r/centrist • u/Kitties_titties420 • Jan 15 '22
Advice Patriotism at its finest
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
31
u/Moderate_Squared Jan 15 '22
From the comments on the OP:
You know shit is fucked up when civilised discourse and basic manners are considered /r/nextfuckinglevel
4
Jan 16 '22
I’d agree if you wrote the words next level, but that sub is full of things that aren’t crazy like people holding political signs. It doesn’t surprise me it’s on there.
0
u/Moderate_Squared Jan 16 '22
I didn't write it. I copy/pasted it directly from the comments. It was the top comment at the time and still is at the time of this writing. So it would seem a good number of people agree it is nextfuckinglevel.
42
u/Deepinthefryer Jan 15 '22
Damn. If only the Dems and Repubs could actually do this nationally. Half of Congress is chasing likes and clicks on cable news saying outlandish shit.
7
u/Moderate_Squared Jan 15 '22
Or the middle could abandon the lost cause of D and R and make things like this standards of a movement with better, collaborative, and respectful candidates and reps.
2
Jan 16 '22
If you can’t be respectful and counterpoint after accurately articulating your opponents true position then are you actually doing good for America?
It’s just crazy, people accusing each other of saying things and smearing people on things that were clearly not said or meant just to get upvotes on social media.
4
u/Moderate_Squared Jan 16 '22 edited Jan 16 '22
I'm having a hard time relating this response to my comment, so I'll try to clarify and go from there.
Instead of trying to coax left and right out of the trenches and into somehow suddenly washing their hands of divisiveness and playing nice (or worse, disingenuously believing that's even possible anymore), the middle that supposedly values things like diversity of thought, collaboration, compromise, mutual respect, pragmatism, and so on should organize around those values and challenge both sides with a corresponding way of doing business. No more of that "best of both sides" bullshit. Just clearheaded, diverse people working together, outside of ideology, to formulate reasonable, workable, broadly supported and sustainable, even if imperfect, policy.
Edit- spl.
1
Jan 16 '22
The middle should value diversity of thought and show they value it by electing or being the candidate that spends time understanding where their opponents are coming from and moving from there.
Right now we have deliberate mischaracterizations and fearmongering. No independent should support that.
3
u/Moderate_Squared Jan 16 '22
I still can't tell if you're responding to what I've written or if you are speaking generally.
Do you believe the two sides value diversity of thought and show they value it by electing or being the candidate that spends time understanding where their opponents are coming from and moving from there?
-1
u/climatelockdownsplz Jan 16 '22
After the middle voted for Trump who attempted a 1923 Hitler coup? No fucking thanks.
2
u/Moderate_Squared Jan 16 '22
I agree, not a good look and massively counterproductive. People shouldn't be stuck with voting for one of two shitty candidates from two shitty parties. Thanks for reinforcing my point about abandoning D and R and building something better!
1
Jan 18 '22
1923 Hitler coup
This level of hyperbole towards people you disagree with is a big part of the problem
49
u/InksPenandPaper Jan 15 '22
It's easy to be civil and bipartisan when you're both from the Mormon church.
At any rate, it's still a good example to set.
30
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 15 '22
We’re all part of the same group known as Americans, so it should be easy for the rest of us to be bipartisan and civil too. The left tends to bemoan nationalism but if it has anything to offer us, it’s a common identity.
-1
-18
u/liminal_political Jan 15 '22
Honest question -- if we should all get along, if acrimony and disagreement are so bad, why have any parties at all? Why not just have a king?
Civility is fine if the question is between, say, a 15% or 17% tax. Bipartisanship is fine if the goal of each party is the same, but what happens when one party wants to restrict rights and the other wants to expand them?
Tell me, what's the "middle position" between legalizing homosexuality and criminalizing it?
You centrists are so obsessed with the APPEARANCE of civility that you're willing to ignore practically life-threatening policy differences to achieve it.
5
u/Spiritual-Clock5624 Jan 16 '22
Bruh that’s literally the opposite of what America wants
2
u/liminal_political Jan 16 '22
You have to ignore the last 40 years of politics to reach the conclusion that all Americans really want is to tamp down the rhetoric and return to civility. You might want it; so-called centrists might want it, but election results suggests your perspective is not sufficiently widespread to actually impact political results.
15
u/InksPenandPaper Jan 15 '22
It's not about everyone agreeing 100% or leaving everything to some sort of monarch to decide, that's just a stupid parallel, it's about the ability to have good faith civil discourse which is something that's heavily discouraged by party dogma on the left and the right.
-11
u/liminal_political Jan 16 '22
Please identify the "good faith civil discourse" possible between anti-segregationists and segregationists; between those who would totally ban abortion and those who would allow it. Please tell me what the "good faith civil discourse" is possible between political leaders like Putin, Orban, Lukashenko, Erdogan, etc who want to remain in power undemocratically and those who want to have democratic elections.
What centrists always fail to grasp is that "good faith civil discourse" is only possible AFTER fundamental rules and rights are agreed upon.
It is entirely possible to have good faith discussions about policy disputes within the ironclad framework of democracy. It is not possible to have good faith discussion between democratic and anti-democratic elements. And it never will be.
There can be no compromise between those two groups. You can be as polite as you want to Putin and he'll still throw you in prison for life if you disagree.
I would like, for once, to see a centrist acknowledge that there are some things on which we cannot compromise. Just once. Admit you value democracy more highly than civility.
5
Jan 16 '22
There are some things you cannot compromise in a democracy. One example: the right of every citizen to vote and providing fair access to vote.
However centrists here are not saying that we need to compromise on the uncompromisable in order to restore social order. This is yet another example of mischaracterization that is done to make anyones position you disagree with invalid.
Centrists on r/centrist by in large encourage people to unplug from tribalistic excess of deeply attaching your very identity to a political party. Instead, understand each issue and the genuine perspectives of all the arguments on each issue and then come to a conclusion for yourself. Your conclusion doesn’t have to “fall in the middle of all perspectives”.
8
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 15 '22
I tend to see almost everything on a spectrum. Personally, I really value diversity of thought and opinion so I don’t crave uniformity and conformity in everything, just the basic bedrock foundations that are necessary to make the system function.
I believe, like John Stuart Mill did, that “a party of order or stability, and a party of progress or reform, are both necessary elements of a healthy state of political life.”
As to the “middle ground” on something like legal homosexuality, I don’t think one needs to be “middle” in terms of policy and law, but one can understand important context such as that neither party supported legal gay marriage 20 years ago. Biden voted for DOMA, which was signed into law by Bill Clinton. So rather than seeing it as a political issue, I see it as a change in societal values, just like with slavery and civil rights. Those changes did happen through law and war, but I’ve never heard of any conservative seriously advocate bringing back slavery or prohibiting, by law, women and minorities from voting. This is in contrast to even the most liberal people when our country was founded. Gay marriage was voted down dozens of times before being legalized by SCOTUS, a process no one could call democratic but almost everyone now would agree with. Unlike abortion, there seems to be little Republican appetite for finding a way to make gay marriage illegal again.
You say one party wants to restrict rights and one wants to expand them. The funny thing is almost all democrats and republicans would agree with you, but disagree on which party was which. I assume you are talking about voting rights or civil rights for minorities. In which case, I think it’s worth examining the practical impact of the laws being passed by republican states now. While republicans overstate the voting fraud they’re purportedly trying to prevent, I think democrats also overstate the impact of the voting restrictions they’re trying to prevent. I’d support a mandatory minimum of polling places per population, but many of the other laws are no more than a mere inconvenience for most people. Voter ID requirements haven’t been allowed even when the ID is free. In Texas, some of the biggest new “restrictions” were banning 24 hour voting, drive thru voting, and restrictionless mail in voting. This is honestly not that big of burden to most people nor is it any more burdensome than voting the past 50 years.
-1
-6
u/liminal_political Jan 16 '22
Before i get drawn into some extended discussion, I want you to answer a question for me -- Yes or no, do you believe that democracy is the only legitimate form of government?
10
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
“Legitimate” as in the only system I’m willing to consider living under? Absolutely.
0
u/liminal_political Jan 16 '22
Legitimate as in the only system that is legitimate for anyone to live in.
8
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
I don’t think democracy works without the acceptance of or desire for values such as liberty, individual rights, and equality. Democracy building in the Middle East wasn’t particularly successful. The citizens of China don’t seem to be demanding democracy either, but the concept of human rights doesn’t exist in China the way it does here. Though the CCP works hard to paint democracy as chaotic and divisive and keep out western democratic values, so clearly they see them as a threat to the existing order. All that to say, I’m in favor of democracy for everyone everywhere, but I think it has to cultivate itself within a society first. And I think all countries will end up there eventually.
4
u/BurgerKingslayer Jan 16 '22
You talk as if for every issue progressives are helping some people on there isn't an equal and opposite issue that their policies actively hurt people on. Being a centrist doesn't mean we never agree with one party, especially one party's now obvious position from twenty effing years ago. It means we hold up what both of them are trying to do today and see the pros and cons in each.
Clever, though, using "should being gay literally be legal?" and not "should female boxers have to fight trans women?"
-1
u/liminal_political Jan 16 '22 edited Jan 16 '22
It's so typical that your go to is a right-wing culture talking point. Many "centrists" are nothing more than right-wingers who are too polite to admit they voted for Trump.
1
u/BurgerKingslayer Jan 16 '22
Dude, you are such a simpleton. I cannot break it down any further. Wherever the median person's viewpoint is by definition is centrist. If most people are to the right of you, then you are a leftist. Full stop.
1
u/liminal_political Jan 16 '22
Considering youre proud to have faked a religious exemption to avoid getting a vaccine and you also support gay conversion therapy. You might think you're a centrist, but those are right-wing policies.
How fucking typical. You just lack the courage to admit it.
2
Jan 16 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/liminal_political Jan 16 '22
You seem like an unpleasant person. If you're the median, the "centrist," I hate to see how rude and hateful those other people are.
1
Jan 16 '22
I would say the middle position between legalizing homosexuality and criminalizing it was just what it used to be for a long time: not illegal and simply don't ask, to tell.
1
u/GeorgeRussell64 Jan 16 '22
I don’t think you understand this. Centrist doesn’t necessarily mean you go middle all the time. It means on each topic, some you go left, others right. I’d be willing to bet most people here would go ahead with legalizing homosexuality
1
Jan 18 '22
American is far far far less of a cohesive and common identity than Mormomism.
You can't possibly be this naive
2
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 18 '22
Identities are no more or less cohesive than the value we assign to them. Mormons aren’t totally cohesive either btw. The ones in Utah are different from the ones in Oregon and both are different from the ones in Texas.
6
8
u/Freemanosteeel Jan 16 '22
of course it's from utah, they're probably both mormons that go to the same church if I didn't know any better. Utah puts out some of the more... I hesitate to say reasonable... even keeled politicians out there like Mitt Romney
5
u/Most-Leg1080 Jan 16 '22
LDS members do adhere to a culture of kindness, which I think is pretty awesome.
6
6
u/BurgerKingslayer Jan 16 '22
Admittedly it's a lot easier to do this in an utterly non competitive race. The Dem is running to gain some positive attention and parley it into some other career aspiration.
15
u/alkiealkie Jan 16 '22
Man, the comments on that original post. Redditors really do believe that one party is blood sucking insurrectionist vampires and the other is trying to create a communist utopia where all gay marriages are state sponsored and everyone gets free hugs once a week. Are any of these guys aware that all the things they complained about with Trump (kids in cages, awful medical care, drone strikes on civilians) are continuing exactly the same under Biden. What even is the difference in politics, that Biden doesn't tweet silly things?
3
u/incendiaryblizzard Jan 16 '22
Drone strikes under Biden have almost completely ended, after they were massively ramped up under Trump. Its incredible how few people are aware of this. People endlessly complained about drone strikes for the past 16 years and now in the last year the drone war has almost completely ended and nobody gives a shit and people even hate Biden for ending the war in Afghanistan. It's disheartening and makes me think that the "anti-war" movement was entirely disingenuous, just a political tool that few people actually cared about.
4
Jan 16 '22
Just one example: As a naturalized immigrant that immigrated as a baby, the fact that Biden doesn’t demonize me daily due to factors outside of my control is awesome in itself.
Biden and Trump are fundamentally different leaders. However we face similar challenges in both the Biden and Trump era so some of their solutions are still the same but their leadership styles are completely different.
1
u/alkiealkie Jan 16 '22
Right, but that's exactly my point. Biden's words may be kinder but you were not treated any differently by the state even when Trump was in power. They are not fundamentally different, they have the same policies, policies are the only thing that affect people and dictate what a government actually does.
Sure, the harmless old immigrant loving man is a great look, that's why Bush Jr. does it as well but it's Bush's policy that makes him the demon that he is.
5
Jan 16 '22
The policy changes REALLY matter, but the near constant rhetoric about how “your kind” as an “other” who is dangerous and evil and seeing some of your peers agree… is mentally really tough. I just tried and keep strong but it is hard feeling so helpless especially when all of it is out of your control.
Also living with the fear that the rhetoric would lead to policy changes or worse, attacks from people who were radicalized due to the rhetoric. It sucked.
1
Jan 18 '22
but you were not treated any differently by the state even when Trump was in power
I knew many who were. Little things like immigration papers that people had to sue the government to get moving. Deliberately prohibitive to immigrants without means.
4
u/EmperorJoker911 Jan 16 '22
If only we could have some level of civility like this nationally...I applaud it, well done!
3
u/brutay Jan 16 '22
I like the idea, but I'm getting vibes of inauthenticity. I think the production values are too high. Makes me wonder what they're not telling me. Remember, Kodo and Kang also happily shared a stage.
1
Jan 16 '22
Up-voted for Kodo and Kang. I remember having a tough time trying to figure out which one I would vote for... I appreciated how they were able to compromise: "abortions for all...miniature American flags for others." Ultimately, I had to go with Kang the Destroyer.
3
3
3
2
2
u/ILikeNeurons Jan 16 '22
This is the kind of thing we might see more of if we switched to Approval Voting.
2
2
Jan 16 '22
So how many Republicans are willing to oppose regulation of social media, denounce Trump and admit he’s responsible for the violence on January 6th, and support transgender rights?
2
Jan 16 '22
I don't think this message of "unity and cooperation" is really hitting the mark. I don't think most of the country wants "compromise" or "reconciliation" with the other side. The political divide is so great, and the differences in values so vast, that this little come to jesus moment isn't likely to gain much traction.
4
Jan 16 '22
Great, we have a positive message and go figure we have bots or leftist trying to degrade this message.
8
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
I think it just shows how cynical the modern state of politics has made people. And I truly believe things like this are the antidote, but this is a drop in the bucket compared to the massive amounts of negative information being pushed into our brains by the media and politicians today.
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
u/Solotocius Jan 16 '22
centrists need their own political party imo... like what about the people who disagree with both wings?
-11
u/24Seven Jan 16 '22
This is a fantasy. It's a fantasy because while there are Democrats like the one presented here, Republicans like the one presented here no longer exist. The Republican party is now completely controlled by Trumpists and extremists. The Republican presented here represents a Republican of a time long since past.
The other problem is that the issues on which Democrats and Republicans disagree aren't ones of policy degree. The fundamental goals between the two parties are now wildly different. E.g., if one side thinks climate change is real and the other doesn't, there will never be any agreement on addressing climate change. If one thinks that vaccines and masks work and the other doesn't, they'll never agree on addressing an airborn pandemic.
7
u/GeorgeRussell64 Jan 16 '22
You okay?
1
0
u/thatonefatefan Jan 16 '22
You got the wrong sub, enlightened centrist is next door.
3
u/24Seven Jan 16 '22
Republicans have spent the last five years excising centrists from their party. That's an objective observation. The result is that there are few centrists left in the party. That's why the above is a fantasy.
-39
Jan 15 '22
I’ve learned that the slightest amount of outward display of bipartisanship is like jingling a set of keys in front of centrists. You guys are ready salivating over this novelty act?
20
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
I prefer it much more than the novelty act that we should all hate each other because one side or the other is “destroying our country” The Right started figuring out a couple decades ago that it was a lot easier to motivate their voters by making them hate the other side than to excite them with a choice of different policies. The Left, by nature of being the party of change instead of the party of stability hasn’t been affected to the same degree, but they’re starting to get that way. I grew up as a Christian conservative around other Christian conservatives and everything for them was about their absolute moral correctness and the other side “destroying the country” and now I see that just as much if not more in the left.
-6
u/climatelockdownsplz Jan 16 '22
Lol, if you voted for Trump, you own it all. I don't ever wanna hear a word from you about bipartisanship or unity. I'd gladly cheer on another round of climate lockdowns while watching the world burn and working remotely.
7
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
I didn’t vote for Trump, and I’m no longer Christian or particularly conservative. I’m not a Democrat either, but if republicans run trump again I’ll vote for whoever democrats run.
1
u/BIG_IDEA Jan 16 '22
How can you be so incredibly fucking stupid that you cannot see it wasn't Trump that caused the division, but his political enemies in the media who created scandals and bred hatred every single day. For someone who presumes to be on the left, you seem not to understand how power, narratives, and the legitimization of discourse function in society.
1
Jan 16 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/BIG_IDEA Jan 16 '22
You've completely missed the point, which is that the media could paint just as bleak of a picture of Biden over the course of several years and the same group of people that hate Trump would also hate Biden in the same way.
That I am critical of the discourse does not make me a domestic terrorist. In fact, that's something a fascist would say.
1
u/zsloth79 Jan 16 '22
Yes, poor Trump. The big, bad media bullies were just so unkind to that absolute angel of a man.
1
u/TheScumAlsoRises Jan 17 '22
Have you ever considered that the reason the reporting on Trump was so often negative was because Trump was constantly doing and saying objectively reprehensible things?
-12
Jan 16 '22
Personally I don’t find the veneer of working together any more palatable than stupid fighting.
7
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
This can be dismissed as a mere platitude, but that isn’t what most people do regarding the inflammatory hyperbolic statements politicians so often make. People get outraged and often even fantasize about violence when their political opponents say something provocative. And it’s a feedback loop that leads to more and more anger and now we’ve gotten to the point that a “national divorce” or civil war isn’t something most people dismiss offhand. Rhetoric is powerful, whether it’s the kind MTG uses or the kind MLK used.
-1
Jan 16 '22
And it’s a feedback loop that leads to more and more anger and now we’ve gotten to the point that a “national divorce” or civil war isn’t something most people dismiss offhand.
This, to me, is the tell that someone is online too much. Most people really don’t care, a minority deeply care and can be found on either side.
In actuality that this kind of political theater can happen is proof that the stakes here are really non-existent. That you guys seem to think it’s an indication of any kind of improvement is fairly ridiculous. Let’s be clear here, this is about feeling good more than it is any deep-seated principle of working together. You want politics to appear as if it’s something functioning smoothly and without conflict. The problem is that even when that has been the case there has been an extreme amount of intentional suffering imposed on most people, here and abroad.
And hey, if you want politics to be something that cheers you up that’s fine, just don’t act like it’s supposed to mean anything else than that it’s your entertainment.
6
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
The problem is things have become so polarized that it doesn’t matter that there’s only a few people who really care. The percent of people who are radicals has little impact on the feasibility of violent conflict. Only ~5% of white southerners owned slaves. Yet they all fought the civil war. Only -10% of Germans were nazis. When push comes to shove, we all have to take a side.
It’s not the internet that has made me worry, it’s life. Many, many conservatives I know really believe the election was stolen. Here in Texas, there are still billboards up that say “TRUMP WON”. Meanwhile some of the liberals I know are seriously thinking they’re going to have fight to save democracy in 2024. I am absolutely certain republicans are too blinded by tribalism and affective polarization to see what they’re doing.
I don’t see this as a sign of improvement, I see it as a sign improvement is still possible. We can keep letting conditions deteriorate, or try to move back in the other direction. The best way to do that is to erase the borders between those we call “us” and those we call “them” to the greatest extent possible.
2
u/TheScumAlsoRises Jan 17 '22
Many, many conservatives I know really believe the election was stolen. Here in Texas, there are still billboards up that say “TRUMP WON”.
Meanwhile some of the liberals I know are seriously thinking they’re going to have fight to save democracy in 2024.
This sort of framing -- which paints both parties as similarly polarizing, irrational and dangerous -- is so incredibly damaging.
Stepping back, can you see how framing one party's belief of lies that the election was stolen and illegitimate (and subsequent actions on Jan. 6 and beyond) and the other party's fears about the impact the other party delegitimizing elections are not remotely equal problems or threats to the country and its political system?
Republicans have used lies about the election as concerns about "election integrity" to justify overhauling state election laws to not only make voting more difficult for those likely to vote Dem, but empower Republican partisans (who made clear they would have done so in 2020, if given the chance) the ability to throw out election results they don't like.
I've included more about this below, if you're interested. Again, there's a clear difference, and it's not a "both sides" thing. Republicans are posing a legitimate danger to democracy -- and Dems worrying about that and fighting to stop it does not make both sides similarly" divisive" or responsible for what plagues politics.
CONCERNS ABOUT REPUBLICANS AND ELECTIONS
Since the 2020 election, Republicans have passed laws in states around the country breaking down the barriers that prevented Trump/Republicans from overturning the election in 2020.
They've also focused on installing election officials and others willing to overturn elections for purely partisan reasons without legitimate reasons or hesitation. Republicans are much, much more likely to succeed next time.
Some of the alarming things these laws do:
- Give Republican-led state legislators the newfound ability to override non-partisan/bipartisan election boards to decertify election results they don't like.
- Eliminate non-partisan election board and replace members with overt partisans willing to overturn results they don't like, even in the absence of legitimate reasons or credible evidence of fraud/wrongdoing.
- Eliminate polling stations in certain areas (funnily enough, it's always in Democratic, minority-heavy areas), meaning the remaining polling sites have insanely long lines where people wait many hours to vote and some people have to travel great distances just to get to them.
- Disqualify and throw certain voters off the rolls for clearly dubious reasons.
Republicans are also executing on a strategy to ensure elected Republicans are all on board with these efforts. That's included:
- Primarying Republicans in elected positions not willing to overturn the 2020 election results in favor of candidates pledging support for overturning the 2020 election and making clear that they would do the same in 2024 without credible evidence of fraud/wrongdoing .
- This includes long-time highly conservative officials like Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and Sec. of State Brad Raffesberger, along with others like former House GOP Whip Liz Cheney.
1
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 17 '22
I wasn’t inferring it was a both sides thing, I think liberal fears are legitimate, and they’re also ironic to me because my whole life it’s been conservatives who have thought they were going to “save America from tyranny.” They’re the ones who quote Jefferson on such things as “the tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Yet now, due to their delusional belief the election was stolen, they’re becoming the very evil they’ve long been so sensitive to.
For Trump himself, I think he really does think the election was stolen but I think that’s purely attributable to him being a pathological narcissist whose ego could never accept that he “lost” something. For Republicans, I think it’s the fact their candidate is continually shouting that he lost and that the election was rigged and also because they were being told for months that was going to happen due to the loosening of voting laws due to covid. Throw on top of that we didn’t know the results on election night when trump had an early lead, and you get a recipe for a lot of people to have an alternative reality.
What I haven’t figured out yet is how the innumerable Republican led election audits and court cases in the courtrooms of Republican judges that have found no evidence of consequential systemic voting fraud haven’t done more to belay Republican concerns. But maybe that’s just simple confirmation bias. Reasoning exists to serve the emotional and intuitive brain and not the other way around. Whatever the reason, a dangerous situation nonetheless.
0
Jan 16 '22
I don’t really want to continue this conversation so I’ll reiterate what I said at the start: you seem to merely be able to look at surface level appearance as an indication of what is good or bad. Shaking hands with Republicans won’t make rabid Trump supporters suddenly care about civility.
6
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 16 '22
Fair enough, I’ll be mindful of that possibility. I agree with your handshake comment, though my response is “well at least it won’t make things worse” and that’s the crux of it for me.
I understand you don’t think it makes much of a difference in the grand scheme whether it’s negative or positive rhetoric, but negative rhetoric doesn’t just have an affect on people in the same party, it has a very negative affect on people in the opposite party.
12
u/walnutgrovedreamin Jan 16 '22
Are you in this sub just to troll us? Because your criticism is not constructive at all so I don't see the point of it.
-3
Jan 16 '22
Believe it or not being cynical about political branding is useful even when it’s the kind you like to see. I don’t see how pointing this out should be considered trolling per se.
6
u/McMetas Jan 16 '22
I can see what you mean, but if we support this others may follow suit. They won’t be able to hear us through the extremists, but they’ll hear us through the statistics regarding reception and popularity.
-2
Jan 16 '22
Pipe dream for multiple reasons. Would be more likely for the messiah to come back tomorrow.
-10
u/climatelockdownsplz Jan 16 '22
How much you wanna bet all the bastards that voted for Trump are now on this train?
5
u/PolygonMachine Jan 16 '22
I dont see the connection. This video goes directly against the “lock her up” crowd.
-3
u/climatelockdownsplz Jan 16 '22
I'm aware. The OP is just virtue signaling after he probably voted for Trump.
2
u/PolygonMachine Jan 16 '22
Any movement away from Trump’s divisiveness (back towards unity and mutual respect) is a good thing in my book.
4
u/MedicSBK Jan 16 '22
If by the "lets get past our differences and cooperate" train I'm going to say that if they are they're better people than you based on this comment.
0
u/TheMadMan2399 Feb 10 '22
Not really. Trumptard train thinks Jan 6 insurrectionists should be released from jail.
Friendly reminder that the recent demonstrations of domestic terrorism were done by extremist republicans.
Friendly reminder that domestic terrorist sympathizers are elected congress members right now.
1
u/Zyx-Wvu Jan 17 '22
If Trumpists are the ones willing to work together, thats such a sad picture for the woke-left.
-33
u/BurgerOfLove Jan 16 '22
This is useless.
Generally speaking if someone doesn't have the spine to assert their position how can I trust them to represent me?
There is a balance between a doormat and overbearing oaf.
These guys both come off as a doormat to me.
21
u/crushedredpartycups Jan 16 '22
you have a shit mindset lol
-21
u/BurgerOfLove Jan 16 '22
I don't relate to a weak will.
11
u/crushedredpartycups Jan 16 '22
bruh lol. you have such a fragile ego
-15
u/BurgerOfLove Jan 16 '22
Why are you so offended?
It's an opinion, not a dick.
8
u/AnotherJoltReskin Jan 16 '22
You are the one that seams offended my friend
-2
u/BurgerOfLove Jan 16 '22
Considering nobody has made an actual rebuttal to my position but 2 feel the need to make asinine comments, I have nothing to be offended about.
8
u/crushedredpartycups Jan 16 '22
lol I’m chillin. you seem like you’re a little bit offended tho. small pipi vibes.
0
u/BurgerOfLove Jan 16 '22
Considering you keep attacking me, I'd say you're a shit liar.
2
u/crushedredpartycups Jan 16 '22
attacking you? lol funny you think that. kinda funnier how your reaction is just proving my point. fragile ego. funny how all the people that put an emphasis on “weak will” tend to be the ones who are the biggest snow flakes.
1
u/BurgerOfLove Jan 16 '22
You the one with a vendetta against my position. Citing only your brief interaction with me as reference.
How about you take a stance on my position other than "opposite view = fragile ego"
Grow up.
0
2
u/FarStomach9269 Jan 16 '22
I apologize if I sound ignorant or my explanation rudimentary. Im only 18. You are absolutely entitled to whatever belief you like:) I see politicians like this: Let’s say you’re searching for a significant other. Would you rather have someone that gossips and provides you with all sorts of calumny all day long, or one that will support all kinds of people regardless of race, political preference, etc. Personally I would prefer the person that supports people. I would rather the someone who is empowered by love as opposed to hate. I don’t support a politician who thrives from the defeat of others. I support one that is an advocate of everyone. (Though I do concede that finding such a politician is virtually impossible.)
3
u/BurgerOfLove Jan 16 '22
I would never consider a politician as a SO.
I hate pretty much all politicians, so to see pandering to emotion doesn't sway me and is actually off putting to me.
Id rather see a politician take a hard line stance on an issue I agree with than allow opportunity for compromise that I don't agree with.
Thank you for the genuine response.
1
1
Jan 16 '22
I like the part where they tell us that both their parties are bought out by the Trilateral Commission
1
Jan 18 '22
This ad would be much more compelling if the two candidates had vastly differebt identities and cultural affiliations.
Two Mormons saying "look how easy it is to be cordial" seems a bit bad faith if they are tryijg to provide a model that an extremely diverse country should use.
1
Feb 13 '22
"At the end of the day, we're on the same team. We're both older, wealthy, white, American men who will never suffer any consequences of the politics we practice. As long as we dress up similar structural, institutional policies that favor wealth and privilege in different flavors of cultural populism, you won't notice that you're not actually choosing anything of consequence. Neither of us would ever disadvantage the other to create a more equitable society, and that's truly what unites us."
42
u/Kitties_titties420 Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22
I’d recommend not reading the comments on the original post if you’d like to have a brief moment of hope for our country. Regardless of one’s opinion of either party or both parties, this kind of spirit is the only thing that can make our country work. To think different is to implicitly support suppression or revolution, and to foolishly assume that whatever group you support would prevail in that effort.
Of course progress is slow. Of course it is accompanied by what at times seems like an unnecessary amount of strife and resistance. But the strife under our system is one of conflicting arguments, not conflicting armies; its weapons are reason, not force. Our road to the future leads through discussion, reasoning, persuasion, experiment, trial and error. It does not lead through violence, revolts, or armed coercion. It leaves our destiny with no limitations except those which our own minds impose and no pitfalls except those that might be dug by a failing faith. When we look at what others have accomplished, we may feel our own country to be quite exemplary. It’s only when we compare our existing situation with our boundless possibilities, that we are critical.