“You won’t meet anyone more conservative than me, and I didn’t vote for this,” Zink told Politico...
Right. You voted for other people to lose their jobs. In reality you voted for and deserve exactly what you're getting.
“You won’t meet anyone more conservative than me, and I didn’t vote for this,” Zink told Politico...
Right. You voted for other people to lose their jobs. In reality you voted for and deserve exactly what you're getting.
“You won’t meet anyone more conservative than me, and I didn’t vote for this,”
Ha, I grabbed that quote too.
Narrator Voice: But He did. He actually did vote for this.
honestly, what I hear when these nitwits say this is "I spent all my time being told what to think by people on TV (famous celebrities! Ooooo!) in the media that I was easily impressed by..."
It's the full flower of the Southern Strategy that Lee Atwater leveraged in 1980 to help Reagan take the election. The early 80's was also when Paul Manafort, Roger Stone and Lee Atwater - broke into politics in the biggest way and cemented lying and couched racism as right wing political tools..
https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/75/creatures-of-the-swamp/
It's been all downhill for the US since then.
It's been all downhill for the US since ~~then~~ ~~1642~~ 1492.
You did vote for this & you were also warned.
You're just a sucker.
Awww is someone having a hard time finding his bootstraps? 😁
“You won’t meet anyone more conservative than me, and I didn’t vote for this,”
You consistently voted for this. Every time conservatives are in power they cut services and environmental protections. You voted for it over and over again but this time it actually hurt you and you're sad.
this time it hurt you in a way that you noticed
'I didn't vote this." Yes. Yes you did. You didn't want to hear others tell you what you were voting for. You wanted to believe your own fantasy version. Even now, most MEGA voters want to believe their own fantasy of what Trump will do for America over the truth of what he is actively doing.
Folks from rural areas prioritize cultural signaling for conservativism over economic growth. I'd hazard that Mr. Zink would probably vote Trump again, given the opportunity, if the opposite candidate publicly supported trans rights or was just a Democratic black woman.
Edit:
Goosechase.jpg "You won't meet anyone more conservative than me, and I didn't vote for this"
"WHAT DID YOU VOTE FOR THEN"
"WHAT DID YOU VOTE FOR THEN"
Conservatives: "We voted for the child rapist."
God people in rural communities are so stupid when they vote. I live in a very lopsided state. Just for ease of understanding, about 80% of the state is rural, but also 80% of the people live in the cities. Rural folks often forget just how many more people live in cities.
So they get resentful and say "why are MAH tax dollars going to all them city folks"! I've had this talk so many times with them, why should they pay (like pennies or their salary) to my city improvements just because they're state taxes?
Well, rural guy, because in actuality "us city folk" subsidize all of the rural state. They think they're paying for our stuff but turns out density is way cheaper and way more economically viable than rural. So we subsidize them all the time. I always remind them who do they think pays for the roads, the infrastructure, their state parks? It's not them and their low tax income. Their life depends on the city people
And then they vote to hurt us by cutting programs... And forget that we were paying for them to be on those programs.
As LBJ famously stated back in the 60's to his then-press secretary Bill Moyers: "If you can convince the lowest white man, that he's better than the best black man, he won't notice that your picking his pocket. Hell, give him someone to look down on and he'll open his pocket for you.."
This is exactly the classism couched in racism that took our erstwile Mr. Rural for a ride. All them "blacks" on welfare taking their tax dollars.. (because the unspoken bit is, ONLY blacks and minorities and uppity unwed women that breed like rabbits - the welfare "queens" don'tcha know.. are on welfare..)
Every goddamn decade these poorly educated idiots fall for it.
Their only connection to the outside world used to be newspapers, then radio and television, now it's the internet. This makes them extremely vulnerable to disinformation.
I can't count the number of times I've been lectured by some yokel on how the city I've lived my entire life in is actually a warzone with shaira law.
Same! They're absolutely terrified of my city and to me it's like, what the place where I walked to get my bagel this morning?
We were always vulnerable, just to a very selective group of content creators. Now it's open to anyone with the flashiest bullshit.
We should have learned about media in the 80s when everyone was telling us this would happen. But we didn't. Heil Trump.
There is a grain of truth in that rural areas get worse government service. Power outages last for longer, often they don't even have sewer hookups and have to maintain septic systems, roads are maintained at a lower level, etc. They really do get less benefit (in outcome terms) than city folk.
I think @Greddan@feddit.org hit on the information environment as the reason they can't see that that lower service level comes at a way, way higher monetary cost. Our information aggregators are in the business of making money from engagement, and telling people things they want to hear that sound true is the most effective engagement tool. I don't see the problem getting any better unless we figure out a better information model.
It is true, and I counter that with if you choose to live far away from people then you will be prioritized less. Things get fixed faster when there are more people affected, so when you choose to live miles away from anyone, when your power goes out it's not a high priority. I argue that that's their choice, and that it's deserved when it also costs much more for that one person to have power compared to thousands of people getting power for relatively the same cost in an urban area. Harsh I know, but that's how the money flows. They can always move to an urban area if they choose that services are more important than living rurally. More or less I agree with you, but I would tell them "you chose that".
“WHAT DID YOU VOTE FOR THEN”
for white unarmed mother of 3 to be murdered and called a terrorist because she was murdered
Of course not. He voted for other people to lose their jobs.
Maybe he should reflect on what it's like to be "other people".
If they had empathy, they wouldn't be conservative.
Do people just not understand how voting works, or what the word means? Do they maybe think it's short for Devote?

So his business is built around serving federal government employees and federal spending, he voted to reduce federal spending and is upset that it negatively affected his business.
Whhhhhaaattt????

The workers who lost their jobs weren’t desk-bound administrators. They were firefighters, trail maintenance crews, wildlife biologists, rangers, foresters, and seasonal workers who kept public lands accessible and safe. They were the people who made it possible for outfitters, guides, hunters, ranchers, and tourism operators to do business.
try doing that without desk-bound administrators and see how it goes
The betrayal is particularly acute because these workers weren’t making big government salaries. Forest Service seasonal workers typically earn $15 to $18 per hour. Park rangers make $35,000 to $50,000 annually. These were working-class jobs that supported working-class families in rural communities with few other options.
isn't this the same group of people who claim that minimum wage is too high?
Yes, you did. Fucking idiot. Enjoy being homeless.
Especially in a country where criminalizing homelessness is literally a bipartisan issue.
"I believed we were cutting waste in Washington,” Mitchell said in an interview with local news. “I didn’t think they’d fire the people actually fighting fires and maintaining trails. That’s not waste—that’s the actual work.”
It's all actual work. The relentless assault on all federal institutions for the last half century had the initial effect of making the vast majority of them the most efficient systems in existence. Both political parties initially agreed they should not be wasteful, and through several rounds of reform they became more efficient than private organizations doing the same job can even theoretically be. But it's never actually been about "waste," and they stated cutting bone by the early 2000s. The only federal jobs left do actual work, and better, more important work than the vast majority of private sector jobs.
The waste is in private contracts that don't fund public sector jobs. But DOGE didn't go for those.
I would argue they didn’t become more efficient. They just outsourced everything to private contractors. And private contractors have an overhead of needing to compete for contracts, so they’re all spending money on staff that writes up the bids. Additionally, they only hire the workers when they win the contract and those contracts usually expire after 5-10 years. This means there is no long term, institutional capacity building. It might be fine for small projects, but for large complex projects, tearing down an organization only to reassemble it under another contractor every 5-10 years is in fact terribly inefficient and produces worse outcomes. Organizations cannot become good at the work. I’ve seen it first hand. There are many contractors that specialize only in federal procurement regulations, but have almost no in house technical knowledge of how to run the projects they’re bidding on beyond what is they need to say to win. And, most importantly, knowing what to say to win is different than having a mature organization in place to do the work.
That's what I meant by "private contacts." They don't outsource every single possible federal job, otherwise there would be no executive branch left. So the public sector jobs are highly efficient, and the waste has been outsourced to the private contracts where it's more obfuscated.
We could do those jobs much more cheaply and efficiently by nationalizing them, but then that would be "big government," even though it would be saving tax payer dollars when all the accounting was said and done. So 🤷.
These are real jobs held by real people in small towns across Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and Arizona—states that overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
Whoa whoa whoa, don't lump Colorado in with those states. We absolutely did NOT vote for that piece of shit - 3 times in a row.
I didn’t vote for this
Edit: Pardon the comma splice. I found such cheese.

You wanted fascism, Zinky. Well, you got it. And you better thank Dear Leader and Jesus. You live in the Greatest Country In The World, and God gave you bootstraps!
Quit crying and get a job, weakling. Hail Trump.
Oh, Terry, you sweet summer child.
What did you expect would get cut when Donald told you he was going to take a saw to our government?
do you wanna stop fascism? want to see trump and elon musk lose power?
working class solidarity is the first step
our entire lives, we’ve been tricked and manipulated into fighting among ourselves, because they know if we worked together, we would be able to take them down.
why do you think, every time that something bad happens, there’s all the media spin about who we should blame?
they love to do this for age, think about all the boomers vs. gen X vs. gen Z articles and social media posts you’ve seen
but they do the same shit all the time with different things. their aim is to split the working class into as many splinter groups as possible.
we need to stop letting the assholes in power divide us like this.
unfortunately, that means extending solidarity to people who haven’t earned it, including people who chose to vote for Trump.
most of these people were tricked and manipulated. many of them have been fed a steady diet of misinformation. many of them are proud, insufferable bigots.
but being smugly superior, insulting, rude or intolerant isn’t how we change people’s minds. the best way to do that is by having a two-way conversation.
we are all so busy yelling at eachother. it doesn’t work. we need solidarity.
the best way to do that is by having a two-way conversation.
Man I hate to tell you this, but here's how that's going to go.
"You want my help dismantling the Trump regime and the oligarchy? Ok, I'll help, but only if you agree to criminalize being gay, trans, black, or brown."
A. You agree, and forsake LGBT and minority communities.
"Good, so first step- wait, what's that? A LIMITED EDITION TRUMP 2028 HAT??? Sign me the fuck up!"
B. You disagree.
"Then get fucked shitlib, I'm calling ICE and telling them to fuck you up."
C. You convince him the oligarchy is the real enemy, not Trump (Requires SPEECH 100) or trans people (Roll Persuasion with disadvantage).
"See, you get it! The globalist Jews..." He carries on and you pretend not to listen. "But when I become a billionaire, I'm gonna do it right!"
The mistake you're making here like in the other thread is that fascists do not see themselves as the working class, but the ruling class. They believe they are better, and should be rewarded for being better. They are the manipulating class, the dividers, the media spinners, the oppression.
How do you do solidarity with the folks that want to oppress us?
They tricked themselves a SECOND TIME, after we WARNED THEM. How do you warn someone a third time? Do you see them extending their hands and help us?
we need solidarity
Solidarity they never give.
Solidarity they destroy once it's convenient.
Trump should have been rotting in prison, not lauded and praised.
That is true, but it is also fair to point out that you are proposing solidarity with someone who voted for fully supporting these negative things happening to other people, even if there was only a vague sense of what that might mean, and is specifically upset now that it unexpectedly turned around on him and his circle. We have to stand with and support someone we might have to fully expect to continue doing the exact same thing as the opportunity arise.
It's true his interests overlap our own, and raising everyone up is in our best interests, but just realize that we want to give liferafts to people who would prefer to poke holes in the liferafts of others. We want to save people who are acting like spoiled, entitled children and who we have no reason to believe will act any different after they've been saved. Just understand that afterwards we need a system that will survive this type of behavior.
Terry, Sarah, this is what you get for voting for a hateful monster. Twice. You can starve for all I care. Your choice has led to death and destruction.
You mean "I ignored anyone who told me anything I didn't want to hear" right?
"what did you vote for then?" name a Trump policy that influenced your vote, please!
I think I might write this fellow a strongly worded letter.
Rules:
Also feel free to check out:
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.