Tom Nichols Profile picture
Jul 25, 2018 15 tweets 3 min read Read on X
So, I had an interesting run-in with some Trumpers today, and it's story worth telling. (Mute now if you're not into story time.) I was part of a panel at Harvard talking about the Helsinki summit. Afterwards, two middle-aged women had some, er, questions. /1
During the talk, I had said (in response to a question) that Helsinki was not going to move the needle on Trump's base support, not least because the Trump base is willfully ignorant and refuses to hear anything they don't like about the summit or about Russia at all. /2
After the talk, they wanted a debate. "Did you say I'm willfully evil?" one asked me. I said: "No, I said you're willfully ignorant." Much spluttering. (Both were immigrants, btw: India and post-Soviet region.) /3
Both did the standard Trump thing: talking at me in a fusillade of words punctuated with questions that they would not let me answer. This is a compulsion with Trumpers: they must - *must* - constantly explain to you why they *had* to vote for Trump. /4
There was the standard litany of phantom Trump successes, including - really - that Trump is "taking jobs away from foreigners and making them give them back to Americans." When I brought up foreign workers at Mar A Lago, they agreed: Bad. But Trump? Good. /5
Finally, I said: "Look, what you believe to be true is false. The things you think are facts are not facts. We can't go further here." This elicited lots of fast talking about why false things were true, and why Trump is generally awesome. /6
Finally, one of them said: "You should respect my view and not call me ignorant. That's not reasonable" I said: "You are not a reasonable person, and this is not really a discussion where I can respect your view. You think Trump is doing great. I think he's a disaster." /7
To which she said, and I quote: "Well, he's not as bad as Obamanation." I said: "Obamanation?" She said: "That's what he was, an abomination."
This was the person who had just implored me to be respectful and reasonable. I rolled my eyes and she left. /8
The other lady was nicer, and said that I was the only Never Trumper she'd met she thought was funny and engaging. (Hmph. Many of us are.) But I finally said: "These things you think are happening aren't really happening." /9
She said, out of nowhere: "Well, I supported Obama. But I couldn't vote for Hillary." I said: "That's irrelevant to what's happening now, isn't it?" She then launched into the Hillary Crimes Litany. I said, again: But that's not relevant *now*. We then parted amicably. /10
My point? These two people will never, ever change their minds. They are not accessible to reason. They demand agreement and respect, even when they don't give it and are themselves unreasonable. This is the cohort that neither the GOP post-Trump nor Dems will ever reach. /10
They were flummoxed when I said: "I don't respect that view. Your facts are not accurate. You are not reasonable." They were used to people deferring to them in a more polite way, I guess. (One of them did say it was kind of refreshing that I was honest with her. Yay, me.) /11
Still, it was a reminder that facts and reason are useless. I'm pretty hard to talk over, and these ladies were like being caught between two North Korean televisions. What they wanted, like most Trumpers, was to explain to you at length why Obama and Clinton are evil. /12
I think it solidified for me that these types of Trumpers are just lost. They're not going to climb down, change their minds, listen to new information. Trump really could shoot them on Fifth Avenue. There's no point in discussion, because they don't *discuss*, they *preach*. /13
No rational or fact-based politics will reach these folks. I hate to say that, because I believe in the power of reason and facts. But they're gone. Some of them are nice people, but dumb. Some of them are just bad people. But rationality isn't going to change much here. /14x

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Tom Nichols

Tom Nichols Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RadioFreeTom

Jan 1
Okay, here we go.
1. Lamb, meet pot Image
2. Make incisions deep with a small, sharp knife. Image
3. Fill those incisions with garlic POWDER and just shut up about it. Image
Read 11 tweets
Dec 30, 2024
I might have more to say later, but all the reviews of Carter's presidency emphasize his character, his success in the Mideast, and inflation/gas prices.
But left out of all that: His Cold War policies were abject failures and left America in a precarious situation by 1980. /1
Not only did the Soviets run wild during Carter's presidency, they hated him personally, seeing him as an unserious man giving them Sunday School lectures. Some of America's allies felt the same way, esp after Carter hosed the Germans on the neutron bomb issue. /2
When Carter finally became a born-again Cold Warrior in late 1978, he amped up multiple nuclear programs (which people mistakenly associate with Reagan) and in 1980 issued PD-59, a pretty extreme nuclear warfighting doctrine that convinced Moscow that he was completely nuts. /3
Read 7 tweets
Nov 20, 2024
So, a few words about this new Russian nuclear doctrine, but here's the short version: It's not a doctrine, it's a ploy.
/1
The old Soviet Union had a formal military doctrine, and it mattered. (Trust me. Wrote my doctoral dissertation and first book on it.) It mattered because the regime believed in ideology, and in conforming its policies to ideology and communicating that to its institutions. /2
Soviet military doctrine was a means of intra-elite communication and policy guidance. Yes, some of it was just bullshit, but it was a real thing that was meant to make the various parts of the USSR defense world (strategy, industry, etc) fly in formation. /3
Read 7 tweets
Nov 11, 2024
Okay, I admit, I've been kind of rope-a-doping some of the people angry over my "it's okay to drop friends over politics posts." So I'll wrap up:
I don't recall anyone on my right getting mad when I wrote this in a right-wing - now insanely right wing - magazine in 2016. /1Image
The reason I got very little pushback, I suspect, is that no one expected Trump to win. But now, people on the right are stuck having to defend what they've done and itchy about it.
But interestingly, the same magazine also now has this:
/2 Image
Image
If you're angry over dropping friends and family over Trump now, but weren't in 2016, or aren't over calls now to de-recognize other citizens as Americans (and I assume that means friends who voted for Harris)...well...
/3
Read 4 tweets
Nov 10, 2024
It's right on brand for the "fuck your feelings" crowd to say their vote, and the things they advocated for, must have no effect on any of their relationships with friends or family. Not only is that unrealistic, it's definitely whiny.
(And now let's remember some history.) /1
As a kid, I saw relationships among friends and family break over several issues - and especially Vietnam. No one back then said "You must treat me like a beloved friend or family member no matter what I say." People were, you know, grownups. They owned their politics. /2
I was there the night my parents and another couple ended their friendship because of Vietnam and the draft. (They said they'd drive their son to Canada if he was drafted.) When they left, all four of them knew it was done. As it turned out, that was okay with all of them. /3
Read 4 tweets
Nov 10, 2024
Just as in 2016, Trump voters are the angriest winners I've ever seen.
🧵
/1
The thing that unites Trump voters with other extremists from right to left is that they are totalitarians. For them, winning an election isn't enough. Deep down, they doubt their own cause so they want you not only to accept their win, but to affirm them.
/2
An example on the left that appalled me was when SCOTUS ruled about gay marriage. There were a lot of people on the left who demanded not only that people accept the ruling, but embrace it and bake those gay wedding cakes. Sorry, but that's not how any of this works. /3
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(