Categories
alt-right crackpottery empathy deficit entitled babies homophobia irony alert Islamophobia misogyny racism rape rape culture sexual assault sexual harassment trump

I’m assembling a post full of anti-Trump resources. Can you help?

notmypresident

So I’m putting together a page (or possibly two) of anti-Trump resources, and I could use your help over the next few days. (No need think about any of this stuff today, obviously!)

I’m looking for a bunch of different things:

Information and graphics to help make the case that Trump’s victory is illegitimate, based on:

Hillary’s big win the popular vote; the ways in which the electoral college effectively overcounts the votes of rural whites and those in swing states and undercounts those of minorities; dirty tricks, from Russian hacking and wikileaks to the machinations of Comey and pro-Trump FBI agents (I’m especially interested in stuff talking about Trump’s connections to the dirty tricksters, as well as his public encouragement and exploitation of leaked emails and the like).

Information on protests and other anti-Trump activism:

Both local and national (and on the internet). Links to help people who want to get involved.

Information and resources to help people deal with Trump-related anxiety, etc. 

Information on Trump’s massive conflicts of interest, and whether or not this could rise to the level of an impeachable offense

Information on his worldwide business dealings. Examples of the conflicts that have already become an issue even though he’s not yet in the White House. The issues raised by his plan to have his kids run his business — despite their continued involvement in the transition and their attendance at meetings with foreign leaders.

Information on Trump’s connections to white supremacists

The possibility that he engaged in “pay to play” for favorable coverage in Breitbart. Connections to far-right parties and activists in Europe. Examples of horrible stuff said and done by his white supremacist supporters. His refusal to clearly and specifically distance himself from these people — in person, on camera.

Trump’s compulsive lying; his vanity; his obsession with revenge; his encouragement of violence at his rallies; his flip-flops, mood swings, erratic behavior; his susceptibility to flattery; his promulgation of fake news and discredited claims

Trump’s racism and misogyny

Trump’s attacks on Muslims and Latinos. His record of discrimination against black tenants. His long history of misogyny. The accusations of sexual assault raised against him.

Historical parallels between Trump and fascist/authoritarian leaders in the past

Information about Trump’s unwillingness to follow traditional norms of presidential behavior and/or do his job

His massive ignorance about this country and the world and unwillingness/inability to learn. His attempts to dodge the press and threats against press freedom. His refusal to attend daily intelligence briefings. His refusal to make his tax returns public.

Trump’s terrible advisors and allies; the Russian connections

Further reading on Trump

Ranging from the terrible things he’s said about women, to his bankruptcies and sleazy business practices, to his embrace of assorted conspiracy theories over the years. I’m generally looking for longer articles here, but short primers on some issues are welcome as well.

Further reading on fascism. authoritarianism, right-wing movements and media

Information about Pence, particularly his anti-LGBT policies

Funny stuff

Recommended publications, writers, podcasters, etc to help make sense of Trump

Anything else you can think of that I’m forgetting

Thanks!

226 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rhuu
Rhuu
5 years ago

Can we also talk about Pence? He’s not really a better option…

From Time: ‘Mike Pence’s hateful Laws Almost Kept Me From My Dying Wife’

His record on abortion laws is terrible too.

Also terrifying with the whole religious freedom thing.

I just don’t want him to be forgotten, so much of his awfulness hasn’t been widely reported on (outside of excellent places like this) that he’s almost received a free pass.

@Axe: Thanks! Didn’t have time to dig that up too. And a new series, you say??

Kagato
Kagato
5 years ago

A good collection of the dodgy practices Donald Trump is currently engaged in (with possibly the best domain ever):

http://corrupt.af

zumahzumah
zumahzumah
5 years ago

@David
At this point the question of whether or not Trump is a traitor is not a closed question.

Ah yes, a question that is not yet closed, that needs to be put on the table: is the leader of the opposition party literally a traitor? Inquiring minds want to know.

Here from the link that someone posted about a Trump meeting with Russia about Syria: “That’s not just subversion. It’s something more. Something darker.” How very melodramatic.

I’m not informed enough about precedent here to tell whether it’s particularly galling for a presidential candidate to meet with foreign leaders, but let’s remind everyone that Russia is not an official enemy, it is a foreign government with which the United States has important strategic partnerships and is in conversation with all the time (example). Trump is allowed to have meetings with foreign leaders and explore what might happen if he were to have the presidency.

In fact, having a better relationship with Russia, including cooperation in Syria, – including also some NATO critical comments made by Trump are at least a rhetorically positive aspect of his candidacy.

I’m also aware that some people have “asserted” that Russia was behind various nefarious things like hacks and whatnot, but just because people (mainly democratic party operatives) constantly assert it doesn’t make it fact. According to MSNBC Brexit, Trump, the alt-right, populist parties in Europe etc. are all some sort of Russian plot. Let’s leave aside the fact that the main country to indulge in foreign propaganda of this sort has recently been the United States and not Russia, shouldn’t it bother people that branding your opponents Kremlin agents has a very ugly history in the United States? All of you would have been called Useful Idiots by some neo-conservative just 25 years ago, when you return the compliment that’s not a good thing.

@Axe

@zumahzumah

I don’t know what he has done to antagonize you

He didn’t do anything to me. Not a fan from back during the Snowden debacle. And then his BernieBro bullshit didn’t help. So, no, I don’t have an antagonistic view of Glenn Greenwald. I just don’t much care for what he has to say *shrug*

Don’t you think that Democrats should have higher standards
No

Yeah, I do think you should have higher standards than using your opponent’s dirty tactics of calling their political opponents literal traitors. And out of curiosity, what’s the “Snowden debacle”?

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
5 years ago

@zumahzumah

I do think you should have higher standards

Me or the Democrats?

what’s the “Snowden debacle”?

A couple years ago… With the leaks at the NSA… And the Guardian was involved… You remember, right?

Handsome "Punkle Stan" Jack

I’m also aware that some people have “asserted” that Russia was behind various nefarious things like hacks and whatnot

There have been confirmations that Russia has been behind multiple hacks. IPs have been tracked, people have come forward, it’s “asserted” because it’s true.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
5 years ago

Yeah, I do think you should have higher standards than using your opponent’s dirty tactics of calling their political opponents literal traitors.

You think a guy who’s called for the assassination of his opponent, asked a foreign country to spy on his opponent (which they did!) and befriended neo-Nazis, neo-Confederates and an ex-KGB dictator isn’t a traitor? Huh.

Ooglyboggles
5 years ago

@zumahzumah

A man who sides with
confederates and fascists
tends to be amoral.

My standards are thus;
Do not call for genocide.
They struggle with that.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
5 years ago

Previous zumahzumah commentary:

Wow, you guys are really bad at civil disagreement and arguing with people without insulting them and making assumptions about them.

From an impassioned defense of the Knights who say Cuck.

http://faceresearch.org/demos/average

that’s a useful site in case you want to speculate on what makes faces conventionally beautiful.

Try to average out faces of just two otherwise unattractive people and see what happens.

A.k.a. “lemme splain beauty to you while you complain about RoK complaining about non-white beauty pageant winners.

And now they’re here bein’ all “Who said the Russians were involved? They weren’t involved. Your Face was involved!”

Shocking turn of events, I know.

Dash
Dash
5 years ago

This vote tracker is still being updated, it clearly shows Hillary’s win and that turnout is higher than 2012. I got it via 538, I’m not sure of the source.

Moocow
5 years ago

Since I posed this link, I suppose I should respond:

Here from the link that someone posted about a Trump meeting with Russia about Syria: “That’s not just subversion. It’s something more. Something darker.” How very melodramatic.

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/aceattorney/images/5/54/Maya_Bench_Exasperated_2.gif

You didn’t even read the article, it’s not about Trump meeting with Russia. It’s about Trump Jr. meeting with russian officals. His fucking kid. Trump Jr is not the fucking president of the fucking united states.

Fishy Goat
Fishy Goat
5 years ago

@Moocow Betcha Trump Sr. will let Jr. ‘help’ with the work while Sr. is off golfing…or why else apply for such high security clearances?

Margot
Margot
5 years ago

With all the misogyny and racism and all that… would someone please raise more attention for the absolutely terrifying things he said with regards to nukes and using nukes? And, well, torture, war crimes and all that?

Ichthyic
Ichthyic
5 years ago

In fact, having a better relationship with Russia, including cooperation in Syria, – including also some NATO critical comments made by Trump are at least a rhetorically positive aspect of his candidacy.

if you think the US leaving NATO is a good thing…

there is no reason for anyone to listen to you, at all.

no wonder you don’t think Trump is a traitor. Hell, if Trump sold the US to Russia, you’d probably call that a good business deal.

Not A Puppet (but maybe a naive optimist?)
Not A Puppet (but maybe a naive optimist?)
5 years ago

For people feeling despair, a few small things to be hopeful about (but never be complacent, keep fighting!!) –
A political blog I have read frequently through the campaign (and really, since around the 2004 election) is http://www.electoral-vote.com.
Some of the more hopeful recent posts from the blog (all include links to references):
Court Strikes Back Against Gerrymandering, Democrats Are Not the Minority, The Map that Should Have the GOP Nervous.

And for some comic relief: Trump Christmas ornament made available on Amazon.com – hilarity ensues.

zumahzumah
zumahzumah
5 years ago

You didn’t even read the article, it’s not about Trump meeting with Russia. It’s about Trump Jr. meeting with russian officals. His fucking kid. Trump Jr is not the fucking president of the fucking united states.

I did read the article (and I was aware of this information before), I know it’s his son, but the son just speaks as the representative of the father, what significance does that have?

if you think the US leaving NATO is a good thing…

there is no reason for anyone to listen to you, at all.

no wonder you don’t think Trump is a traitor. Hell, if Trump sold the US to Russia, you’d probably call that a good business deal.

NATO is not uniformly a force for good, and while Trump’s exact statement on it will probably be contradicted by the next sentence and be incoherent in itself, the fact that the USA’s role in NATO and the future of NATO can be debated is a good thing.

@Axe
A couple years ago… With the leaks at the NSA… And the Guardian was involved… You remember, right?

I’m aware who Snowden is, I just don’t know why Greenwald’s involvement (which was positive afaik) in it makes it a debacle and casts some sort of negative aspersions on his character, — unless I’m misreading you. Certainly you consider the fact the NSA’s programs were revealed a positive development as a whole?

@Scildfreya

Previous zumahzumah commentary:

Wow, you guys are really bad at civil disagreement and arguing with people without insulting them and making assumptions about them.
From an impassioned defense of the Knights who say Cuck.

http://faceresearch.org/demos/average

that’s a useful site in case you want to speculate on what makes faces conventionally beautiful.

Try to average out faces of just two otherwise unattractive people and see what happens.
A.k.a. “lemme splain beauty to you while you complain about RoK complaining about non-white beauty pageant winners.”

And now they’re here bein’ all “Who said the Russians were involved? They weren’t involved. Your Face was involved!”

Shocking turn of events, I know.

It’s okay, I can tell that I’m unwanted here and I knew about the reflexive, hostile reaction I would receive beforehand. I’m posting here despite my lack of trust in this community because I wanted to remind others about what I think are dangerous tactics to delegitimize political opposition, which I think has negative implications beyond the direct partisan battles of the coming years, and which historically have been denounced by Democrats only to be revived now when it seems useful to them.

By the way, it’s very brave of you to search through my post history and expose my evil ways by quoting one comment completely out of context and then denounce me as sexist, but I think if you read the comment within the context of the rest of the discussion you’ll find it is perfectly permissible. The fact that any disagreement whatsoever on this site will very quickly have you branded as some sort of arch-nemesis of feminism whose every utterance must be denounced is why I don’t normally comment here, even though David’s blog is on my list of things I check every few days and even though I 99% agree with his politics. I know you won’t believe it. /shrug

Actually, I normally only comment when I disagree with something because that’s just my personality and I don’t really feel like affirming what other people already have said because I wouldn’t know what to contribute to it. It’s not my intention to sabotage any sort of anti-Trump organizing.

Here is my contribution for the resource list, and that’ll be the end of my posting for now.

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/11/hillary-clinton-is-going-to-win-the-popular-vote-by-a-margin-greater-than-the-total-population-of-40-of-the-states

https://www.facebook.com/timothy.david.snyder/posts/1206636702716110

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
5 years ago

And here’s where zumahzumah throws all credibility out of the window…

I did read the article (and I was aware of this information before), I know it’s his son, but the son just speaks as the representative of the father, what significance does that have?

Because nepotism is bedfellows with despotism. The government isn’t a family business. We have strong traditions of opposing family ties in government as anti-corruption measures.

You’re supporting a deeply undemocratic idea by saying “what significance does that have?”. Somehow I imagine you’re okay with that.

And you can shut your trap about how unfair I was for quoting you “out of context.” That was the entire goddamn quote. You didn’t say anything else. I also provided a link to the source. The opposite of cherry picking.

And you can double shut your trap about how mean I was for looking up your previous comments. It would behoove you to put in some actual research into your own posts.

And you can triple shut your trap with the “you’re all gonna hate me ’cause you’re so biased” nonsense, your Ballad of the Spurned Commenter. You’re allowed to only comment when you disagree with someone, but if I happen to disagree with you when you do, then I’m the one being biased and unfair? Beyond ridiculous.

Get lost. I can’t see how anyone can say “I agree with 99% of what David writes” and “What’s wrong with nepotism?” without being woefully unreflective or a two-faced liar. You choose.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
5 years ago

@zumah

I just don’t know why Greenwald’s involvement (which was positive afaik) in it makes it a debacle

I never made any causative statement to that effect

Certainly you consider the fact the NSA’s programs were revealed a positive development as a whole?

Exactly how certain are you?

Moocow
5 years ago

I did read the article (and I was aware of this information before), I know it’s his son

If you knew that, you would have said it in your original post.

but the son just speaks as the representative of the father, what significance does that have?

A) He’s not the president. He’s been selected as part of the transition team. Why does that suddenly give him the authority to meet with Russians on the behalf of Trump?
B) Again, from the article. You quoted the last part of this sentence but forgot to include the first part, gee I wonder why?:

Meddling in foreign policy by sending Junior Trump to talk about Syria with Russia after the Obama administration terminated talks with them? That’s not just subversion. It’s something more. Something darker. Something almost predictable, given past history.

Like I said, perhaps read the article before talking.

EDIT:
@ Scildfreja

And you can shut your trap about how unfair I was for quoting you “out of context.” That was the entire goddamn quote. You didn’t say anything else. I also provided a link to the source. The opposite of cherry picking

Oh that’s funny, this troll claims he was ‘taken out of contet’ yet took my article quote out of context? Hypocrite

Sascha Vykos
Sascha Vykos
5 years ago

One of the more interesting discussions I’ve heard was on Vox The Weeds podcast.
http://www.podcastchart.com/podcasts/vox-s-the-weeds/episodes/conflicts-of-interest-trump-and-the-media-and-rethinking-teen-pregnancy/pop

They have discussion about systemic corruption in government- some of its features and causes. It’s the context of Trump, but not specific to him.

I know it’s not graphics or easily quotable, but I found it really enlightening and kinda terrifying. Sorry about the crap link, I’m on a phone and struggling just to type this out.

Megalibrarygirl
Megalibrarygirl
5 years ago

Shannon has an always up to date list of companies supporting/selling Trump to Boycott:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vu0Y0HvadMgG_LN7dF8W7M66oPCcx_nmSARQWirV7iY/htmlview#gid=0

Cynical Optimist
Cynical Optimist
5 years ago

@Scildfreja

Someone should write an actual Ballad of the Spurned Commenter. Should be fun and funny.

Also, on Trump Jr,

Can he not do ANYTHING without his children helping him? I mean seriously, there’s a family business and there’s this. It’s ridiculous.

A Lurker
A Lurker
5 years ago

A temporary delurk to provide a couple of links related to security.

First, The Onion Router.
This will help protect you against snooping on your Internet traffic. Be sure to read the warnings about what it can and cannot do.

If you think your physical machines may be at risk, then you may want to look at The Amnesiac Incognito Live System, which can be run off a DVD or thumb drive, and leave no trace on your machine. Also useful if you are connecting from a public access machine, for convenience or extra security. Again, read the warnings.

Both projects are currently fund-raising. If you were thinking of donating money somewhere, then these projects could use it, and would be worthy causes (that you could support regardless of politics) even if the current alarm is a false one.

A Lurker

zumahzumah
zumahzumah
5 years ago

…fine, it’s past my bedtime, but I’ll add another response

@Scildfreja,

Because nepotism is bedfellows with despotism. The government isn’t a family business. We have strong traditions of opposing family ties in government as anti-corruption measures.

You’re supporting a deeply undemocratic idea by saying “what significance does that have?”. Somehow I imagine you’re okay with that.

See, how can I possibly argue anything with you when this is the level of bad faith I have to put up with? I’m speaking about the case of a Trump representative meeting with a Russian representative and you turn it into me supporting nepotism and depotism and being okay with it. My point was discussing whether it was okay at all for Trump or a Trump surrogate to have these discussions, but now I was supposed to have been against it because it was specifically his son and that was nepotistic therefore depotistic therefore evil?

And you can shut your trap about how unfair I was for quoting you “out of context.” That was the entire goddamn quote. You didn’t say anything else. I also provided a link to the source. The opposite of cherry picking.

The context is the rest of the discussion which reveals why I even bothered to make a post to publicize this link. I actually remember very well making that post, because at the time I thought to myself: will I be attacked and insulted for posting this? And I thought I was being careful enough, that I had good intentions to post something relevant to the discussion, just a neutral source to add illustrations to something people were already discussing within the comment thread itself, so that it was safe.

Because I just thought it was a cool link, one that I remembered from a few years ago, as I thought the symmetry of faces was fascinating and when that discussion happened I thought I could contribute positively. So it annoys me that now you bothered to search through my post history to pick out this comment and add a very denigrating explanation along with it, knowing that nobody is going to read the rest of the discussion anyway. And the other discussion is context! It’s relevant at least… I know that every random sentence I write will doubly discredit me in your eyes, but not everything I say is filled with malice you know…

And you can triple shut your trap with the “you’re all gonna hate me ’cause you’re so biased” nonsense, your Ballad of the Spurned Commenter. You’re allowed to only comment when you disagree with someone, but if I happen to disagree with you when you do, then I’m the one being biased and unfair? Beyond ridiculous.

No, it’s about the empirical observation that if you disagree with a regular commentator (or David) on this forum you’ll immediately have attack dogs like yourself summoned to engage in various acts of character assassination. Do you think it’s possible to have any sort of civil disagreement in an environment like that? Like I said, I don’t like you and I don’t normally comment here, this is one of the reasons why. And it’s not just you, it’s also people like Axe that are always dripping with non-helpful condescension towards everything unenlightened irregulars like myself might posit. I know that my emotional reaction to posting in good faith and then being insulted and misread and misattributed etc. is not relevant to you, but I can tell you that it does annoy me (enough to make me waste sleep at least…) Now let’s have some more posts where people will call me a troll, hypocrite, sexist-MRA-drive-by fascist scum. /yawn *goes back into hiding*

and @ moocow, I did read the article, stop constantly telling me I have not read the article when I did read the article…

Handsome "Punkle Stan" Jack

See, how can I possibly argue anything with you when this is the level of bad faith I have to put up with? I’m speaking about the case of a Trump representative meeting with a Russian representative and you turn it into me supporting nepotism and depotism and being okay with it.

I was gonna tell you how fucking dumb this is but I’m just gonna tell ya a little fact.

Did you know it’s common for comic book artists to use porn as references for drawing?

http://i.imgur.com/v58Ns9H.png

(Okay, I just wanted an excuse to share this. It’s haunting.)

Hippodameia
Hippodameia
5 years ago

We expect more from trolls here. You’re boring.

%d bloggers like this: