Opinion Trump and the UFC - Neutral Take...

[WoozyFailGuy]

Right, so 90+% of the academic constituency, to which I belong, is below 80-IQ.

This is not about Trump vs. Kamala.

No wonder you come off as a smug fart sniffer then

I totally get what Trump did for the UFC, so there's an implicit debt. And I am also totally in favor of athletes, and the managers like Dana, giving explicit support for a political view. What I think is an issue is when you use an entire platform where hundreds of people work and compete, and who are the show, made to stand behind a message leveraged by the company without their consent.

Just like your academic bubble is mostly liberal, I'd be willing to be that the vast majority of the employees that you are vicariously getting offended for support Trump.
Did you have an issue with media outlets supporting certain candidates explicitly when some of the employees might hypothetically support the other candidate?
Where exactly do we draw the line for how much support a company can show? Who is the arbitrator of said line?

 

[Iroh]

I think no sports organization or league should actively campaign, let alone propagandize, in favor of any political figure, party, or position.

Where is the non-neutrality?

What is exactly the propaganda they have brought forth?

Edit: I guess you mean the vlip or something they showed? I missed it, so I can't judge.

 

[spinup]

I didn't vote, because I am completely disillusioned with the American left, but I also do not endorse the republican right.

I think it is a mistake to turn the UFC into a platform for political propaganda. Dana is free to support Trump and they are free to give him free seats, as well as to anyone else they want. But as a company, many people involved, including the fighters, might not align with that message. They are the stars of the show, and they might not represent the politics put forth. Even if a minority is in that position, it generates polarization.

This is selfish and disrespectful to fighters: the company represents not only the will of the owners, but the people that work and compete there. It was a polarizing and needless avowal of Trump.

Leaving freedom for any fighter to express their views is good; making the show a vehicle of support for one side of a very divisive bipartisan political system, is not. I would think the exact same thing regardless of the politician, party, or position.

Flame away...

Trump is basically the american Kadyrov.
That said, his interest for MMA is possibly the least fake thing about him.

 

[Ronin13]

1936 Olympics vibes

Like Wimbledon does with British Royalty, oh wait, never mind

 

[Brigfa2]

Entertainment industry in the US is super left so this is a safe place for poor republicans. And Dana doesn't force fighters to love Trump, can you say the same about Hollywood actors?

 

[WoozyFailGuy]

Trump is basically the american Kadyrov

Possibly the stupidest political take anyone has had on here this month, an election month, congratulations.

 

[surgeyou1]

He's already elected. Why are they still parading him around.

 

[CPH]

Yes, I do think there is a place for that position, when one is truly objecting to the available options of the constituency. But that's not the point. This is not about me.

Sure. I have said what I wanted to say.

 

[tritestill]

I totally get what Trump did for the UFC, so there's an implicit debt. And I am also totally in favor of athletes, and the managers like Dana, giving explicit support for a political view. What I think is an issue is when you use an entire platform where hundreds of people work and compete, and who are the show, made to stand behind a message leveraged by the company without their consent.

Then tell Dana how you feel. Are you hearing his employees are upset? Does every worker in every organization share the top brass views? They are a fight organization and should not run promos? Every time Orange man shows up, they walk him out and film that. Guy just won an election after political persecution, character assassination, and the media spinning narratives for years and it all backfired. Anybody without bias and neutral should see that when everything corporate slants one way, they are rigging the game and it's actually influenced millions of people into choosing someone who represents a party that tells us boys can be girls and girls can be boys, just as long as it's not Orange Man.

One minute promo was enough for you to draw the line? Think your issue is that majority of people are tired of tolerating what's happening. Your friend throwing a hissy fit sounds like they/them feelings were hurt.

Couldn't imagine having a friend that emotionally underdeveloped.

 

[ultra321]

1936 Olympics vibes

Oh STFU troll... go watch teletubbies

 

[sonhow]

Same energy as: boy you did us proud son. Now do the last good deed of the day and kiss the ass of your dictator so we get food for rest of the year.

 

[Jose Beehive]

Like Wimbledon does with British Royalty, oh wait, never mind

They should be impartial not politically biased.. but also fuck them too

 

[krelianx]

No wonder you come off as a smug fart sniffer then


Just like your academic bubble is mostly liberal, I'd be willing to be that the vast majority of the employees that you are vicariously getting offended for support Trump.
Did you have an issue with media outlets supporting certain candidates explicitly when some of the employees might hypothetically support the other candidate?
Where exactly do we draw the line for how much support a company can show? Who is the arbitrator of said line?

Who is the arbitrator: the law for legal matters, and the public for ethical matters. We are on the latter front. Which is why this is a forum of public, civic debate.

My academic bubble is mostly liberal, yes. But I am not, and it is irrelevant. The claim was that anyone who did not vote for Trump "had sub 80-IQ". That is an idiotic thing to say, even if I do not agree with the academic constituency.

You raise a good question: where do we draw the line for political support/rejection? Obviously there's no clearly defined boundary, but what I was proposing here is that when you are a company that represents thousands of employees that might not share those political views, you should not use the company as a platform for propaganda for the political orientation of the management. That would hold regardless of the political position, and regardless of the distribution of support to a given side or another.

But I'm just laying this out as my position.

 

[spinup]

Possibly the stupidest political take anyone has had on here this month, an election month, congratulations.

I meant that regarding his relationship with the MMA world.

 

[Jose Beehive]

Oh STFU troll... go watch teletubbies

It’s not on tele anymore .

 

[BluntForceTrama]

I wasn’t a fan of Trump and I. Fact I voted for Biden regretfully. I hated the dude

But as corny as it sounds this all changed after he was shot at in Pn. Also I admired him for his work ethic display.

He can go where ever he wants. you can be as politically sensitive as you want to be but to me Trump was visiting his friend Dana White and enjoying a big night of fights.

I don’t really feel comfortable with Musk and Trump hanging out in the same place all the time. Once in a while is fine but not to a predictable level no

 

[CasualBot]

Listening to simps defend this donald guy is hilarious.

Y'all have lost the plot defending politicians and billionaires.

 

[sanguinius]

I think this is a good read. Yet, even if a relatively small minority of the workers, viewers, and fighters in the UFC are democrat leaning, this was needlessly polarizing. I seriously had a friend tonight who walked out of the fights, and said he's done with the UFC. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people, who feel very strongly politically, would take such stances. It seems needlessly confrontational and taking one side of a very divisive issue.

I’m sure he’s withholding sex from his boyfriend in protest, too.


On topic, why the fuck wouldn’t the ufc broadcast that the president fucking elect is in attendance? It’s a big deal.

 

[krelianx]

No wonder you come off as a smug fart sniffer then


Just like your academic bubble is mostly liberal, I'd be willing to be that the vast majority of the employees that you are vicariously getting offended for support Trump.
Did you have an issue with media outlets supporting certain candidates explicitly when some of the employees might hypothetically support the other candidate?
Where exactly do we draw the line for how much support a company can show? Who is the arbitrator of said line?

"I'd be willing to bet"

Nothing I said hinges on the majority of workers in the UFC being pro or against Trump. It is about not making a company a platform for political propaganda. I don't think you understand what I even said, because you are belligerent trying to pick a fight with who you perceive as an ally of "the liberals". You need to slow down, think, and realize I am not your enemy.

 

[sanguinius]

1936 Olympics vibes

You guys need a new script.