"I Choose Not To Listen": Trumpsters' Coping Mechanism Is Willful Ignorance

[Garnier Fructis]

My dad actively gets pissed if you bring up politics now, and refuses to watch the news because he might hear something bad.

I guess that's how he's dealing with having voted for the Donald.

I would consider that the beginning stage of the healing process. Anger comes first. Then comes acceptance.

[Vanyali]

I would consider that the beginning stage of the healing process. Anger comes first. Then comes acceptance.

My dad will never admit he was wrong to vote the Donald. My mom has stopped cold at "god, why didn't the democrats put someone BETTER for me to vote for" despite her not having voted non-republican in any vote since she was old enough to vote. I'm actually shocked that, plus a very strong anti-hillary dose via my grandpa for the last ten years, didn't send her into anaphylactic shock.

[Pannonian]

Conservatism has had to use this approach for a while now on a number of issues. Many conservatives still think the majority of the US is against gay marriage. They deny anthropomorphic climate change and in some cases deny climate change entirely. They have to consistently ignore polling that shows a majority of Americans support items ranging from minimum wage increases, to gun control measures, to taxing the wealthy.

They live in a world of alternate facts -- and this has nothing to do with Trump. When you have a party that runs contrary to reality it's what you have to do.

Now i don't identify myself as conservative and i'm not a fan of conservatism, but your points aren't conservatism either. That's just reactionary, which will be found more often with conservatives, but is in no way exclusive to them.

[xChurch]

Ignorance is bliss, and not restricted to Trump supporters.

[Lenonis]

Now i don't identify myself as conservative and i'm not a fan of conservatism, but your points aren't conservatism either. That's just reactionary, which will be found more often with conservatives, but is in no way exclusive to them.

I'm a bit confused about your assertion that my post, which pointed to specific conservative policy platforms, is not conservatism?

Honest question -- I just didn't follow.

- - - Updated - - -

but is in no way exclusive to them.

Oh, no doubt. But it is also in no way equal across the political spectrum. Kind of hard to have it be equal when you have a side that rejects science and embraces religion to form its policy.

[Bullettime]

I would consider that the beginning stage of the healing process. Anger comes first. Then comes acceptance.

Not in this case. Many are doubling down on the denial. They refuse to discuss the topic when they used to try (and fail horribly,) They're stricter on blocking out anything that isn't alternative news because they have to be right. They want to stick their head in the sand and claim nothing is happening and all bad news is a conspiracy.

People aren't going to admit that they're wrong because honestly, Trump's campaign and efforts tapped into much more than a normal election. I live in an area heavily targeted by his campaign and in every way imaginable. These people bought into the ideology that they're the victim, that it's all a conspiracy, that the immigrants and muslims are going to take their world, rape their daughters, etc. It's some of the most depressing and pathetic cognitive dissonance I've ever seen watching them try to defend events. It's why the eventual fallout of Trump's presidency terrifies me. There absolutely will be innocent lives lost in the backlash against the "deep state" and the "liberals" that they feel are taking their world.

This election wasn't a case of just picking a candidate on a normal platform. Trump's campaign preyed hard on their fear and basically brainwashed these people through propaganda into thinking Trump was the last hope for their lives instead of accepting that the world doesn't stop changing.

[GreenJesus]

Conservatism has had to use this approach for a while now on a number of issues. Many conservatives still think the majority of the US is against gay marriage. They deny anthropomorphic climate change and in some cases deny climate change entirely. They have to consistently ignore polling that shows a majority of Americans support items ranging from minimum wage increases, to gun control measures, to taxing the wealthy.

They live in a world of alternate facts -- and this has nothing to do with Trump. When you have a party that runs contrary to reality it's what you have to do.

Of course the majority (peasants) want the wealthy to be taxed.. of course the peasants want minimum wage increased.. for those issues majority rule isn't a fair measure for if something is good or not.

[Garnier Fructis]

Of course the majority (peasants) want the wealthy to be taxed.. of course the peasants want minimum wage increased.. for those issues majority rule isn't a fair measure for if something is good or not.

Good thing there's valid reasons for both that don't boil down to majority support.

[GreenJesus]

Good thing there's valid reasons for both that don't boil down to majority support.

Exactly. Determining taxation should not be by majority rule. If the majority made 1 million dollars or more and the rest made 0, that would be bad too.

[Jeezy911]

I'm still waiting for democrats to get the news that they lost.

[Deleted]

I'm still waiting for democrats to get the news that they lost.

In an actual democracy, Trump lost, of course, but yeah, you're right, the Democrats did lose the presidency because of an asinine electoral college system. I mean, if you feel amazing yelling from the minority how your candidate won, go ahead. You're still in the minority, though.

[NED funded]

Eighty-six percent to 13%, those who identify as Republicans or as independents who lean Republican have a favorable view of Trump, the Pew survey found.

That's the whole Republican party, about half of voters. They think Trump is amazing. There will be no impeachment with numbers this high for one.

This forum is a hell of an echo chamber.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/wash...htmlstory.html

There really isn't many arguments for an impeachment either.
Oddly enough I just read this write up about the pros and cons about the possibility of an impeachment.

Pros:

1. Trump is unfit to govern. As explained in an excellent piece by Bob Bauer in Lawfare, we are experiencing an ongoing “governing crisis,” as a result of Trump’s character flaws. Vice President Mike Pence, who (unlike Trump) has political experience and seems at least competent, would ascend to the presidency. While liberals might worry that a unified Republican government led by a competent president would pass damaging legislation, the alternative—an incompetent government mired in a continuous crisis—is worse.

2. An impeachment could help strengthen political norms that Trump has broken. Chief among them:

a. The norm against conflict of interest and concealment of financial interests.

b. The norm against political interference in law enforcement functions.

Cons:

1. Impeachment might fail. If proceedings do not rouse sufficient public opinion against Trump, then a majority of House members will not vote for impeachment, and a supermajority of Senators will not vote for conviction. A failed impeachment could strengthen Trump and weaken his critics. The impeachment of Clinton actually increased public support for him as measured by the polls.

2. Trump’s worst behavior does not rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Specifically:

a. The attempt to obstruct justice is alleged, not proven; even if Trump did attempt to obstruct justice, he failed, as the investigation of the Russia ties continues.

b. The leaking of intelligence to the Russians may not have happened, and even if it did, it may have been justified, or reasonable under the circumstances, or excusable in some way.

c. The financial conflicts of interests are not illegal, and were known during the campaign, and hence endorsed, implicitly at least, by voters.

d. Trump’s various other actions—attacks on the press and the courts, boorish political attacks, and much else—have not resulted in any identifiable harm to any person or institution.

3. Therefore, impeachment of Trump would only weaken the presidency by normalizing an instrument that could be used for partisan purposes, or as a matter of routine, by Congress against the president, even a competent one. A weakened presidency and empowered Congress is a recipe for gridlock in our polarized age.

4. Impeachment would create lasting resentment among Trump’s supporters, and strengthen their conviction that the government is controlled by corrupt elites. This would in turn feed the populist movement for years to come, worsening political turmoil and gridlock.

My vote: No.

http://ericposner.com/impeachment-pros-and-cons/

[Mormolyce]

I'm still waiting for democrats to get the news that they lost.

Maybe they're waiting for the realisation to dawn on you that everyone lost.

- - - Updated - - -

There really isn't many arguments for an impeachment either.
Oddly enough I just read this write up about the pros and cons about the possibility of an impeachment.

I don't know why so many people look at this from the perspective of righteousness or legality. That's not how impeachment works.

Impeachment is basically (de facto) a way for a political party to divest itself of an official who has become a political liability. It's rarely needed because career politicians know when their number is up and generally resign themselves if they are faced with a big enough scandal that their continued presence is causing more damage to their party than help. Impeachment is there for those people who don't.

"High crimes and misdemeanors" sounds all official but in fact includes vague things like dereliction of duty and unbecoming conduct which can be subjectively applied in almost any controversy of sufficient seriousness. Whether or not Congress votes to impeach is ultimately a product of the political climate. Look at how long it took to impeach Nixon, and when it finally was in motion he left before it could complete because it was indicated to him that his own party wouldn't support him unanimously in Congress. The impeachment of Clinton on downright spurious grounds was completely politically motivated but still succeeded in the House. And was then defeated in the Senate by a nearly party line vote.

TLDR: None of this shit is germane, all that matters is how big a liability congressional Republicans think Trump is to their party. In the long term.

[Celista]

Well yeah. Remember the steps of the grieving process. Denial is the first one Also we're only four months into the Trump presidency, it's a bit early for disillusionment to hit all of his supporters. Even in the face of a federal investigation.

I do feel as though it goes beyond cognitive dissonance at this point, Fox News does in fact paint Trump in a very different light than the other news agencies. Despite the right's claim that the mainstream media is biased, so is Brietbart and Fox News. Just in the a different way than the more moderate/liberal news outlets.

[NED funded]

Maybe they're waiting for the realisation to dawn on you that everyone lost.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't know why so many people look at this from the perspective of righteousness or legality. That's not how impeachment works.

Impeachment is basically (de facto) a way for a political party to divest itself of an official who has become a political liability. It's rarely needed because career politicians know when their number is up and generally resign themselves if they are faced with a big enough scandal that their continued presence is causing more damage to their party than help. Impeachment is there for those people who don't.

"High crimes and misdemeanors" sounds all official but in fact includes vague things like dereliction of duty and unbecoming conduct which can be subjectively applied in almost any controversy of sufficient seriousness. Whether or not Congress votes to impeach is ultimately a product of the political climate. Look at how long it took to impeach Nixon, and when it finally was in motion he left before it could complete because it was indicated to him that his own party wouldn't support him unanimously in Congress. The impeachment of Clinton on downright spurious grounds was completely politically motivated but still succeeded in the House. And was then defeated in the Senate by a nearly party line vote.

TLDR: None of this shit is germane, all that matters is how big a liability congressional Republicans think Trump is to their party. In the long term.

>Republicans thinking in the long term

Like are we talking about the same republican party?

Either way, Republicans control congress so the chances of an impeachment are unlikely to happen. I recall reading this article, the gist of it is that partisanship is strong even in the biggest political scandal. So in this case Trump would have to seriously fuck up (borderline if not actual treason) for the impeachment to pass.

[Macaquerie]

>Republicans thinking in the long term

Like are we talking about the same republican party?

Either way, Republicans control congress so the chances of an impeachment are unlikely to happen. I recall reading this article, the gist of it is that partisanship is strong even in the biggest political scandal. So in this case Trump would have to seriously fuck up (borderline if not actual treason) for the impeachment to pass.

Most Republicans in Congress would gladly shit all over their party if it meant saving their own sorry asses. And it's pretty much the consensus these days that there's no way Trump makes it to the end of the term without imploding, so everybody's sort of angling to get off the sinking ship and distance themselves from the administration as much as possible.

[NED funded]

Most Republicans in Congress would gladly shit all over their party if it meant saving their own sorry asses. And it's pretty much the consensus these days that there's no way Trump makes it to the end of the term without imploding, so everybody's sort of angling to get off the sinking ship and distance themselves from the administration as much as possible.

Republican support for Trump is strong, the same Republicans that elect congress members. So, like I said the only way Trump gets impeached under the current congress is if he seriously fucks up (like borderline treason or actual treason fuck up and also has undeniable evidence behind it).

[Celista]

>Republicans thinking in the long term

Like are we talking about the same republican party?

Either way, Republicans control congress so the chances of an impeachment are unlikely to happen. I recall reading this article, the gist of it is that partisanship is strong even in the biggest political scandal. So in this case Trump would have to seriously fuck up (borderline if not actual treason) for the impeachment to pass.

Partisanship has increased in recent years as well. I also think it is unlikely, although inaction on Republicans' part may help to secure democrat wins in 2018/2020. This scandal is happening so early in the Trump administration, its timing seems quite poor if impeachment does not occur. Voters have short memories.

[Macaquerie]

Republican support for Trump is strong, the same Republicans that elect congress members. So, like I said the only way Trump gets impeached under the current congress is if he seriously fucks up (like borderline treason or actual treason fuck up and also has undeniable evidence behind it).

Given Trump's limited mental capacity and how easily he can be manipulated, it's only a matter of time before he commits serious and unequivocal treason. Most elected officials have already figured this out and are scrambling to save their own asses before shit hits the fan so they have some plausible deniability. The GOP base is a bit slower on the uptake, but even they won't be able to ignore the obvious forever.

[Heladys]

Well hey, why not add willful ignorance to all the other kinds of ignorance on display by Trumpians? They probably think if they complete the whole set they get a commemorative plate or something.