Is the Right Unusually Outraged and Angry?

Nov 2018
4,861
2,565
Rocky Mountains
I find on Hate Radio, the speeches of Trump, the rhetoric of John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and Mike Pompeo certain common features. These features appear here on DTT as well amid those who are Right-leaning or frankly conservative.
Without even knowing the exact issue, I think a person can fairly predictably identified by the following characteristics in their speech or communication:
1. undercurrent of irritation at any critical questions
2. tendency to disparage the messenger or questioner
3. annoyance that any contrary opinion might be raised
4. frequent use of sarcasm and hyperbole as an argument technique.
5. conviction of absolute certainty that his/her opinion is unquestionably correct
6. impatient disinterest in any factual information
 
Nov 2018
4,861
2,565
Rocky Mountains
They've been angry ever since that buhlack man got elected.
I don't think so, although I can understand the reasoning.

Limbaugh has always been the same (I remember him on the radio in Sacramento, California decades ago) and John Bolton has always been considered to be a hot-headed and bombastic extremist.
The issue is that the angry personality type seems more common than the calmly intellectual conservative. There just are not a lot of William F. Buckley or Barry Goldwater Republicans around anymore. The intolerance and impatience has found approval by Trump, of course, and the Republicans have become more conservative so that is possibly a factor. But, why does the extreme Right need anger to be part of the message?

I guess the point I am trying to make is that to be the behavior of the average conservative now seems to require a degree of annoyed petulance and absolute certainty that seems different than it has been in the past. Without any real basis, conservatives emphatically and angrily asserted that the Mueller report was baseless and would find nothing, for example. It appears that conservatives cannot distinguish what they WANT from what they perceive to be reality. Hoping that Trump would be vindicated is far different from "knowing", without evidence that he would be vindicated. Overlaid on that is a certain anger that anyone would even question Trump as though scrutiny of someone with as many faults and lack of political experience as Donald has was an unreasonable concern.

Here on DTT, almost invariably any discussion of Trump gets turned by the Right into some sort of argument about Clinton or Obama. It seems like Trump should be defended by his supporters by what HE is or has done, not by what others have done (or not done). Again, the conservative argument seems to be that Trump is above question or analysis and if anyone is determined to criticize him, they must be diverted to another topic or reviled.
 
Nov 2012
11,034
9,248
nirvana
I find on Hate Radio, the speeches of Trump, the rhetoric of John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and Mike Pompeo certain common features. These features appear here on DTT as well amid those who are Right-leaning or frankly conservative.
Without even knowing the exact issue, I think a person can fairly predictably identified by the following characteristics in their speech or communication:
1. undercurrent of irritation at any critical questions
2. tendency to disparage the messenger or questioner
3. annoyance that any contrary opinion might be raised
4. frequent use of sarcasm and hyperbole as an argument technique.
5. conviction of absolute certainty that his/her opinion is unquestionably correct
6. impatient disinterest in any factual information
No. They aren't outraged or angry.

That's the product they're selling in furtherance of an agenda.
 
Nov 2018
4,861
2,565
Rocky Mountains
No. They aren't outraged or angry.

That's the product they're selling in furtherance of an agenda.
Explain, please. Are you saying that the emotion is the message alone and there is no need for or interest in an intellectual message?
 

LTP

Mar 2018
1,479
290
Grayson
I find on Hate Radio, the speeches of Trump, the rhetoric of John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and Mike Pompeo certain common features. These features appear here on DTT as well amid those who are Right-leaning or frankly conservative.
Without even knowing the exact issue, I think a person can fairly predictably identified by the following characteristics in their speech or communication:
1. undercurrent of irritation at any critical questions
2. tendency to disparage the messenger or questioner
3. annoyance that any contrary opinion might be raised
4. frequent use of sarcasm and hyperbole as an argument technique.
5. conviction of absolute certainty that his/her opinion is unquestionably correct
6. impatient disinterest in any factual information
I find that what you write is accurate; however, I find the same things true about the left.

When people want to be critical of what I write, they don't ask questions, they begin their responses with something like "moron." One individual did that to me today not realizing that I actually lobby and fight cases based upon what she called me a moron over. How do they justify such stupidity?

Since I'm neither on the left or the right, I can be objective. The left will swear and be damned that I'm a right winger and the right with the same fervor will call me a left winger... and both sides use the same amount of intolerance, name calling, and the belief that their side holds a monopoly on the solutions.

I've had both sides reject factual information they don't like. The standard canard is to attack the figures... one guy actually got pissed off at me for presenting facts he disagreed with - and then called me names when I attributed the research to HIS side of the discussion. The tactics are used on radio, in social media, discussion boards, etc.

We're immune to a little civility - someone might get proven wrong; name calling usually changes the OP to a personality contest. So, the ones who begin their responses with name calling actually lose, but hope to win in a popularity contest. Sadly they feel they do win - usually because most posters then avoid the thread and the name callers avoid having their positions exposed.
 
Jul 2018
4,442
2,000
Trump World! Where the circus is always in town.
Is the Right Unusually Outraged and Angry?
I call it, "revenge anger." You can watch no one on the right without seeing it. Hate with "I won" glee. "Now I am gonna shove your face in my shirt" anger.

Just lost night, for the first time, I saw some real Trump hate from the MSM. Sadly, I truly believe if Trump somehow does not win reelection, this civil war will turn hot.
Putin has won, fair and square. No wonder all the celebrations in the Kremlin on our election night in 2016.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Nov 2018
4,861
2,565
Rocky Mountains
I find that what you write is accurate; however, I find the same things true about the left.

When people want to be critical of what I write, they don't ask questions, they begin their responses with something like "moron." One individual did that to me today not realizing that I actually lobby and fight cases based upon what she called me a moron over. How do they justify such stupidity?

Since I'm neither on the left or the right, I can be objective. The left will swear and be damned that I'm a right winger and the right with the same fervor will call me a left winger... and both sides use the same amount of intolerance, name calling, and the belief that their side holds a monopoly on the solutions.

I've had both sides reject factual information they don't like. The standard canard is to attack the figures... one guy actually got pissed off at me for presenting facts he disagreed with - and then called me names when I attributed the research to HIS side of the discussion. The tactics are used on radio, in social media, discussion boards, etc.

We're immune to a little civility - someone might get proven wrong; name calling usually changes the OP to a personality contest. So, the ones who begin their responses with name calling actually lose, but hope to win in a popularity contest. Sadly they feel they do win - usually because most posters then avoid the thread and the name callers avoid having their positions exposed.
I think there is a danger in arguing that "both sides do it" just because a few on one side may demonstrate similar behavior. It seems unlikely that the left is channeling Trump emotionally in the same fashion as the Right. There is definitely a pattern of similar rhetoric by most conservatives that, at this point in American politics, is more iconic than any regular pattern by the Left. Argument and disagreement is common among the Left (hence the connection to academics and intellectuals). The Right tends toward a more monolithic dogma that does not tolerate disagreement.

Trump (and many on the Right) seems to assume that bullying China and Iran and Canada will automatically result in a favorable response. It is simply beyond understanding of the Right that bullying results in stiffening and resistance by those countries as much as it would to us if those countries were belligerent towards the USA.