What's new
By:

Never Trump

Joe Bagadonuts said:
Conservatives
Click to expand...

You've tried to peg me as some kind of leftist. I absolutely detest this idea of team "R" vs team "D"

You'd be surprised by the fact that I don't hate conservatives. I will own up to the fact that I do have a very strong dislike and distrust of people who combine their mythological beliefs with their political beliefs, because for them politics becomes a battle of good vs evil, and it's acceptable to use whatever means necessary to root out and destroy evil.
 
Shifting to just being a political thread reader has been a good thing. If I learned anything is that most people are stuck in ideals that they create for themselves to try to make sense out of the world that surrounds them. I'm guilty of this very same thing myself.

And people get into defensive or passive aggressive mode if a challenging idea that threatens the very core of their beliefs is thrown out there.
 
Gameface said:
You've tried to peg me as some kind of leftist. I absolutely detest this idea of team "R" vs team "D"

You'd be surprised by the fact that I don't hate conservatives. I will own up to the fact that I do have a very strong dislike and distrust of people who combine their mythological beliefs with their political beliefs, because for them politics becomes a battle of good vs evil, and it's acceptable to use whatever means necessary to root out and destroy evil.
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree with your last paragraph. I'm surprised that you don't recognize that the sentence I responded to is exactly what a liberal would say. If there's a way to make an issue into a racist or sexist argument they'll do it every time.

You'd probably be surprised to learn that I don't vote along party lines either. In fact, I often vote for Dems locally, and I even voted for Obama in '08.
 
Stoked said:
Yup. No use beating around the bush.
Click to expand...

Indeed....

https://www.slate.com/articles/news...iolent_resistance_only_help_donald_trump.html

"Isaac Chotiner: What did you make of the events in San Jose Thursday night?

Todd Gitlin: My thoughts ran back to an incident in San Jose in 1970 when Nixon was speaking from a rally and got up on his car and he flashed his V-sign with a big grin. Later, he said to one of his hangers-on, “They hate it when I do that.” He was courting a venomous display of rage. I don’t think Trump was necessarily deliberately inciting this, but I think he properly regards these collisions as food for his wilder beasts, and he loves it.

Another thought was, who knows who these people are? Might some of them be agent provocateurs? It wouldn’t be the first time, and it doesn’t mean all of them are, and it doesn’t mean that there are not authentic feelings of rage directed at Trump. But it wouldn’t be surprising if there were agent provocateurs nibbling around the edges. You have Roger Stone working with Trump, an old-time dirty trickster."

"The lead story in the New York Times right now is about a Trump victory being a real threat to the rule of law. Lots of people have thrown around the word fascism, not altogether wrongly I don’t think. So in a sense do you think people are responding rationally to the possible threat they see?

I think it is likely to be counterproductive. On the other hand there is a nonzero threat of massive deportation and assault directed against Latinos and Muslims and whatnot. I think the anger is entirely justified. Playing it out by going up and punching people is dumb but hard to control."
 
This suggestion that Trump is behind some of the anti-Trump protests is becoming more and more common. It's a stupid suggestion to make without evidence.
 
Gameface said:
You've tried to peg me as some kind of leftist. I absolutely detest this idea of team "R" vs team "D"

You'd be surprised by the fact that I don't hate conservatives. I will own up to the fact that I do have a very strong dislike and distrust of people who combine their mythological beliefs with their political beliefs, because for them politics becomes a battle of good vs evil, and it's acceptable to use whatever means necessary to root out and destroy evil.
Click to expand...

That's a very good distinction to make when we are speaking in currently defining terms. Every rational person knows "conservativism" has its merits as much as the liberal welfare side does. It's the clinging add-on agendas that, for one reason or another, those types tend to align with that brings a lot of cloudiness to the designations.

As an aside, I doubt I will ever understand why humanity tends to land in one camp or the other on a plethora of issues. Anyone have a clue? The closest I can come up with is "conservative" is associated with a hard ***, do it yourself mentality while "liberal" is associated with a fluffy feel good and failure mentality. I doubt that is the true underlying reason why humanity is split into binary groups that align on most issues as we do.
 
franklin said:
That's a very good distinction to make when we are speaking in currently defining terms. Every rational person knows "conservativism" has its merits as much as the liberal welfare side does. It's the clinging add-on agendas that, for one reason or another, those types tend to align with that brings a lot of cloudiness to the designations.

As an aside, I doubt I will ever understand why humanity tends to land in one camp or the other on a plethora of issues. Anyone have a clue? The closest I can come up with is "conservative" is associated with a hard ***, do it yourself mentality while "liberal" is associated with a fluffy feel good and failure mentality. I doubt that is the true underlying reason why humanity is split into binary groups that align on most issues as we do.
Click to expand...

Very interesting thought, I've asked myself that same question many times. A big part of it is again how many people are stuck in a certain mindset (in all sides of the political spectrum) as a self defense weapon, hard to let go of, to feel safer about the ever changing world we live in.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
This suggestion that Trump is behind some of the anti-Trump protests is becoming more and more common. It's a stupid suggestion to make without evidence.
Click to expand...

I think it's made from a position of cynicism, and the recognition that these events benefit Trump. Hard to see how they actually hurt him. That's not evidence. And it might all go back to the Plumbers of Watergate fame and just expecting every dirty trick in the book to be on the table. People are bound to think such thoughts. Whether the thought is stupid or not is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I don't subscribe to it with any kind of conviction, but I do think, " oh sure, why not?" when the thought is made to cross my mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top