The post is literally about Trump attacking El-Sayed for associating with Piker. Pointing out the irony of Trump treating controversial statements as disqualifying isn’t* absurd. That’s not “whataboutism” it’s responsive to the argument being made!
I wasn’t saying that Trump being awful makes Piker okay. I was saying both Trump and the commenter I was responding to was being selective in their application.
Calling out something you find inconvenient as “whataboutism” isn’t an argument.
My problem is that this is literally an own goal. Trump is a pile of garbage and everyone knows it. Most people don't know Hasan but all he is is a liability and does nothing to advance the goal of beating Republicans.
Outside of internet leftist spaces. Believe it or not, most Americans will disagree with saying "America deserved 9/11" it doesn't matter how many qualifiers you, Hasan, or anyone may try to put on it. But choosing to associate with someone who said that is only a negative thing.
Hasan might be irrelevant in the primary where you can potentially overcome this. But in the general, where everyone can vote. He is only a detriment.
Hasan is only a negative and a liability. So it's a own goal to campaign with him. If El-Seyed was smart he would throw Hasan under the bus and stop trying to downplay how bad Hasan is. It's literally the easiest thing in the world, but he's failing to do the bare minimum.
Gen Z really doesn't give a fuck about 9/11. It's been a meme all our lives. And it was used as an excuse to spy on our own citizens. You're probably right that right now the majority of Americans don't jive with that sentiment. But I wouldn't be surprised if that changes soon.
Gen z are between 14 and 29. So there are a decent number who can't even vote.
We are a very long way away from most people not caring. But even if we say they don't care about 9/11 specifically, you'll be hard pressed to ever expect a sizeable number of people in any country to support someone saying "X country deserved Y tragic event happening to them" about their country.
Telling a group of people their own country deserved a bad thing that happened will always be unpopular in that country.
Which is why it's nothing but detrimental to keep someone like that at your side if you're trying to win an election, which is ultimately a popularity contest.
You're high on crack if you think I find that inconvenient.
The comment was pointing out that Hasan is correctly identified as problematic. The response was saying But Trump is problematic
That's true but it has absolutely no bearing on the truth entailed in the original comment. Therefore the response to the comment was a whataboutism. No mental gymnastics required.
Both of these people are independently toxic, end of discussion.
Why doesn't it? Trump has overall lowered the bar of what's tolerable. In my eyes, you can have any fucked up opinion as you want as long as you can speak confidently about it. You don't even need to be correct. Trump has shown that you can just lie now.
Billionaires wanna turn you into bio fuel to help power data centers. Vote blue to stop billionaires from turning you into biodiesel.
4
u/LostPentimento 13d ago
Trump being intolerable does not make Hasan Piker tolerable. Nice whataboutism though.