What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Zoupa]

You're right off course. The plight of the white man in America, such a tragedy.

En ces temps difficile, il convient d'accorder notre mépris avec parcimonie, tant nombreux sont les nécéssiteux.

[Eddie Teach]

I'm not asking you to feel sorry for anybody. Just to realize that feeling and acting superior is not the way to win people over to your cause.

[Admiral Yi]

Zoupa, mon frere, I thought your response made zero fucking sense.

[garbon]

And I wish you'd stop because I have to live with the results. Contempt only begets hatred.

That's funny. They hated me first.

[Eddie Teach]

Most don't.

[Razgovory]

I'm not asking you to feel sorry for anybody. Just to realize that feeling and acting superior is not the way to win people over to your cause.

What is the best way to win people who want to scalp us over to our cause?

[DGuller]

I'm not asking you to feel sorry for anybody. Just to realize that feeling and acting superior is not the way to win people over to your cause.

Sometimes the right move is to not try to win over some people, but rather to protect yourself from them.  Often these two strategies are at direct odds with each other.

[Maladict]

I'm not asking you to feel sorry for anybody. Just to realize that feeling and acting superior is not the way to win people over to your cause.

What is the best way to win people who want to scalp us over to our cause?

Settle them on your land and hire them as mercenaries. That should postpone the inevitable until past your lifetime. And if it doesn't it will make the takeover relatively peaceful.

[Oexmelin]

I'm not asking you to feel sorry for anybody. Just to realize that feeling and acting superior is not the way to win people over to your cause.

True enough, and so the use of this line of thought is identifying what is negotiable, in order to win people over to your cause, and what just isn't. The problems with this line of thought, is that

1) the rhetoric of the last 20 years in America, if not more, has reserved the label extremists for lefties and Muslims, when it's  clear that Republicans have ventured pretty far towards radicalism.

2) the idea that liberal snobbery has created, and thus is responsible for extending the hand to that Republican extremism appears politically and morally bankrupt. Weirdly enough, no one seems to be arguing that it is the Republican's responsibility to extend their hands to Democrats because their Christian contempt expressed towards all "insufficient" believers has shaped liberal extremism. 

3) it seems extremely unsuited to the current political climate where Republicans seem to have decided that victory at all costs is their modus operandi (see South Carolina as a test case).

Thus far, I think I have a pretty good idea of what "cause" the Republicans are serving, and they've made clear they do not want to negotiate with people like me, or even people only just vaguely aligned with my political ideas. So many Republicans have veered toward such a brand of extremism that the number of things which appear negotiable has been dwindling to almost zero - if only because so many Republicans seem to labor under the idea that theirs is a fight against their extinction.

So, quite frankly, much like garbon, I think we ought to stop worrying about offending the poor snowflakes who seem to be under no such compulsion themselves, are insulting, threatening with violence my friends and family, are more then ready to deploy their own spite against people they are increasingly seeing as traitors to their version of America. At this point, if you are supporting Trump, you got a pretty good sense of what you are supporting, and it's fucking ugly. And for the others, who would support the exact same policies, and the same desire to triumph at all costs, minus Trump's clownery, and perhaps even minus Russia (I am not even sure...) I don't see much hope for "bipartisanship" either. 

So, at this point, it's much more about energizing the base, convincing apathetic voters (who aren't True Believers anyways), fighting disenfranchisement which is happening right now and, yes, getting the message across - but that's not going to happen on the internet.

[Eddie Teach]

I think when you've given up engagement and girded yourself for civil war, the extremist label seems apt.

[Oexmelin]

Who are you referring to? Who's girded for civil war?

[grumbler]

Who are you referring to? Who's girded for civil war?

Well the POTUS and most of his cabinet, for one.  At least they claim to be. Make the Swamp Great Again!

[Berkut]

I think when you've given up engagement and girded yourself for civil war, the extremist label seems apt.

Indeed.

It was very unfortunate when the Tea Party right did that 20+ years ago, and even more unfortunate that that said extremists now don't just control the political Right in America, but that they actually define it explicitly such that someone like McCain is seen as a enemy of the Right.

[mongers]

Melania Trump has stood up to her husband in public more than 90% of the republican party politicans have:

Melania Trump backs NBA star LeBron James after Trump insults

US First Lady Melania Trump has backed basketball player LeBron
James, hours after her husband made insulting remarks about him on Twitter.

James had said in an interview that Mr Trump was divisive and had emboldened racists.

In response, Mr Trump questioned James' intelligence, saying it was not easy to make the NBA player "look smart".

However, Mrs Trump's spokeswoman said James was "working to do good things" with a school in his Ohio hometown.

She said Mrs Trump wanted "to have an open dialogue about issues facing children".

Full item here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45070210

[Razgovory]

I think when you've given up engagement and girded yourself for civil war, the extremist label seems apt.

Are we to engage with such extremists?