Why the left hates Trump so intensely

[martybegan]

I may be new here, but you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about, and had you before posting it confirmed that your supposition about the distinction between a reply and a response, you would not have posted it. Alas, that's not what you did and now you shall look like the fool you are.

• What is the difference between reply and respond? | the-difference-between.com
  
• Difference between "response" and "reply"
  
• Reply (see synonym guide too)
• Response/respond (verb)

Every reply is a response, but not every response is a reply. And that, rock-boy, is why you are wrong;.

Trust me when I tell you that I am not the person with whom you want to try playing pedantically snide word games. I'm quite careful to be cognizant of the denotation and connotation of the words I choose to express myself in public. That's not to say I never make mistakes, but rather that this time I have not.

So much text, so little content. Not a single thing about the article I posted, or my views on said article.

Only trolls and morons who want to appear smarter than they are go into such snide detail as you.

Enjoy your (probably brief) stay here.

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

I stand by my statement that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a Religion. In fact I am debating it with someone now, unlike my posts with you, which are nothing more than your pathetic attempt to avoid the conversation at hand.

Eight Elements of a Religion

1. BELIEF SYSTEM or WORLDVIEW:
   Many beliefs that fit together in a system to make sense of the universe and our place in it.
2. COMMUNITY:
   The belief system is shared, and its ideals are practiced by a group.
3. CENTRAL STORIES/MYTHS:
   Stories that help explain the beliefs of a group; these are told over and over again and sometimes performed by members of the group. They may or may not be factual.
4. RITUALS:
   Beliefs are explained, taught, and made real through ceremonies.
5. ETHICS:
   Rules about how to behave; these rules are often thought to have come from a deity or supernatural place, but they might also be seen as guidelines created by the group over time.
6. CHARACTERISTIC EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES:
   Most religions share emotions such as awe, mystery, guilt, joy, devotion, conversion, inner peace, etc.
7. MATERIAL EXPRESSION:
   Religions use things to perform rituals or to express or represent beliefs, such as: statues, paintings, music, flowers, incense, clothes, architecture, and specific sacred locations.
8. SACREDNESS:
   Religions see some things as sacred and some not sacred (or profane). Some objects, actions, people and places may share in the sacredness or express it.

Share with us how you see all eight of those key traits of a religion found in progressivism. At least using the above outline you have a framework that you can use to drive the discussion. Go for it. Have fun.
_____________

Just so you understand where I'm coming from....You say you want to initiate a discussion about the nature and extent in which modern progressivism is as much a religion as, say, Christianity, Roman Catholicism, or Hinduism. The topic is reasonably interesting in the abstract, but frankly I'd never given it any consideration. I would be happy to engage on that line of discussion, but seeing as I've not thought about it in the context you have in mind -- and you can't know when you are creating the thread that anyone else has either -- you need to guide the direction and context in which you want people to think about the topic and discuss it. It's your burden to put the framework out so others can consider it.

What did your OP do? It tossed someone else's ideas at us (the blog) and your only personal contribution to the topic it amounted to, "See, see. I told you so. I've been saying this all along and here a blogger agrees with me." (BTW, I googled "Blue Team Progressivism" to see what it is. I quickly found nothing about it and the quote you posted was "out of the blue;" thus it wasn't apparent just what to make of it. I don't even know if the quoted words are yours as your name isn't at the top of the quote.)

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

That's not much of a positive and thoughtful conversation starter. That's little other than pride braggadociously expressed. Why is that so?

• You didn't offer any of your own nuanced spin on the blog post.
• You didn't expound on the ideas in the blog post.
• You didn't put any of your own ideas on the table in advance of asking us to do the same.

It's fine that you use the blog post as a high level rubric for the discussion, but without your putting your own "something" out there with it -- something beside a blanket "he says the same thing I do" affirmation -- it's not you that we'd be discussing, it's the blogger's ideas, and he's not here to defend or explain them. And all you said, was basically, "me too and I told you so." What else is that but you expressing a feeling of validation? Nothing. That all that is.

Think of it as though you found a recipe (the blog post) for apple pie. You read it and it's close to what you want to bake, but you put your own take on it and add apple brandy to the recipe and then ice the pie crust with hard sauce. Now it's not someone else's pie/recipe, it's your pie/recipe and the people to whom you serve it will have a reason to talk about it with you.

I prefer to start a discussion with minimal input, and let the ideas hash themselves out through discussion. If you don't like that, feel free to infest other threads.

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

More like start with minimal thought then apply minimal honesty.

That is a indictment of your own ability to comprehend, not mine to express my views as I see fit.

 

[NightFox]

I do think there is a danger here. Once ideology infects us at a cultural/societal level, a momentum can take over and cause literal schisms, I'd think. Not just silly little verbal slap fights, but something more tangible and destructive.

Maybe I'm wrong. That would be nice.
.

You're probably not wrong but maybe the questions you should be asking are:
1. What are you really afraid of?
2. What can you do to prevent it?
3. If prevention proves to be impractical or impossible what is your strategy to mitigate the effects?

Personally I think that a gaggle of incoherent, brain washed anti-Trump ding bats running around trying demonstrate what mindless drones they really are is the least of our problems given that the Republic is facing an ever increasing risk of currency destruction and the economic chaos & political uncertainty that will surely follow.

"Every hand is turned against you. Even the ground beneath your feet carries the seeds of your destruction! " -- Dark Voice, Starcraft II

I've pretty much given up trying to ask. The only response I've gotten so far is to deny that the behavior is at all unusual.

I think they believe the behavior is perfectly justified.

If you can't agree on a fundamental premise, there's nowhere to go from there.
.

I agree Mac but IMHO nobody should be surprised by any of this when you look at the behavior of our so-called "leaders" and their paid mouthpieces in the media; petty, dishonest, unprincipled and self-absorbed what would one expect from the followers of such "leaders"? We find ourselves in a largely Id driven society where the ends justifies the means and large swaths of the citizenry believe that government need only be held morally accountable for it's actions when the people running it have the wrong letter behind their names, no first principles, no coherent philosophy and no sacrifice for the future need guide their actions only getting their way RIGHT NOW matters.

It's a situation commonly known as decadence and it was one of the principle culprits in the fall of Rome, if you want to know what's in store for the future one need only objectively examine the past.

"The problem with revolutions is that they always end right where they begin." -- Matthew Catania

 

[candycorn]

Mind if I quote you?

I haven’t yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria.

Well, you had 4 years in 2 cases. Conservatives stating they will not hire anyone because we have Obama in office; gun store owners refusing to serve people who voted for Obama.

And you had 2 years since the court ruled on SSM to “come to terms” with why conservative clerks wouldn’t issue marriage certificates.

How much more time do you need?

I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

Oh… you don’t?

Perhaps you missed this:

2008–13 United States ammunition shortage - Wikipedia (the page has 500 edits plus…it wasn’t started last week so yes, it was “a thing”). You don’t think that was “over the top” hysteria?

But that was just an example of hysteria that lasted 5 years that you claim to be completely unaware of….

Lets go back to 2009 when Obama hadn’t done much of anything to piss anyone off yet: You may recall that the President of the US wanted to broadcast a message to some school kids. Pretty innocuous, right? Wrong:

Many conservatives enraged over Obama school speech - CNN.com

One “level headed” conservative said: “"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.”

School Districts in Six States to Refrain from Showing Presidential Address Next Week

Proves it was widespread.

I guess you missed the Town Halls in 2009—right after Obama took office in January 8 months earlier. Politico described the supposedly “non hysterical” protestors as this:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

Guess you missed that one too.

Hysterical behavior is the staple of both sides when they lose the election; somehow you only cite it when the left is guilty of it and plead ignorance to all of the other examples.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

I guess you missed Ms. Streep’s comments and how much love they generated by the right wing when she said that MMA wasn’t an “art”. But the again, the right wing posters here (you mentioned the board) have always loved Hollywood; right? <sarcasm>

Whatever…everyone feels they are under attack 100% of the time on the board.

But FWIW…

I’ve yet to see any “sheer hatred” of the “rubes” as you put it that has been beyond the usual comments that supposedly educated people make about the supposedly uneducated… on this board at least. I see much more venom in the other direction as a matter of fact. What I think you’re seeing is that people who love the nation (and many Republicans too) know that Mr. Trump is, at best, several fathoms in over his head with no inkling of how to begin to tackle the problems of the nation; all the while professing unique expertise in solving those specific problems. And when you air those concerns…naturally…the people who installed this douchebag are (or at least feel) they are being targeted for being dumb enough to think he knew more than the generals about ISIS, that he had a plan to replace Obamacare, that he actually did care about veterans, and that he will bring jobs back when simple mathematics makes it nearly impossible.

So all this means that you disagree that the Left has been unusually animated about Trump's win.

Animated? Sure

Unusual? No. As demonstrated with citations from ACTUAL media sources reporting craziness in Texas, Georgia, Colorado, Florida, etc.. I could have cited 7-10 more instance in places like MN and NY.

Over the top? Hardly (adjusted for inflation).

My turn to ask you a question. Do you think anyone on the right pronounced that the nation would fall after 2012 on this board? That the nation split apart? That Obama was not legitimate?

Can you explain the difference between 2012 and 2016 other than who is saying it?

Is that a fair conclusion?

And have you not seen ANY of guno's posts, for example?
.

I imagine I have.
I would imagine that they are the exception rather than the norm.

 

[candycorn]

So much text, so little content. Not a single thing about the article I posted, or my views on said article.

Only trolls and morons who want to appear smarter than they are go into such snide detail as you.

Enjoy your (probably brief) stay here.

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

I stand by my statement that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a Religion. In fact I am debating it with someone now, unlike my posts with you, which are nothing more than your pathetic attempt to avoid the conversation at hand.

Eight Elements of a Religion

1. BELIEF SYSTEM or WORLDVIEW:
   Many beliefs that fit together in a system to make sense of the universe and our place in it.
2. COMMUNITY:
   The belief system is shared, and its ideals are practiced by a group.
3. CENTRAL STORIES/MYTHS:
   Stories that help explain the beliefs of a group; these are told over and over again and sometimes performed by members of the group. They may or may not be factual.
4. RITUALS:
   Beliefs are explained, taught, and made real through ceremonies.
5. ETHICS:
   Rules about how to behave; these rules are often thought to have come from a deity or supernatural place, but they might also be seen as guidelines created by the group over time.
6. CHARACTERISTIC EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES:
   Most religions share emotions such as awe, mystery, guilt, joy, devotion, conversion, inner peace, etc.
7. MATERIAL EXPRESSION:
   Religions use things to perform rituals or to express or represent beliefs, such as: statues, paintings, music, flowers, incense, clothes, architecture, and specific sacred locations.
8. SACREDNESS:
   Religions see some things as sacred and some not sacred (or profane). Some objects, actions, people and places may share in the sacredness or express it.

Share with us how you see all eight of those key traits of a religion found in progressivism. At least using the above outline you have a framework that you can use to drive the discussion. Go for it. Have fun.
_____________

Just so you understand where I'm coming from....You say you want to initiate a discussion about the nature and extent in which modern progressivism is as much a religion as, say, Christianity, Roman Catholicism, or Hinduism. The topic is reasonably interesting in the abstract, but frankly I'd never given it any consideration. I would be happy to engage on that line of discussion, but seeing as I've not thought about it in the context you have in mind -- and you can't know when you are creating the thread that anyone else has either -- you need to guide the direction and context in which you want people to think about the topic and discuss it. It's your burden to put the framework out so others can consider it.

What did your OP do? It tossed someone else's ideas at us (the blog) and your only personal contribution to the topic it amounted to, "See, see. I told you so. I've been saying this all along and here a blogger agrees with me." (BTW, I googled "Blue Team Progressivism" to see what it is. I quickly found nothing about it and the quote you posted was "out of the blue;" thus it wasn't apparent just what to make of it. I don't even know if the quoted words are yours as your name isn't at the top of the quote.)

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

That's not much of a positive and thoughtful conversation starter. That's little other than pride braggadociously expressed. Why is that so?

• You didn't offer any of your own nuanced spin on the blog post.
• You didn't expound on the ideas in the blog post.
• You didn't put any of your own ideas on the table in advance of asking us to do the same.

It's fine that you use the blog post as a high level rubric for the discussion, but without your putting your own "something" out there with it -- something beside a blanket "he says the same thing I do" affirmation -- it's not you that we'd be discussing, it's the blogger's ideas, and he's not here to defend or explain them. And all you said, was basically, "me too and I told you so." What else is that but you expressing a feeling of validation? Nothing. That all that is.

Think of it as though you found a recipe (the blog post) for apple pie. You read it and it's close to what you want to bake, but you put your own take on it and add apple brandy to the recipe and then ice the pie crust with hard sauce. Now it's not someone else's pie/recipe, it's your pie/recipe and the people to whom you serve it will have a reason to talk about it with you.

I prefer to start a discussion with minimal input, and let the ideas hash themselves out through discussion. If you don't like that, feel free to infest other threads.

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

More like start with minimal thought then apply minimal honesty.

That is a indictment of your own ability to comprehend, not mine to express my views as I see fit.

Actually, it’s an accurate forensic examination of your posts and subsequent criticism when your hypocrisy is pointed out.

 

[Mac1958]

Mind if I quote you?

I haven’t yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria.

Well, you had 4 years in 2 cases. Conservatives stating they will not hire anyone because we have Obama in office; gun store owners refusing to serve people who voted for Obama.

And you had 2 years since the court ruled on SSM to “come to terms” with why conservative clerks wouldn’t issue marriage certificates.

How much more time do you need?

I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

Oh… you don’t?

Perhaps you missed this:

2008–13 United States ammunition shortage - Wikipedia (the page has 500 edits plus…it wasn’t started last week so yes, it was “a thing”). You don’t think that was “over the top” hysteria?

But that was just an example of hysteria that lasted 5 years that you claim to be completely unaware of….

Lets go back to 2009 when Obama hadn’t done much of anything to piss anyone off yet: You may recall that the President of the US wanted to broadcast a message to some school kids. Pretty innocuous, right? Wrong:

Many conservatives enraged over Obama school speech - CNN.com

One “level headed” conservative said: “"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.”

School Districts in Six States to Refrain from Showing Presidential Address Next Week

Proves it was widespread.

I guess you missed the Town Halls in 2009—right after Obama took office in January 8 months earlier. Politico described the supposedly “non hysterical” protestors as this:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

Guess you missed that one too.

Hysterical behavior is the staple of both sides when they lose the election; somehow you only cite it when the left is guilty of it and plead ignorance to all of the other examples.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

I guess you missed Ms. Streep’s comments and how much love they generated by the right wing when she said that MMA wasn’t an “art”. But the again, the right wing posters here (you mentioned the board) have always loved Hollywood; right? <sarcasm>

Whatever…everyone feels they are under attack 100% of the time on the board.

But FWIW…

I’ve yet to see any “sheer hatred” of the “rubes” as you put it that has been beyond the usual comments that supposedly educated people make about the supposedly uneducated… on this board at least. I see much more venom in the other direction as a matter of fact. What I think you’re seeing is that people who love the nation (and many Republicans too) know that Mr. Trump is, at best, several fathoms in over his head with no inkling of how to begin to tackle the problems of the nation; all the while professing unique expertise in solving those specific problems. And when you air those concerns…naturally…the people who installed this douchebag are (or at least feel) they are being targeted for being dumb enough to think he knew more than the generals about ISIS, that he had a plan to replace Obamacare, that he actually did care about veterans, and that he will bring jobs back when simple mathematics makes it nearly impossible.

So all this means that you disagree that the Left has been unusually animated about Trump's win.

Animated? Sure

Unusual? No. As demonstrated with citations from ACTUAL media sources reporting craziness in Texas, Georgia, Colorado, Florida, etc.. I could have cited 7-10 more instance in places like MN and NY.

Over the top? Hardly (adjusted for inflation).

My turn to ask you a question. Do you think anyone on the right pronounced that the nation would fall after 2012 on this board? That the nation split apart? That Obama was not legitimate?

Can you explain the difference between 2012 and 2016 other than who is saying it?

Is that a fair conclusion?

And have you not seen ANY of guno's posts, for example?
.

I imagine I have.
I would imagine that they are the exception rather than the norm.

Sure, there was cartoonish paranoia after 2008 & 2012, illustrating my point about how similarly the two ends of the spectrum behave, absolutely. By partisans. However, my point is that it has permeated further into our culture and society in 2016 than it has before, and I gave examples: The restaurant putting out the sign saying it won't serve Trump supporters, entertainers refusing to/afraid to perform at the inauguration, stories of families and friendships literally breaking up because of differences. That wasn't happening before this election.

Your point appears to be that nothing unusual is going on. Okay. If we can't agree on a basic premise, there's no reason to continue.
.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Marty has to be told what to think or have his “thoughts” confirmed by someone as equally narrow minded.

This coming from one of the biggest bleating sheep of the left on this board is comical.

You quoted the blog then tried lamely to criticize others of getting their thoughts fed to them. Just reciting facts; name calling is your game

I tried to start a discussion on a discussion board. People of your ilk don't feel like actually discussing. Yet there is a perfectly adult conversation also going on, that if you don't feel like participating in, kindly sod off.

Your idea of catalyzing a discussion is to post a link to a blog, say nothing of substance that builds upon what we'll find at the link, and just think we'll say stuff that you can then either agree with and make yourself feel good or castigate folks with whom you disagree, which also makes you feel good, but do it in a setting where you know there will be people running to your defense, which you need a lot of as you're a world class schlub. No. That's not starting a discussion; it's a pathetic attempt at ego boosting.

Why don't you look at the discussion between me and Mac on this, which was started by my post and link.

You on the other hand are adding nothing to the conversation except arguing ABOUT the conversation.

Oh lord.

You know, if you'd have opened the thread saying

"Modern progressivism may as well be a religion. It has all the characteristics of one as follows: ......Thomas Lifson expounds on this idea and contrasts it with the Trump movement and how progressives have responded to it. You can read his take on it here. I've previously expressed my own ideas on it here:....."​

That little introduction tells us what you want to talk about and gives us a framework for doing so by opening the door to contrasting progressivism or Trumpism with the structure of a religion. Had you looked at my initial snide remark and considered whether in fact there was a point there -- you don't actually come off as an a buffoon, so it seems to me like you might have sussed it out had you considered it before getting pissed of that that you were chided about the nature of your thread thesis statement. I think you may be mature enough to know that even when one is catching crap from someone, one has to at least objectively consider whether the person riding one has a valid point.

Don't mistake me. The discussion that compares and contrasts a political movement with a faith-based belief system is plenty weighty enough for some really good discussion.

• Religious Democracy and Civilizational Politics: Comparing Political Islam and Political Catholicism
  
• Religion and Politics
  
• Religion and Nationalism: Four Approaches
  
• Political Parties Functions and Organisation in Democratic Societies
  
• Religions And Political Parties: What’s The Difference?
  
• Churches and political parties are in the same pickle
  
• It’s time we think of politics more like religion
  
• Arts & Sciences | Boston University
  
• Why Millennials Are Getting Sick of Political Parties and Religion

To close, there's plenty of fodder to inform a discussion about the similarities and differences between a religion and a party/political movement. "Why the left hates Trump so intensely" does not portend such a topic of discussion is to ensue.

 

[usmbguest5318]

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

Okay. I look forward to reading your exposition on how that is so.

 

[candycorn]

Mind if I quote you?

I haven’t yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria.

Well, you had 4 years in 2 cases. Conservatives stating they will not hire anyone because we have Obama in office; gun store owners refusing to serve people who voted for Obama.

And you had 2 years since the court ruled on SSM to “come to terms” with why conservative clerks wouldn’t issue marriage certificates.

How much more time do you need?

I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

Oh… you don’t?

Perhaps you missed this:

2008–13 United States ammunition shortage - Wikipedia (the page has 500 edits plus…it wasn’t started last week so yes, it was “a thing”). You don’t think that was “over the top” hysteria?

But that was just an example of hysteria that lasted 5 years that you claim to be completely unaware of….

Lets go back to 2009 when Obama hadn’t done much of anything to piss anyone off yet: You may recall that the President of the US wanted to broadcast a message to some school kids. Pretty innocuous, right? Wrong:

Many conservatives enraged over Obama school speech - CNN.com

One “level headed” conservative said: “"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.”

School Districts in Six States to Refrain from Showing Presidential Address Next Week

Proves it was widespread.

I guess you missed the Town Halls in 2009—right after Obama took office in January 8 months earlier. Politico described the supposedly “non hysterical” protestors as this:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

Guess you missed that one too.

Hysterical behavior is the staple of both sides when they lose the election; somehow you only cite it when the left is guilty of it and plead ignorance to all of the other examples.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

I guess you missed Ms. Streep’s comments and how much love they generated by the right wing when she said that MMA wasn’t an “art”. But the again, the right wing posters here (you mentioned the board) have always loved Hollywood; right? <sarcasm>

Whatever…everyone feels they are under attack 100% of the time on the board.

But FWIW…

I’ve yet to see any “sheer hatred” of the “rubes” as you put it that has been beyond the usual comments that supposedly educated people make about the supposedly uneducated… on this board at least. I see much more venom in the other direction as a matter of fact. What I think you’re seeing is that people who love the nation (and many Republicans too) know that Mr. Trump is, at best, several fathoms in over his head with no inkling of how to begin to tackle the problems of the nation; all the while professing unique expertise in solving those specific problems. And when you air those concerns…naturally…the people who installed this douchebag are (or at least feel) they are being targeted for being dumb enough to think he knew more than the generals about ISIS, that he had a plan to replace Obamacare, that he actually did care about veterans, and that he will bring jobs back when simple mathematics makes it nearly impossible.

So all this means that you disagree that the Left has been unusually animated about Trump's win.

Animated? Sure

Unusual? No. As demonstrated with citations from ACTUAL media sources reporting craziness in Texas, Georgia, Colorado, Florida, etc.. I could have cited 7-10 more instance in places like MN and NY.

Over the top? Hardly (adjusted for inflation).

My turn to ask you a question. Do you think anyone on the right pronounced that the nation would fall after 2012 on this board? That the nation split apart? That Obama was not legitimate?

Can you explain the difference between 2012 and 2016 other than who is saying it?

Is that a fair conclusion?

And have you not seen ANY of guno's posts, for example?
.

I imagine I have.
I would imagine that they are the exception rather than the norm.

Sure, there was cartoonish paranoia after 2008 & 2012, illustrating my point about how similarly the two ends of the spectrum behave, absolutely. By partisans.

Yeah, I seem to have missed your outrage at the right wing loons.

However, my point is that it has permeated further into our culture and society in 2016 than it has before, and I gave examples: The restaurant putting out the sign saying it won’t serve Trump supporters,

And the guy in Texas (and who knows how many others) who won’t sell to Obama supporters is different how exactly….?

entertainers refusing to/afraid to perform at the inauguration,

Uh….Mac?

I would point to the childish antics of the President Elect, his denigration of women and the simple fact that he is just plain old mean as the cause of this resistance.

Do you think that played any role in it whatsoever?


Further, you may wish to study up a bit. Whose party is a sponsor of the Arts and whose party is one that is almost constantly at odds with tax money supporting the arts? That is part of it.

But it’s an old story even beyond that and is certainly nothing new.

From 2013
18 athletes who refused to visit the White House

stories of families and friendships literally breaking up because of differences. That wasn't happening before this election.

Really? You don’t think there were ever any family squabbles before 2016?

One difference is that instead of arguing around the Thanksgiving Turkey about this anecdote or that anecdote; Uncle Bill shared an article on Facebook that had some of what he believed in it (if he read the whole thing through) and Aunt Edna took exception to the 3rd paragraph where Trump was going to use his pussy grabbing hand on the Bible. Put another way, in 2006, you knew Uncle Bill was probably a Republican and Aunt Edna was a democrat. Thanksgiving was about the 2006 election and you were talking about Iraq and maybe Afghanistan. In 2016, Bill has seen Edna’s Facebook page, her Instagram, and her Snaps of dogs peeing on Trump’s signs. Edna has seen all of Bill’s shares from Breitbart and the Blaze and You Tubes of Hannity. There is more to discuss and it cuts deeper because what is shared is not the mundane NYT block of texts; it’s the sensational.

But in the end….

Perhaps people would act more civilized if the candidates acted more civilized? Just throwing that out there.

Your point appears to be that nothing unusual is going on. Okay. If we can't agree on a basic premise, there's no reason to continue.
.

Well, I’ve proven that it isn’t with data. Citing the upheaval in 2009 and 2013. I have proven that both sides engage in it when they lose an election. I have proven that the supposed “over the top hysteria” is actually history repeating itself.

You have argued with anecdotes.

Which is fine… if that is all you have. Apparently it is.

 

[martybegan]

I don't see you still trying to defend that stupid remark you made either, now do I? You're back to your empty aspersions. You go with that....

I stand by my statement that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a Religion. In fact I am debating it with someone now, unlike my posts with you, which are nothing more than your pathetic attempt to avoid the conversation at hand.

Eight Elements of a Religion

1. BELIEF SYSTEM or WORLDVIEW:
   Many beliefs that fit together in a system to make sense of the universe and our place in it.
2. COMMUNITY:
   The belief system is shared, and its ideals are practiced by a group.
3. CENTRAL STORIES/MYTHS:
   Stories that help explain the beliefs of a group; these are told over and over again and sometimes performed by members of the group. They may or may not be factual.
4. RITUALS:
   Beliefs are explained, taught, and made real through ceremonies.
5. ETHICS:
   Rules about how to behave; these rules are often thought to have come from a deity or supernatural place, but they might also be seen as guidelines created by the group over time.
6. CHARACTERISTIC EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES:
   Most religions share emotions such as awe, mystery, guilt, joy, devotion, conversion, inner peace, etc.
7. MATERIAL EXPRESSION:
   Religions use things to perform rituals or to express or represent beliefs, such as: statues, paintings, music, flowers, incense, clothes, architecture, and specific sacred locations.
8. SACREDNESS:
   Religions see some things as sacred and some not sacred (or profane). Some objects, actions, people and places may share in the sacredness or express it.

Share with us how you see all eight of those key traits of a religion found in progressivism. At least using the above outline you have a framework that you can use to drive the discussion. Go for it. Have fun.
_____________

Just so you understand where I'm coming from....You say you want to initiate a discussion about the nature and extent in which modern progressivism is as much a religion as, say, Christianity, Roman Catholicism, or Hinduism. The topic is reasonably interesting in the abstract, but frankly I'd never given it any consideration. I would be happy to engage on that line of discussion, but seeing as I've not thought about it in the context you have in mind -- and you can't know when you are creating the thread that anyone else has either -- you need to guide the direction and context in which you want people to think about the topic and discuss it. It's your burden to put the framework out so others can consider it.

What did your OP do? It tossed someone else's ideas at us (the blog) and your only personal contribution to the topic it amounted to, "See, see. I told you so. I've been saying this all along and here a blogger agrees with me." (BTW, I googled "Blue Team Progressivism" to see what it is. I quickly found nothing about it and the quote you posted was "out of the blue;" thus it wasn't apparent just what to make of it. I don't even know if the quoted words are yours as your name isn't at the top of the quote.)

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

That's not much of a positive and thoughtful conversation starter. That's little other than pride braggadociously expressed. Why is that so?

• You didn't offer any of your own nuanced spin on the blog post.
• You didn't expound on the ideas in the blog post.
• You didn't put any of your own ideas on the table in advance of asking us to do the same.

It's fine that you use the blog post as a high level rubric for the discussion, but without your putting your own "something" out there with it -- something beside a blanket "he says the same thing I do" affirmation -- it's not you that we'd be discussing, it's the blogger's ideas, and he's not here to defend or explain them. And all you said, was basically, "me too and I told you so." What else is that but you expressing a feeling of validation? Nothing. That all that is.

Think of it as though you found a recipe (the blog post) for apple pie. You read it and it's close to what you want to bake, but you put your own take on it and add apple brandy to the recipe and then ice the pie crust with hard sauce. Now it's not someone else's pie/recipe, it's your pie/recipe and the people to whom you serve it will have a reason to talk about it with you.

I prefer to start a discussion with minimal input, and let the ideas hash themselves out through discussion. If you don't like that, feel free to infest other threads.

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

More like start with minimal thought then apply minimal honesty.

That is a indictment of your own ability to comprehend, not mine to express my views as I see fit.

Actually, it’s an accurate forensic examination of your posts and subsequent criticism when your hypocrisy is pointed out.

What hypocrisy? Be specific, (if you can)

 

[martybegan]

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

Okay. I look forward to reading your exposition on how that is so.

Why do I have to post an "exposition' for you amusement. Unlike you I don't need a wall o' text to get my views out there.

 

[Mac1958]

Mind if I quote you?

I haven’t yet quite come to terms with this over-the-top hysteria.

Well, you had 4 years in 2 cases. Conservatives stating they will not hire anyone because we have Obama in office; gun store owners refusing to serve people who voted for Obama.

And you had 2 years since the court ruled on SSM to “come to terms” with why conservative clerks wouldn’t issue marriage certificates.

How much more time do you need?

I can see why the traditional partisans would be upset, they were absolutely sure that we were on a inexorable march towards a Euro-social democracy (so was I, by the way), and this has just stunned them. That would explain their intensity.

The part that I don't yet understand is the way it has ignited such hatred throughout the entire Left side of our culture. There is simply nothing in our history, as far as I know, that compares with this.

Oh… you don’t?

Perhaps you missed this:

2008–13 United States ammunition shortage - Wikipedia (the page has 500 edits plus…it wasn’t started last week so yes, it was “a thing”). You don’t think that was “over the top” hysteria?

But that was just an example of hysteria that lasted 5 years that you claim to be completely unaware of….

Lets go back to 2009 when Obama hadn’t done much of anything to piss anyone off yet: You may recall that the President of the US wanted to broadcast a message to some school kids. Pretty innocuous, right? Wrong:

Many conservatives enraged over Obama school speech - CNN.com

One “level headed” conservative said: “"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.”

School Districts in Six States to Refrain from Showing Presidential Address Next Week

Proves it was widespread.

I guess you missed the Town Halls in 2009—right after Obama took office in January 8 months earlier. Politico described the supposedly “non hysterical” protestors as this:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

Guess you missed that one too.

Hysterical behavior is the staple of both sides when they lose the election; somehow you only cite it when the left is guilty of it and plead ignorance to all of the other examples.

One clue may be in the increase in sheer hatred towards "the rubes", those who don't live in the bluest states. You can see it all over this board, it's a little disturbing.
.

I guess you missed Ms. Streep’s comments and how much love they generated by the right wing when she said that MMA wasn’t an “art”. But the again, the right wing posters here (you mentioned the board) have always loved Hollywood; right? <sarcasm>

Whatever…everyone feels they are under attack 100% of the time on the board.

But FWIW…

I’ve yet to see any “sheer hatred” of the “rubes” as you put it that has been beyond the usual comments that supposedly educated people make about the supposedly uneducated… on this board at least. I see much more venom in the other direction as a matter of fact. What I think you’re seeing is that people who love the nation (and many Republicans too) know that Mr. Trump is, at best, several fathoms in over his head with no inkling of how to begin to tackle the problems of the nation; all the while professing unique expertise in solving those specific problems. And when you air those concerns…naturally…the people who installed this douchebag are (or at least feel) they are being targeted for being dumb enough to think he knew more than the generals about ISIS, that he had a plan to replace Obamacare, that he actually did care about veterans, and that he will bring jobs back when simple mathematics makes it nearly impossible.

So all this means that you disagree that the Left has been unusually animated about Trump's win.

Animated? Sure

Unusual? No. As demonstrated with citations from ACTUAL media sources reporting craziness in Texas, Georgia, Colorado, Florida, etc.. I could have cited 7-10 more instance in places like MN and NY.

Over the top? Hardly (adjusted for inflation).

My turn to ask you a question. Do you think anyone on the right pronounced that the nation would fall after 2012 on this board? That the nation split apart? That Obama was not legitimate?

Can you explain the difference between 2012 and 2016 other than who is saying it?

Is that a fair conclusion?

And have you not seen ANY of guno's posts, for example?
.

I imagine I have.
I would imagine that they are the exception rather than the norm.

Sure, there was cartoonish paranoia after 2008 & 2012, illustrating my point about how similarly the two ends of the spectrum behave, absolutely. By partisans.

Yeah, I seem to have missed your outrage at the right wing loons.

However, my point is that it has permeated further into our culture and society in 2016 than it has before, and I gave examples: The restaurant putting out the sign saying it won’t serve Trump supporters,

And the guy in Texas (and who knows how many others) who won’t sell to Obama supporters is different how exactly….?

entertainers refusing to/afraid to perform at the inauguration,

Uh….Mac?

I would point to the childish antics of the President Elect, his denigration of women and the simple fact that he is just plain old mean as the cause of this resistance.

Do you think that played any role in it whatsoever?


Further, you may wish to study up a bit. Whose party is a sponsor of the Arts and whose party is one that is almost constantly at odds with tax money supporting the arts? That is part of it.

But it’s an old story even beyond that and is certainly nothing new.

From 2013
18 athletes who refused to visit the White House

stories of families and friendships literally breaking up because of differences. That wasn't happening before this election.

Really? You don’t think there were ever any family squabbles before 2016?

One difference is that instead of arguing around the Thanksgiving Turkey about this anecdote or that anecdote; Uncle Bill shared an article on Facebook that had some of what he believed in it (if he read the whole thing through) and Aunt Edna took exception to the 3rd paragraph where Trump was going to use his pussy grabbing hand on the Bible. Put another way, in 2006, you knew Uncle Bill was probably a Republican and Aunt Edna was a democrat. Thanksgiving was about the 2006 election and you were talking about Iraq and maybe Afghanistan. In 2016, Bill has seen Edna’s Facebook page, her Instagram, and her Snaps of dogs peeing on Trump’s signs. Edna has seen all of Bill’s shares from Breitbart and the Blaze and You Tubes of Hannity. There is more to discuss and it cuts deeper because what is shared is not the mundane NYT block of texts; it’s the sensational.

But in the end….

Perhaps people would act more civilized if the candidates acted more civilized? Just throwing that out there.

Your point appears to be that nothing unusual is going on. Okay. If we can't agree on a basic premise, there's no reason to continue.
.

Well, I’ve proven that it isn’t with data. Citing the upheaval in 2009 and 2013. I have proven that both sides engage in it when they lose an election. I have proven that the supposed “over the top hysteria” is actually history repeating itself.

You have argued with anecdotes.

Which is fine… if that is all you have. Apparently it is.

My question is "why is this happening?"

Your response is "it isn't happening."

Okay. We're driving on parallel lanes that don't intersect.
.

 

[Correll]

Millions of folks dislike Trump because he is a top grade chauvinist wearing his prejudices with pride. ....

I stopped reading here. Save your bullshit for another thread. Address the op.

 

[Correll]

The sheer absurdity of Donald Trump being elected president of the United States of America is the single most ignored and avoided aspect of this whole calamity. Even the liberal media won't step up and acknowledge it.

He disagreed with the Conventional Wisdom that there were not more votes to be found from White Voters, the single largets demographic.


The absurdity is that the COnsensus is shocked that the MAJORITY of the country turned out to be the key demographic in an election.

 

[usmbguest5318]

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

Okay. I look forward to reading your exposition on how that is so.

Why do I have to post an "exposition' for you amusement. Unlike you I don't need a wall o' text to get my views out there.

Oh, screw this. I express an interest in reading your ideas and that's what you have to say? How's this for brief? FUCK YOU!

 

[Correll]

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

Okay. I look forward to reading your exposition on how that is so.

Why do I have to post an "exposition' for you amusement. Unlike you I don't need a wall o' text to get my views out there.

Oh, screw this. I express an interest in reading your ideas and that's what you have to say? How's this for brief? FUCK YOU!

The link was not that long and was very interesting. I recommend reading it.

 

[martybegan]

And to me progressivism has many of the traits you list above, What really is the clincher is how they deal with "heretics" or those with beliefs outside their own system.

Okay. I look forward to reading your exposition on how that is so.

Why do I have to post an "exposition' for you amusement. Unlike you I don't need a wall o' text to get my views out there.

Oh, screw this. I express an interest in reading your ideas and that's what you have to say? How's this for brief? FUCK YOU!

Sorry I don't acquiesce to your method of debating. No reason to get all pissy.

 

[candycorn]

Mind if I quote you?

Well, you had 4 years in 2 cases. Conservatives stating they will not hire anyone because we have Obama in office; gun store owners refusing to serve people who voted for Obama.

And you had 2 years since the court ruled on SSM to “come to terms” with why conservative clerks wouldn’t issue marriage certificates.

How much more time do you need?

Oh… you don’t?

Perhaps you missed this:

2008–13 United States ammunition shortage - Wikipedia (the page has 500 edits plus…it wasn’t started last week so yes, it was “a thing”). You don’t think that was “over the top” hysteria?

But that was just an example of hysteria that lasted 5 years that you claim to be completely unaware of….

Lets go back to 2009 when Obama hadn’t done much of anything to piss anyone off yet: You may recall that the President of the US wanted to broadcast a message to some school kids. Pretty innocuous, right? Wrong:

Many conservatives enraged over Obama school speech - CNN.com

One “level headed” conservative said: “"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.”

School Districts in Six States to Refrain from Showing Presidential Address Next Week

Proves it was widespread.

I guess you missed the Town Halls in 2009—right after Obama took office in January 8 months earlier. Politico described the supposedly “non hysterical” protestors as this:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

Guess you missed that one too.

Hysterical behavior is the staple of both sides when they lose the election; somehow you only cite it when the left is guilty of it and plead ignorance to all of the other examples.

I guess you missed Ms. Streep’s comments and how much love they generated by the right wing when she said that MMA wasn’t an “art”. But the again, the right wing posters here (you mentioned the board) have always loved Hollywood; right? <sarcasm>

Whatever…everyone feels they are under attack 100% of the time on the board.

But FWIW…

I’ve yet to see any “sheer hatred” of the “rubes” as you put it that has been beyond the usual comments that supposedly educated people make about the supposedly uneducated… on this board at least. I see much more venom in the other direction as a matter of fact. What I think you’re seeing is that people who love the nation (and many Republicans too) know that Mr. Trump is, at best, several fathoms in over his head with no inkling of how to begin to tackle the problems of the nation; all the while professing unique expertise in solving those specific problems. And when you air those concerns…naturally…the people who installed this douchebag are (or at least feel) they are being targeted for being dumb enough to think he knew more than the generals about ISIS, that he had a plan to replace Obamacare, that he actually did care about veterans, and that he will bring jobs back when simple mathematics makes it nearly impossible.

So all this means that you disagree that the Left has been unusually animated about Trump's win.

Animated? Sure

Unusual? No. As demonstrated with citations from ACTUAL media sources reporting craziness in Texas, Georgia, Colorado, Florida, etc.. I could have cited 7-10 more instance in places like MN and NY.

Over the top? Hardly (adjusted for inflation).

My turn to ask you a question. Do you think anyone on the right pronounced that the nation would fall after 2012 on this board? That the nation split apart? That Obama was not legitimate?

Can you explain the difference between 2012 and 2016 other than who is saying it?

Is that a fair conclusion?

And have you not seen ANY of guno's posts, for example?
.

I imagine I have.
I would imagine that they are the exception rather than the norm.

Sure, there was cartoonish paranoia after 2008 & 2012, illustrating my point about how similarly the two ends of the spectrum behave, absolutely. By partisans.

Yeah, I seem to have missed your outrage at the right wing loons.

However, my point is that it has permeated further into our culture and society in 2016 than it has before, and I gave examples: The restaurant putting out the sign saying it won’t serve Trump supporters,

And the guy in Texas (and who knows how many others) who won’t sell to Obama supporters is different how exactly….?

entertainers refusing to/afraid to perform at the inauguration,

Uh….Mac?

I would point to the childish antics of the President Elect, his denigration of women and the simple fact that he is just plain old mean as the cause of this resistance.

Do you think that played any role in it whatsoever?


Further, you may wish to study up a bit. Whose party is a sponsor of the Arts and whose party is one that is almost constantly at odds with tax money supporting the arts? That is part of it.

But it’s an old story even beyond that and is certainly nothing new.

From 2013
18 athletes who refused to visit the White House

stories of families and friendships literally breaking up because of differences. That wasn't happening before this election.

Really? You don’t think there were ever any family squabbles before 2016?

One difference is that instead of arguing around the Thanksgiving Turkey about this anecdote or that anecdote; Uncle Bill shared an article on Facebook that had some of what he believed in it (if he read the whole thing through) and Aunt Edna took exception to the 3rd paragraph where Trump was going to use his pussy grabbing hand on the Bible. Put another way, in 2006, you knew Uncle Bill was probably a Republican and Aunt Edna was a democrat. Thanksgiving was about the 2006 election and you were talking about Iraq and maybe Afghanistan. In 2016, Bill has seen Edna’s Facebook page, her Instagram, and her Snaps of dogs peeing on Trump’s signs. Edna has seen all of Bill’s shares from Breitbart and the Blaze and You Tubes of Hannity. There is more to discuss and it cuts deeper because what is shared is not the mundane NYT block of texts; it’s the sensational.

But in the end….

Perhaps people would act more civilized if the candidates acted more civilized? Just throwing that out there.

Your point appears to be that nothing unusual is going on. Okay. If we can't agree on a basic premise, there's no reason to continue.
.

Well, I’ve proven that it isn’t with data. Citing the upheaval in 2009 and 2013. I have proven that both sides engage in it when they lose an election. I have proven that the supposed “over the top hysteria” is actually history repeating itself.

You have argued with anecdotes.

Which is fine… if that is all you have. Apparently it is.

My question is "why is this happening?"

Your response is "it isn't happening."

Okay. We're driving on parallel lanes that don't intersect.
.

I said “it isn’t happening”? News to me.

I think that is what you wish I had said. Let me inject some truth here if I may. I pointed out that it happens every time someone loses an election; more so in Presidential years than off years.

I’ve proven using actual established media outlets that the craziness you cite today has been going on for years. Next I imagine you’ll be astonished that the Democrats in the Senate are using the filibuster because it’s such an arcane and rarely used parliamentary procedure.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Millions of folks dislike Trump because he is a top grade chauvinist wearing his prejudices with pride. ....

I stopped reading here. Save your bullshit for another thread. Address the op.

It appears someone bumped you and your shit sundae smeared your glasses impairing your vision! The title of the OP is, "Why the left hates Trump so intensely"!

My opening remark, which you started to quote, has EVERY THING to do with the OP your bloody knuckle dragging FOOL. If you have troubles with comprehension of the written word, perhaps an enema may be in your future to help cleanse your brain!

Have a nice day, shit for brains!

 

[Syriusly]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

[Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism./QUOTE]

[
The Blue Church controls the HR department, so even if you don't go to church, you have to act like a loyal churchgoer in every way that matters while you're on the clock. And off the clock, on any kind of public social media platform.

Jon Stewart and John Oliver are basically TV preachers. Watching them gives the same sense of quiet superiority your grandma gets from watching The 700 Club. The messages are constantly reinforced, providing that lovely dopamine hit, like an angel's voice whispering, "You're right, you're better, you're winning."
/QUOTE]

For the first time in decades, voters explicitly rejected the Blue Church, defying hours of daily cultural programming, years of indoctrination from the schools, and dozens of explicit warnings from HR.

We've been trained since childhood to obey the pretty people on TV, but for the first time in decades, that didn't work.E]

LOL- you have been trained since childhood to listen to the loudest mouths on TV- and lo and behold- that worked.

You elected him.

I don't hate Trump- I hope he proves my pre-election predictions completely wrong- I hope he is a great President.

Unlike the right- I always hope a new President turns out to be a good President.

 

[martybegan]

Blog: Why the left hates Trump so intensely

I have said repeatedly that modern progressivism has all the trappings of a religion, and this person agrees.
He found a posting on Reddit that goes into the details.

[Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism./QUOTE]

[
The Blue Church controls the HR department, so even if you don't go to church, you have to act like a loyal churchgoer in every way that matters while you're on the clock. And off the clock, on any kind of public social media platform.

Jon Stewart and John Oliver are basically TV preachers. Watching them gives the same sense of quiet superiority your grandma gets from watching The 700 Club. The messages are constantly reinforced, providing that lovely dopamine hit, like an angel's voice whispering, "You're right, you're better, you're winning."
/QUOTE]

For the first time in decades, voters explicitly rejected the Blue Church, defying hours of daily cultural programming, years of indoctrination from the schools, and dozens of explicit warnings from HR.

We've been trained since childhood to obey the pretty people on TV, but for the first time in decades, that didn't work.E]

LOL- you have been trained since childhood to listen to the loudest mouths on TV- and lo and behold- that worked.

You elected him.

I don't hate Trump- I hope he proves my pre-election predictions completely wrong- I hope he is a great President.

Unlike the right- I always hope a new President turns out to be a good President.

Methinks you got the quote function screwed up.