[isthatafact]

> "If you go on left-leaning media, you can find comments that would be considered gross hate speech if it targeted any other group"

That seems like just a rephrasing of the old meme that Trump voters are "delicate snowflakes"

Why? -- because when someone defines hate speech so liberally, one finds it everywhere and against everyone.

I thought the Trump vote was meant to be a protest against that sort of irrational thinking.

[frmersdog]

The Trump vote was never about principle, but the perceived (correctly or not) practical. Most would happily allow hate speech as long as it's not directed at them ("It's just a joke, bro."). The moment it is directed at them (or is perceived to have been): burn everything down.

There's a difference between telling a dead baby joke to a couple that just had a miscarriage, and telling it to a group of edgy teenagers (perhaps by the couple themselves). That is to say, the problem is "punching down." What's important to understand here is that well-paid politicians and consultants telling people who are struggling that they're the problem - even if it flips historical dynamics of marginalization like gender and race - might be just that.

That doesn't mean that entitlement isn't a factor. It doesn't mean that it's actually harder to be a straight cis white man, in general. It doesn't mean that the normalization of prejudiced and hurtful speech wasn't basically invented and templated by white dudes. It just means that it's entirely predictable that people who are feeling bad aren't going to vote for someone who isn't spending enough time talking about the things they think are the reason that they're feeling bad. Said candidate doesn't even have to agree with such voters; they just have to engage with the issues honestly.