[thecynh]

> My brother and his wife, and many of the people with whom I work, are not "disgusting misogynistic racist pigs".

I am sure they aren't (well actually I don't know, and as you rightly convey, I obviously CAN'T know just from their pro-Trump vote) but would you agree that people that voted for Trump have to be at least OK with being represented by one "disgusting misogynistic racist pig(s)" without themselves being one? … I really don't want to imply that all or even the majority of Trump voters are bad people (because I don't know any due to not being from the US) but they sure seem OK with having a repulsive person as their prime representative?

[jessaustin]

Trump is Br'er Rabbit, not a pig. The statements he made that have received the most opprobrium, were made precisely to receive that opprobrium. He correctly calculated that opprobrium, not the statements themselves, would gain him enough votes to win the election. Trump got far more votes from people who wished to reject the standard media narrative than from race-motivated one-issue voters.

The statements themselves may well be racist, but racist speech is a different thing than racist action. People who don't mind appearing to the weak-minded as racists may well actually be racists. However they are different sorts of racists than politicians like Richard Nixon and the Clintons who have destroyed minority lives and communities for political gain.

Children may be excused for only thinking about surface meanings, but after one has voted in several elections, it's time to put away childish things.

[zyx321]

That's the trouble in a two party (Winner-takes-all AKA first-past-the-post) system is that you can never tell who genuinely approves of Trump, and who merely disapproves of Clinton.

Would you be OK with being represented by a crook, without yourself being one?

[thecynh]

Your point with the fptp system makes a lot of sense. I didn't think about these implications since where I am from we have a pluralistic political system. Thanks for the insight!

And no, I would not be OK with being represented by a crook. If you are asking for my personal opinion in case of HRC/DT I'd still would have preferred her downsides over his though. Good thing I didn't have to chose I guess.

[BrandonM]

Are you suggesting that there were no reasons to dislike Hillary? Or that misogyny and racism live on a plane above all other issues? Because in the end, the people only had two choices in this election.

[thecynh]

No, sorry I did not want to suggest either of those things. There are reasons to dislike Hillary I am sure, and voting for her would in my opinion imply "being OK" with these reasons. I was really just looking for input, not making a point.