"Trump is following a playbook written for him by Christian White Nationalists."

[Aeson]

But I didn't pretend that racists and other hate-voters don't exist, did I? I observed that people who have evidence that they would vote for someone for being a woman or for being a protected class vastly outnumber those who have evidence that they would vote against someone for any of the same. This is certainly not saying that the haters don't exist. Also, I observed that since the dog whistle conjecture is non falsifiable and non-testable that it is not of much use for dealing with the lack of evidence of voters making their ballot selections based on hate rather on other non-hate related motivations.

<seeing if posts need extra padding at the bottom for small edits. whoops slowing down might help too>

You gave an anecdote of a few people. Even in your anecdote though it's unclear if they would have voted a different way if the candidate was male, or if they are just excited for a first. It doesn't seem to be a case that they would ONLY vote for women.

I know people that would never vote for a woman president. Ive even got people telling me on the bus, completely without any provocation, that Kamala couldn't be president because "what if she's *****y and just presses the button". I have never met anyone who would never vote for a male president.

Those are anecdotes.

You ignored the obvious fact that no woman has ever won the presidency. All the evidence supports that the net effect of sexism is against women, not for them.

[Aeson]

But I didn't pretend that racists and other hate-voters don't exist, did I?

No, and I did not claim you did.

What you did do is strongly imply I "believe that the vast majority of Trump voters are all lying about why they were willing to vote for Trump and the real reason which you have access to is that they are hoping to harm non white non male non straight non cis-gendered people" and that I didn't provide "evidence because it's all communicated via dog whistle". Both are extreme distortions of what I have said.

Then you tried to imply my arguments are Q anon conspiracy level. All while you refuse to address any statements I have made about Trump's platform, or actual election results.

[Geronimo]

No, and I did not claim you did.

What you did do is strongly imply I "believe that the vast majority of Trump voters are all lying about why they were willing to vote for Trump and the real reason which you have access to is that they are hoping to harm non white non male non straight non cis-gendered people" and that I didn't provide "evidence because it's all communicated via dog whistle". Both are extreme distortions of what I have said.

Then you tried to imply my arguments are Q anon conspiracy level. All while you refuse to address any statements I have made about Trump's platform, or actual election results.

So long as you aren't claiming that the primary determinant of the election was sexism or racism against Harris that's good enough for me. I absolutely do not buy that no woman could be elected president and prior and subsequent to Obama's nomination I did not buy that no non-white person could be elected president either.

Let's move on to your requested discussion of your statements about Trump's platform and any actual election results. could you clarify enough to help me get back to those topics?

[Aeson]

So long as you aren't claiming that the primary determinant of the election was sexism or racism against Harris that's good enough for me. I absolutely do not buy that no woman could be elected president and prior and subsequent to Obama's nomination I did not buy that no non-white person could be elected president either.

Let's move on to your requested discussion of your statements about Trump's platform and any actual election results. could you clarify enough to help me get back to those topics?

Again you take my factual statement that no woman has been elected president and my claim that suggests the net effect of sexism is against women, and instead argue against the strawman than no woman could be elected president.

My original statement was that with how close the election was, it's reasonable to suggest that racism and sexism could have covered that spread. (The spread being a couple hundred thousand votes in the swing states.)

If you flip a coin 59 times and it comes up the same way every time, you might want to check the coin for some bias. You certainly wouldn't expect it to have a bias contrary to the result.

I already posted about Trump's platform in regards to DEI, immigration, etc. You just skipped the whole post.

[giblets]

ahh. you believe that the vast majority of Trump voters are all lying about why they were willing to vote for Trump and the real reason which you have access to is that they are hoping to harm non white non male non straight non cis-gendered people? This doesn't require evidence because it's all communicated via dog whistle?

I begin to think this is going to resemble my conversations with Qanon nutjobs. I hope not.

They use euphemisms like saying they want "strong borders"

[N35t0r]

Yeah, Aeson has a lot more patience than me for arguing with you, Geronimo.