[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Mar 2, 2024 - 9:44pm
 
Joe Biden - kurtster - Mar 2, 2024 - 9:31pm
 
Memorials - Remembering Our Loved Ones - oldviolin - Mar 2, 2024 - 6:35pm
 
March 2024 Photo Theme - Many - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 2, 2024 - 5:51pm
 
NYTimes Connections - islander - Mar 2, 2024 - 5:28pm
 
Wordle - daily game - ptooey - Mar 2, 2024 - 3:42pm
 
Did the punishment fit the Crime? - Red_Dragon - Mar 2, 2024 - 2:03pm
 
Song of the Day - oldviolin - Mar 2, 2024 - 1:18pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - skyguy - Mar 2, 2024 - 12:40pm
 
WikiLeaks - R_P - Mar 2, 2024 - 11:53am
 
Israel - R_P - Mar 2, 2024 - 11:33am
 
Ukraine - Beaker - Mar 2, 2024 - 10:54am
 
Thanks William! - oldviolin - Mar 2, 2024 - 9:03am
 
Today in History - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 2, 2024 - 8:13am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - Mar 2, 2024 - 8:03am
 
Name My Band - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 2, 2024 - 6:11am
 
Things You Thought Today - Coaxial - Mar 1, 2024 - 6:29pm
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Mar 1, 2024 - 5:50pm
 
Great guitar faces - Manbird - Mar 1, 2024 - 5:23pm
 
Little known information...maybe even facts - Manbird - Mar 1, 2024 - 5:20pm
 
HALF A WORLD - buddy - Mar 1, 2024 - 3:37pm
 
February 2024 Photo Theme - Water - Antigone - Mar 1, 2024 - 3:30pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Mar 1, 2024 - 2:04pm
 
TuneIn Issue - gabugman1 - Mar 1, 2024 - 12:58pm
 
ONE WORD - oldviolin - Mar 1, 2024 - 11:21am
 
Irony 101 - oldviolin - Mar 1, 2024 - 11:20am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Mar 1, 2024 - 11:07am
 
What Makes You Sad? - oldviolin - Mar 1, 2024 - 10:44am
 
Outstanding Covers - oldviolin - Mar 1, 2024 - 10:38am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - ColdMiser - Mar 1, 2024 - 7:23am
 
Play the Blues - oldviolin - Feb 29, 2024 - 12:05pm
 
What makes you smile? - Steely_D - Feb 29, 2024 - 10:02am
 
Russia - R_P - Feb 29, 2024 - 9:49am
 
trouble with cache block filling on Android 9 - nhm5 - Feb 29, 2024 - 9:43am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - Feb 29, 2024 - 7:57am
 
The Obituary Page - lily34 - Feb 29, 2024 - 5:39am
 
New Music - pete_shakey - Feb 29, 2024 - 5:04am
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Feb 28, 2024 - 9:51pm
 
April 8th Partial Solar Eclipse - geoff_morphini - Feb 28, 2024 - 1:15pm
 
Announcements being clipped - larvenz - Feb 28, 2024 - 6:40am
 
China - R_P - Feb 27, 2024 - 10:34pm
 
Ways to Listen to RP on WiiM Plus - rexswain - Feb 27, 2024 - 3:22pm
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Feb 27, 2024 - 2:46pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - ColdMiser - Feb 27, 2024 - 8:25am
 
NASA & other news from space - Beaker - Feb 27, 2024 - 6:10am
 
In My Room - oldviolin - Feb 27, 2024 - 6:02am
 
Road Trip! - Proclivities - Feb 27, 2024 - 4:54am
 
ANSWERS - miamizsun - Feb 27, 2024 - 4:25am
 
Trump - islander - Feb 26, 2024 - 3:52pm
 
Derplahoma! - Red_Dragon - Feb 26, 2024 - 3:10pm
 
RightWingNutZ - kcar - Feb 26, 2024 - 2:22pm
 
Total solar eclipse playlist - Isabeau - Feb 26, 2024 - 12:13pm
 
Frequent drop outs (The Netherlands) - Babylon - Feb 26, 2024 - 11:39am
 
Audio Sampling Rates - William - Feb 26, 2024 - 9:12am
 
Artificial Intelligence - islander - Feb 26, 2024 - 7:21am
 
OUR CATS!! - DaveInSaoMiguel - Feb 26, 2024 - 7:16am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - pete_shakey - Feb 25, 2024 - 10:31pm
 
Guns - islander - Feb 25, 2024 - 6:34am
 
Coffee - kurtster - Feb 24, 2024 - 9:27pm
 
It's all good fun until... - oldviolin - Feb 24, 2024 - 2:10pm
 
The Secret Combination - oldviolin - Feb 24, 2024 - 1:50pm
 
Lyrics that are stuck in your head today... - oldviolin - Feb 24, 2024 - 1:30pm
 
Caching to Apple watch quit working - jmenzies - Feb 24, 2024 - 7:01am
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - KurtfromLaQuinta - Feb 23, 2024 - 9:16pm
 
If not RP, what are you listening to right now? - westslope - Feb 23, 2024 - 3:43pm
 
Favorite Quotes - oldviolin - Feb 23, 2024 - 1:42pm
 
Florida - thisbody - Feb 23, 2024 - 10:30am
 
Is there a help forum? - amyarnelle - Feb 22, 2024 - 3:22pm
 
Celebrity Face Recognition - oldviolin - Feb 22, 2024 - 1:06pm
 
Today, I learned... - Steely_D - Feb 21, 2024 - 9:52pm
 
Best guitarists - skyguy - Feb 21, 2024 - 4:00pm
 
NEED A COMPUTER GEEK! - geoff_morphini - Feb 21, 2024 - 12:45pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - geoff_morphini - Feb 21, 2024 - 11:44am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Steely_D - Feb 21, 2024 - 11:06am
 
Republican Party - Red_Dragon - Feb 21, 2024 - 8:14am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Trump Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 1119, 1120, 1121  Next
Post to this Topic
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 26, 2024 - 3:52pm

 Beaker wrote:


Ask islander.  He used the word "handwave".  I merely modified it to be grammatically correct in my quote.



well if we're going to be overly pedantic, you should probably have used a hyphen as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving

Hand-waving (with various spellings) is a pejorative label for attempting to be seen as effective – in word, reasoning, or deed – while actually doing nothing effective or substantial.<1> It is often applied to debating techniques that involve fallacies, misdirection and the glossing over of details.<2> It is also used academically to indicate unproven claims and skipped steps in proofs (sometimes intentionally, as in lectures and instructional materials), with some specific meanings in particular fields, including literary criticism, speculative fiction, mathematics, logic, science and engineering.

The term can additionally be used in work situations, when attempts are made to display productivity or assure accountability without actually resulting in them. The term can also be used as a self-admission of, and suggestion to defer discussion about, an allegedly unimportant weakness in one's own argument's evidence, to forestall an opponent dwelling on it. In debate competition, certain cases of this form of hand-waving may be explicitly permitted.

Hand-waving is an idiomatic metaphor, derived in part from the use of excessive gesticulation, perceived as unproductive, distracting or nervous, in communication or other effort.<citation needed> The term also evokes the sleight-of-hand distraction techniques of stage magic,<2> and suggests that the speaker or writer seems to believe that if they, figuratively speaking, simply wave their hands, no one will notice or speak up about the holes in the reasoning.<2> This implication of misleading intent has been reinforced by the pop-culture influence of the Star Wars franchise, in which mystically powerful hand-waving is fictionally used for mind control, and some uses of the term in public discourse are explicit Star Wars references.<3>

Actual hand-waving motions may be used either by a speaker to indicate a desire to avoid going into details,<1> or by critics to indicate that they believe the proponent of an argument is engaging in a verbal hand-wave inappropriately.<2>



Somehow, I bet you are already well aware of the term though, and this is just another disingenuous attempt to look like you care about the cause at hand. 
Beaker

Beaker Avatar

Location: Your safe space


Posted: Feb 26, 2024 - 10:22am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:


um, by handwaving I take it to mean, turn a blind eye / see it, but let it go through kind of thing. Not a coronation jubilee wave at the queen type of thing.
am I right?


Ask islander.  He used the word "handwave".  I merely modified it to be grammatically correct in my quote.

islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 26, 2024 - 9:35am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:


um, by handwaving I take it to mean, turn a blind eye / see it, but let it go through kind of thing. Not a coronation jubilee wave at the queen type of thing.
am I right?




NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 26, 2024 - 9:00am

 Beaker wrote:

Can you cite a few examples of this handwaving of "blatant racism" from "they" "everyone on the right" ?   


um, by handwaving I take it to mean, turn a blind eye / see it, but let it go through kind of thing. Not a coronation jubilee wave at the queen type of thing.
am I right?
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 26, 2024 - 7:34am

 Beaker wrote:

Can you cite a few examples of this handwaving of "blatant racism" from "they" "everyone on the right" ?   



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/23/republican-party-hate-racism-antisemitism-trump

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/13/us/politics/republicans-racist-language.html

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/trump-deploys-racist-tactics-as-biden-rematch-appears-likely

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/10/15/racist-appeals-heat-up-final-weeks-before-midterms/

Or, how about the simple fact that trump is the nominee?
Beaker

Beaker Avatar

Location: Your safe space


Posted: Feb 26, 2024 - 7:11am

 islander wrote:
I don't think everyone on the right thinks in lockstep. There is a wide swath of beliefs. But I am alarmed at how swiftly they handwave blatant racism because of some tiny bit of convenience that arrives with it. "Those guys are mean to me (because they wanted me to wear a mask during a pandemic), so I'm going to join the flat earthers" is a hard stance to understand. When viewed as a pattern, the cruelty appears to be a feature not a bug.

Can you cite a few examples of this handwaving of "blatant racism" from "they" "everyone on the right" ?   
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 26, 2024 - 12:13am

 islander wrote:


I'll start with 'I don't think everyone in the crowd is  racist/homophobe/ant-science'.  I can even see why many are pushed that direction due to economic and social circumstance. But there has to be at least a little resonance or familiar echo in the sentiment for them to stay there.  If I find myself on the same side of an issue as the Nazis, my first reaction is to really consider that position, not to rationalize it by saying 'the Nazis aren't all bad, they have some really snazzy uniforms'.   If their grievance is so deep that they are more comfortable siding with a group of fascists because they don't like my stance on equality, science or *complete* religious freedom, that's their choice.  "Yeah, but those guys were mean to me" is a weird excuse to join a group that espouses some pretty specifically 'mean' stances, it just happens to be pointed a different direction.

The right has leaned into it with the "we're all domestic terrorists" at CPAC, and the new crazy bits from Jack Posobiec at CPAC championing 'the end of democracy' (in a good way?!?!) and Steve Bannon responding with â€œWe are here to overthrow it completely. We didn’t get all the way there on January 6, but we will endeavor to get rid of it.”  If these are your guys because you aren't comfortable with the other side well, the people get the government they deserve. The fact that the leaders are just opportunistic doesn't diminish the part about them being assholes.  EDIT TO NOTE: yes the end of democracy bit was humor. That the jokes made in this forum were self deprecating, the jokes made at CPAC were about hurting other people. Again - if that's what resonates, maybe there's a reason.

I don't think everyone on the right thinks in lockstep. There is a wide swath of beliefs. But I am alarmed at how swiftly they handwave blatant racism because of some tiny bit of convenience that arrives with it.  "Those guys are mean to me (because they wanted me to wear a mask during a pandemic), so I'm going to join the flat earthers" is a hard stance to understand.  When viewed as a pattern, the cruelty appears to be a feature not a bug.



+1
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 5:17pm

 steeler wrote:


I agree with the premise that these group characterizations and ad hominems lead us to and perhaps into an abyss. Demonizing an opponent is a propaganda tool — and should be seen as such.

That said, this is a two-way street. Goose and gander applies. The demonization flows both ways. It is insufficient to claim, for example, that conservatives — especially the MAGA supporters, who upped the ante, so to speak — only started returning fire after decades of rhetorical abuse. This is akin to a child trying to defend his or her actions by exclaiming “he started it.” It does not matter who started it, but it is important to acknowledge that both sides are equally guilty and should back away from the abyss.

I am mystified by this mantra that conservatives — and most especially Trump supporters — are misunderstood and have long been marginalized by liberals, especially those “coastal elites” who view the rest of the country as “fly-over” territory. The notion that it is incumbent upon one side of the ideological spectrum to strive to understand the other side, but not the other way around, makes no sense to me. Although it is not always easy to follow through, I do accept as wisdom that one should try to put oneself in the shoes of another when in disagreement.

I also have been mystified by conservatives claiming that they have had to fight against institutional liberal indoctrination imposed by academia, the media, and Hollywood (now, we apparently can add elementary and secondary school teachers to that list, perhaps along with medical doctors and various scientists, and possibly the “Deep State)”. If this ideological indoctrination campaign has been in place for so long and is so pervasive, one wonders how it is possible the country is roughly split between conservatives and liberals. Perhaps I would need to view it through the same prism that leads one to the conclusions that the 2016 GOP primary and general election were rigged against Trump, and the 2020 election was stolen from him.

Perhaps this has been building inevitably during my lifetime to the critical mass of today that brings many of us to wonder whether our democracy will stand. The January 6 assault on the Capitol should have been a wake-up call. Alas, I am not sure that is true for everyone, and, yes, that is difficult for me to understand.



+1
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 4:38pm

 steeler wrote:


I agree with thr premise that these group characterizations and ad hominems lead us to and perhaps into an abyss. Demonizing an opponent is a propaganda tool — and should be seen as such.

That said, this is a two-way street. Goose and gander applies. The demonization flows both ways. It is insufficient to claim, for example, that conservatives — especially the MAGA supporters, who upped the ante, so to speak — only started returning fire after decades of rhetorical abuse. This is akin to a child trying to defend his or her actions by exclaiming “he started it.” It does not matter who started it, but it is important to acknowledge that both sides are equally guilty and should back away from the abyss.

I am mystified by this mantra that conservatives — and most especially Trump supporters — are misunderstood and have long been marginalized by liberals, especially those “coastal elites” who view the rest of the country as “fly-over” territory. The notion that it is incumbent upon one side of the ideological spectrum to strive to understand the other side, but not the other way around, makes no sense to me. Although it is not always easy to follow through, I do accept as wisdom that one should try to put oneself in the shoes of another when in disagreement.

I also have been mystified by conservatives claiming that they have had to fight against institutional liberal indoctrination imposed by academia, the media, and Hollywood (now, we apparently can add elementary and secondary school teachers to that list, perhaps along with medical doctors and various scientists, and possibly the “Deep State)”. If this ideological indoctrination campaign has been in place for so long and is so pervasive, one wonders how it is possible the country is roughly split between conservatives and liberals. Perhaps I would need to view it through the same prism that leads one to the conclusions that the 2016 GOP primary and general election were rigged against Trump, and the 2020 election was stolen from him.

Perhaps this has been building inevitably during my lifetime to the critical mass of today that brings many of us to wonder whether our democracy will stand. The January 6 assault on the Capitol should have been a wake-up call. Alas, I am not sure that is true for everyone, and, yes, that is difficult for me to understand.


+1 to all of that. Especially the last bit. How the supposed 'patriotic' party can justify what happened (yes it happened - we saw the video) is beyond me.  
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 1:04pm

Apropos of discussion here today is an op-Ed in today’s Washington Post I just read talking about how The Founders thought the republic might avoid the rise of a populist demagogue. Here are two passages:

“In their view, the key to a healthy republic begins with how we address our own flaws and commit to becoming better citizens over time.”

“The Founders believed that virtuous self-mastery was necessary for both personal and political happiness. Today, we think of happiness as the pursuit of pleasure. But classical and Enlightenment thinkers defined happiness as the pursuit of virtue — as being good rather than feeling good. Just as individuals can use their powers of reason to achieve psychological happiness, so can groups of citizens use theirs to achieve political happiness.”


Beaker

Beaker Avatar

Location: Your safe space


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 12:54pm

 kurtster wrote:
An example of how the DEI culture works and the risks involved in speaking out, let alone acting on your beliefs and convictions. You have to risk your employment and how many can make that choice ?

The DEI topic is far too broad and all-encompassing to have a coherent, neutral conversation about DEI.  This is deliberate - and by design.

Far better to dissect what hides under the DEI umbrella, and discuss the merits, or obscenities of each situation.  And thereby dissect and dismantle DEI, piece by piece.

eg: having a cross-dresser/trans/male using the same change room as your 12yo daughter.
eg: having trans / women with a penis playing on women's sports teams
eg: companies having hiring practices that clearly state they are looking for a candidate with a certain gender (eg female, trans, gender fluid etc) or are non-caucasian (whitey need not apply!)

And risking our employment to talk about these issues?  We've already seen that with anyone resisting the pressure to take the COVID vax.

The tide is slowly turning.  Those with the extreme racist/bigot/anti-semitic views are now being ostracized or de-hired, slowly, from our Unis, corps, and eventually govts.





VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 12:40pm

 kurtster wrote:

Hooking up your horse to his wagon ?

Rockefeller.  If one family is more responsible for global warming than any other it would be the Rockefellers and Standard Oil.

Only thing worse is being descended from slave owners ...

Rockefeller = bad. Ok draw your own convoluted conclusions, I guess. Besides... during that time, the idea of global warming directly related to human activity/consumption didn't even exist.
 
He's done a hell of a lot more for this country than Trump. Trump would do well to read-up on him but since Trump doesn't read... no shot of that happening.


Oh, and I forgot to mention... you channeled Trump and uttered the stupidest statement you have ever made: Only thing worse is being descended from slave owners ...
 
As if someone gets to choose who they are descended from  
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 11:37am

 rgio wrote:

Rockefeller.  If one family is more responsible for global warming than any other it would be the Rockefellers and Standard Oil.

It's not his fault you're addicted to heat and transportation.  It would be like blaming gun manufacturers for the mental health crisis.
 
That is like excusing the CCP and Mexican drug cartels for supplying the demand for fentanyl.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 11:34am

 Beaker wrote:
I'd like to invite the discourse here to try something different: what can you agree on?  And do you see any (relatively) new &  defining issues as being important in where your vote might go, this cycle?  Consider the so-called independants.  Consider those who are angry or disappointed with the leadership of their party.  I'd like to suggest there are in fact some issues that cross party lines - and have the support of a significant number of voters.  Those issues may be regional - or not.  And some of the issues even cross the border between our nations - and are a concern to all our citizens, and even our immigrants - legal or not.
/idle thots
 

A wonderful sentiment.  The avenues for finding common ground are nearly all but gone.  The places to have these kinds of conversations are too heavily monitored and censored on top of that.  If you want to remain employable you cannot speak out on social media about anything that goes against or is perceived to be against DEI.  What qualifies anymore for violating the DEI culture is that the language allowed to even have a conversation is being changed to prevent thoughtful and objective conversations.  So self censorship prevents people in the middle from speaking out about nearly anything other than the weather and even that is risky.  DEI correct virtue signaling is the end result and the only type of discourse that makes it past all the algorithms and filters.  It's part of the plan to divide and conquer.  Keep people from interacting with each other and finding that common ground and working things out by consensus rather than by government edicts.

Then as we have seen below, there are those who refuse to look for common ground anymore.  That makes them part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

I really do not know how these obstacles can be overcome anymore.  They are too well entrenched by the powers that be and continue to be.




Here's one issue that's drawing large support across party lines - and across our border.  The candidate(s) who take a stance on one side or the other will be rewarded - or punished.  This is but one issue where there's very likely to be significant common ground.   And watch for some swings in voter behaviour if your previously loyal voters are somewhat underwhelmed by the candidate they are supposed to vote for - and that candidate is on the wrong side of their personal hot button issue.


Can you think of any other issues where 'both sides' are able to look at an issue/problem and agree on a solution/policy?  You may find we learn much more about each other, and respect each other more, when we can identify the common topics and issues we can agree on.  There are far more voters in the 'middle' than in the far/extreme right, or far/extreme left.

/idle thots

 

An example of how the DEI culture works and the risks involved in speaking out, let alone acting on your beliefs and convictions.  You have to risk your employment and how many can make that choice ?

.

{#Meditate}

rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 10:47am

 kurtster wrote:
Hooking up your horse to his wagon ?

Compared to Trump (which was his comment), sign me up as taking it as a compliment too.   Comparing policies is a bit silly, given the social and political changes globally over the past 50 years, but his commitment to social programs, education, and charities that didn't end up in court I'd support.  

Rockefeller.  If one family is more responsible for global warming than any other it would be the Rockefellers and Standard Oil.

It's not his fault you're addicted to heat and transportation.  It would be like blaming gun manufacturers for the mental health crisis.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 10:17am

 VV wrote:
 kurtster wrote:
You kids might want to learn a little bit of history regarding good old Nelson. He was to Nixon what Cheney was to Bush.  You can thank him for bringing Kissinger into the US government. Being from the West as opposed to the East, this Rockefeller means a whole lot different than the perceptions that Easterners have of him. Just to be clear, it was not a compliment.

Sorry, you can't take it back. I do see it as a compliment. Trump couldn't carry Rockefeller's jock-strap. 
 
Hooking up your horse to his wagon ?

Rockefeller.  If one family is more responsible for global warming than any other it would be the Rockefellers and Standard Oil.

Only thing worse is being descended from slave owners ...
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 10:04am

 Lazy8 wrote:

You think you're kidding, but honestly I think this is where the majority of Trump's support comes from.

This is why his supporters adopted the epithet "deplorables". Every example of this disdain fuels their sense of grievance.

Yeah, I think it's misdirected. Tribal. Counter-productive, self-defeating, and eminently exploitable by demagogues. And look what it has gotten us.

I know a lot of people in this camp. According to the rhetoric being flung at them it's because they're all racists, homophobes, transphobes, misogynists, anti-science, anti-intellectual, religious bigots, deluded conspiracy theorists...pick your pejorative. And some of them are at least some of these.

Steven Miller is a racist. Alex Jones is an utterly shameless grifter leading a conspiracy cult. Ted Cruz is (at least performatively) anti-immigrant. The list goes on.

But is Ted Cruz a homophobe? No, he's an opportunistic (if reluctant) conscript terrified that the mob he once led will turn on him. Is Steven Miller anti-science? Don't have any reason to think so, he's just taking an opportunity to push his agenda. Alex Jones is seeking an audience that won't dismiss him as a nutcase. Peter Navarro found a receptive audience for his anti-trade agenda.

And Tribe Trump welcomes them, at least until their leader finds them no longer useful or a threat and casts them out.

From the outside everyone in the tribe gets sullied with the characteristics of the worst examples within the tribe. This is unfair, but it's a unifying dynamic. If you're going to be tarred as a racist regardless of whether or not you actually are one, then the epithet "racist" starts losing its power. Diluting the word this way accomplishes exactly nothing besides empowering actual racists.

So I don't mean to single you out for this, you are far from the only one feeding this fire. But you need to ask yourself it this approach is really helping.


I agree with the premise that these group characterizations and ad hominems lead us to and perhaps into an abyss. Demonizing an opponent is a propaganda tool — and should be seen as such.

That said, this is a two-way street. Goose and gander applies. The demonization flows both ways. It is insufficient to claim, for example, that conservatives — especially the MAGA supporters, who upped the ante, so to speak — only started returning fire after decades of rhetorical abuse. This is akin to a child trying to defend his or her actions by exclaiming “he started it.” It does not matter who started it, but it is important to acknowledge that both sides are equally guilty and should back away from the abyss.

I am mystified by this mantra that conservatives — and most especially Trump supporters — are misunderstood and have long been marginalized by liberals, especially those “coastal elites” who view the rest of the country as “fly-over” territory. The notion that it is incumbent upon one side of the ideological spectrum to strive to understand the other side, but not the other way around, makes no sense to me. Although it is not always easy to follow through, I do accept as wisdom that one should try to put oneself in the shoes of another when in disagreement.

I also have been mystified by conservatives claiming that they have had to fight against institutional liberal indoctrination imposed by academia, the media, and Hollywood (now, we apparently can add elementary and secondary school teachers to that list, perhaps along with medical doctors and various scientists, and possibly the “Deep State)”. If this ideological indoctrination campaign has been in place for so long and is so pervasive, one wonders how it is possible the country is roughly split between conservatives and liberals. Perhaps I would need to view it through the same prism that leads one to the conclusions that the 2016 GOP primary and general election were rigged against Trump, and the 2020 election was stolen from him.

Perhaps this has been building inevitably during my lifetime to the critical mass of today that brings many of us to wonder whether our democracy will stand. The January 6 assault on the Capitol should have been a wake-up call. Alas, I am not sure that is true for everyone, and, yes, that is difficult for me to understand.

VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 10:04am

 Beaker wrote:

Try harder.


Ah.  But that's two separate topics.

Global warming is unlikely to be a topic that there is common ground to be found.  Both sides claim science is on their side.  Side 'A' points to 'the science', and leaves it at that - 'nuff said, etc.  The 'B' side says ' hey wait, let's look closer at that science - it seems fishy' - and also 'but these missing records!'  B wants the A's to slow down and look at stuff.  A says gfy!, you science deniers!  There's no middle ground because the data/info from one side (maybe both) is deeply flawed and there's no desire to reconcile it.

The Coming Collapse Of El Nino and The Ramifications on The Atlantic Basin Tropical Season

Clean energy - a slightly simpler topic - screw the if wishes were horses crowd, we actually have facts.  In Canada, our better-thans have actually imposed a carbon tax on us, for the consumption of any carbon-based fuels, so that the world will get better, we'll see the error of our sinful ways, and all will be well.  This ignores the issues of global competitiveness, that our neighbour south of the border doesn't have a carbon tax, and that China not only has no carbon tax, but is building new coal-fired generation plants as fast as they can.  And in Canada, if our pain wasn't enough already, our current federal govt charges a tax ! on the carbon tax.    It's insane.

No, I don't think either of these topics are going to find much common ground.  There's a vast gulf between get-along go-along + ideologues — and those who wish to question policy.

And I don't think calling out "MAGAs" helps in any conversation - calling out a tribe to defend themselves doesn't generally encourage individual reflective thought.

/2c





Well, I for one am done with the common ground effort. You all want to go down that path... be my guest, I haven't seen it go anywhere the umpteen times it gets brought up. I'm resolved to zero common ground (and I'll live with that) until we get different party leaders (to signal to) and influence their constituencies that common ground might be possible. 

Sorry... but to call out the obvious, Trump thrives on chaos and likes/prefers polarization and to denigrate anyone who isn't on board with him 100%. That pretty much excludes anyone but his supporters. He harbors grievances and his vindictiveness is well known. He has never, ever been "about" bringing people together. I don't even think he would know how to go about doing that even if he wanted to. People respond to their leaders and (whatever you want to refer to the MAGA group as) takes their cue from him. 
 
Oh, and I've said this before... I have been a lifelong registered Republican, but I don't recognize the party that I joined so many years ago.




Beaker

Beaker Avatar

Location: Your safe space


Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 9:33am

 VV wrote:
Ahh the common ground discussion. It's been tried and abandoned many times. No common ground right now to speak of. 

Try harder.

 VV wrote:
But to play along... I for one believe it is global warming but you would be hard-pressed to find a one of the MAGA faithful to agree with me because that would involve a discussion of clean energy. MAGAs don't want any part of that. 

Ah.  But that's two separate topics.

Global warming is unlikely to be a topic that there is common ground to be found.  Both sides claim science is on their side.  Side 'A' points to 'the science', and leaves it at that - 'nuff said, etc.  The 'B' side says ' hey wait, let's look closer at that science - it seems fishy' - and also 'but these missing records!'  B wants the A's to slow down and look at stuff.  A says gfy!, you science deniers!  There's no middle ground because the data/info from one side (maybe both) is deeply flawed and there's no desire to reconcile it.

The Coming Collapse Of El Nino and The Ramifications on The Atlantic Basin Tropical Season

Clean energy - a slightly simpler topic - screw the if wishes were horses crowd, we actually have facts.  In Canada, our better-thans have actually imposed a carbon tax on us, for the consumption of any carbon-based fuels, so that the world will get better, we'll see the error of our sinful ways, and all will be well.  This ignores the issues of global competitiveness, that our neighbour (and largest trading partner) south of the border doesn't have a carbon tax, and that China not only has no carbon tax, but is building new coal-fired generation plants as fast as they can.  And in Canada, if our pain wasn't enough already, our current federal govt charges a tax ! on the carbon tax.    It's insane. 

As far as 'clean energy' alternatives goes - well, both our countries just went through a very nasty cold snap - and it handily revealed the shortcomings in some of the alternate energy sources many think we should switch our entire grid to.  There's a thing called base load - and it won't be denied what it requires.
No, I don't think either of these topics are going to find much common ground.  There's a vast gulf between get-along go-along + ideologues — and those who wish to question policy.

And I don't think calling out "MAGAs" helps in any conversation - calling out a tribe to defend themselves doesn't generally encourage individual reflective thought.

/2c






HaydukeTwo



Posted: Feb 23, 2024 - 9:25am

Article in Salon.com covers important information “Dr. John Gartner on a tale of two brains: “Biden’s is aging. Trump’ brain is dementing”

Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 1119, 1120, 1121  Next