[thiht]

It was not, but the Trump campaign continuously lied about it. Trump lied and lied and lied about the democratic party being anti-men, anti-cis, anti-Christian, Kamala being low IQ, and whatever other stupid shit he could think about, but somehow it's Harris fault for being "too divisive" (not sure how).

Trump is the incarnation of a thin-skinned bully, he allows himself the worst but will cry as loud as possible on the first sign of a backslash.

If people who voted for him are not stupid, they certainly act like it.

[theonething]

And I view Kamala as a fake, policy flip-flopping, question dodging word salad spewer.

> If people who voted for him are not stupid, they certainly act like it.

This attitude of "you must be stupid if you don't see things my way" I expect on Reddit, but am disappointed to see it here.

[pritambaral]

> if you don't see things my way

This attitude of putting words in people's mouths I expect on Reddit, but I am disappointed to see it here.

[theonething]

They literally said anyone who voted for Trump, which they obviously disagree with, is stupid or acts like it

[pritambaral]

Then stop acting like it.

They said, "People who support Trump". They never said, "People who disagree with me". Those are your own words. And there's a great deal of difference between those two clauses.

I understand you want to shield yourself from criticism, by pretending you're merely in the "people who disagree with" camp and not in the "people who support Trump" camp. But trying to do that while putting words in someone's mouth lowers the quality of discourse here. And then to try claiming moral superiority by citing "This is HN, not reddit" is just ... transparently pointless.

Also, you ruin your own argument by proving your parent correct.

[theonething]

> They said, "People who support Trump". They never said, "People who disagree with me". Those are your own words. And there's a great deal of difference between those two clauses.

They are closely related and I don't see as much difference as you do but okay, they are different clauses. I also believe saying someone is stupid for supporting Trump is wrong. You can disagree with a person's vote, try to point out why you think they are wrong, just ignore them but calling someone stupid has no benefit except maybe it makes the insulter feel good about their own superiority.

> lowers the quality of discourse here.

but calling me and over half the country stupid adds to the quality of discourse?

> "This is HN, not reddit" is just ... transparently pointless.

HN has clear guidelines about this [0] and people here generally adhere to them. By saying this is HN, I'm appealing to the higher standard espoused in these guidelines. Do you think those guidelines are pointless?

> I understand you want to shield yourself from criticism, by pretending you're merely in the "people who disagree with" camp

You understand incorrectly. If you look at my recent comment history, it's pretty easy to see I'm Republican and voted for Trump.

> Also, you ruin your own argument by proving your parent correct.

I don't understand your logic here. How did I prove the parent correct? Seems like just another personal insult on your part.

I look forward to your responses to the above.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Be kind." "When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

[pritambaral]

> They are closely related and I don't see as much difference as you do but okay

They are nowhere close but of course you can't see that so okay.

> I also believe saying someone is stupid for supporting Trump is wrong.

Of course, Trump supporters are known for being poor employers of reason and introspection.

> try to point out why you think they are wrong

This list is so long that it's pointless to point this out in every conversation with a Trumper, but your parent did actually try.

> just ignore them

This is dangerous, to all humanity. At best, it's tolerance of the intolerant.

> but calling someone stupid has no benefit except maybe it makes the insulter feel good about their own superiority.

I strongly doubt your parent felt good about it. There's nothing good about calling a Trumper "stupid", because it does nothing to help the situation. Trumpers don't listen to reason; I'm sure your parent knows this. It's far more likely your parent spoke out of sheer frustration, which I fully understand, having had my own faith in humanity tested by this whole ordeal, and it hasn't even begun its "revenge run".

> but calling me and over half the country stupid adds to the quality of discourse?

1. Spoken by itself, probably not. But your parent didn't just call Trumpers stupid. They first explained their reasoning. Within a greater context where that's precisely the point being discussed: "How Trumpers are stupid."

2. More like "quarter of the country". Half your country didn't even vote.

> By saying this is HN, I'm appealing to the higher standard espoused in these guidelines.

If that's all you were doing, that'd be fine. But to do that while putting words in people's mouths? That's disingenuous, at best, and transparently so.

> Do you think those guidelines are pointless?

And there we go again with the putting words in people's mouths.

> it's pretty easy to see I'm Republican and voted for Trump.

I don't see how this, in any way whatsoever, proves I "understood incorrectly".

> How did I prove the parent correct?

I've already explained in this thread above. Twice. I don't see the point in trying a third time, especially when ... <see above>.

> Seems like just another personal insult on your part.

It wasn't. It was an appeal to do better, since, as you said, "This is HN". Maybe I understand why you feel that way, though. I am, after all, somebody that disagrees with you on sth, so of course I must be out to "get you". Rest assured, I am not out to "get you".

----

> [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Be kind." "When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

Since you quoted this, let me leave you with one thing to ponder on: Just how spectacularly poorly your candidate (i.e., Trump) does on these guidelines.

[onlyrealcuzzo]

> If people who voted for him are not stupid, they certainly act like it.

Being stupid is not a prerequisite to being apathetic.