you want to play the 'broad generalization' game, then you have to be able to suck it up and admit that on one side of the argument we have neo-Nazis, so if you identify with that side you'll be called a neo-Nazi.

I am new to Hackernews, is this site mainly for technology or is politics also allowed?

Politics is generally considered off-topic unless it's "evidence of some interesting new phenomenon"[0]

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Mostly about startups really, with a big lean on technology. On occasion, there are political discussions but they tend to be heavily monitored to stop them becoming too bad.

>Try harder. And while you're trying, learn a little US history. The real stuff, not fauxnews talk show host interpretive stories designed to create controversy in order to sell more ads...

Could you point me to the part in US history that shows rioting and destroying innocent people's lives and property is not an act of hatred?

Off the top of my head: Boston tea party? (about taxation without representation, and related issues)

I guess it is pretty typical that the establishment doesn't want to understand or acknowledge the real reasons for why rioters are upset, they'd rather smear them and keep things the way they are.

>Boston tea party

The people involved in that did not go around destroying the property of random uninvolved shopkeepers, it was specifically a rebellion against the English.

When the established rules leave some in a bad enough spot they will become frustrated enough to break the rules as best as they can. Sometimes all you get are pointless riots, sometimes you get music, sometimes you get a revolution. It depends on the situation.

What is always true is that the establishment wants to maintain the current order. They don't want to understand or accommodate the malcontents. Instead they smear and continue to oppress them.

In the case of the recent riots, there is a large segment of white america that want to see blacks kept down, and are happy for the police to do their dirty work. That's why there are protests, and that's also why there are riots - different people expressing their anger and frustration in their own ways.

Are you implying the Tulsa race massacre wasn't an act of hatred?

Seriously? Where did you go to school?

Start with the US revolution... and then find your way up through the 20th century. There are thousands of instances.

The US revolution wasn't people going around randomly burning down other people's houses and businesses, it was specifically targeted at the English oppressors.