Liberals are sort of, fundamentally incapable of understanding that the republican voter is more than just like, some stereotypical idiot white southerner, or self-interested multi-millionaire, I think. They’re incapable of understanding that republican voters can often be some of the more marginalized in society. The disabled, and migrants, as we’ve seen. Dumb people, even, right, people with less education. Explicitly, explicitly this is the case, they bring it up all the time! As though that lack of education is some sort of moral failing, or thing to poke fun at. They don’t understand that conservatives will rightly point out that sort of mockery and call them cruel elitists. It takes this cruel and apathetic stance towards those groups, this unempathetic stance that has no interest in understanding how we got there, this incurious stance. It’s so overly moralized, to the point of incoherence. Well, that disabled person or migrant voted for trump, so, FAFO, they deserve to die, I guess. What am I to do? Well, looks like the palestinian voter in michigan decided not to vote, so, FAFO, guess their family is reserved to being buried under beachfront property. What am I to do?
It’s callous, it’s a self-callousing kind of reaction. It makes you number, and it makes you dumber. It’s cope, basically, I guess is what I’m saying. It’s a way to contend with a cruel reality by becoming crueler yourself.
It also has some intersection with two things. This assumption of free will, and thus a kind of innate moral character and disposition, a constant internal moral agency for all your actions, and so there’s obviously something it inherently shares there with liberalism philosophically, right.
It also, in the positive rhetoric, has an intersection with this sort of, political armchair jockeying, where everyone theorizes that rhetorical moves are being made by politicians for some theoretical person out there that isn’t them, but the fundamental character of the party is still agreeable, and okay. You can’t question the party’s positioning on Gaza. Even if you can cede that it’s immoral, explicitly, then it has to be done because it’s electorally advantageous. I don’t understand how they can’t see how this alienates a ton of people right off the bat, because it shows that you’re willing to do things which are actively morally detestable and still not win. It’s never the case for policy which itself is a positive end, like healthcare, that they are willing to violate legal and political norms in order to take action on that. Or even, say, violating political norms in order to stop a genocide. It’s only that they’re willing to keep up a genocide in order to win electorally, and then whatever follows is sort of what you’re just supposed to get as a reward for sitting through 200,000+ people dying.
So I dunno, that all just pisses me off. I wish people could argue about actual tangible policy, and then pursue that unabashed as an unqualified good, rather than being tricked into believing that their own sense of good, their own goals, are naive, and they need to settle for more exploitation as the cost of doing business. It’s both a cope that makes you callous and it’s a nihilism that grinds you down. An apathy, in the face of politics.
I also don’t understand why in the political realm we have all been so reduced to viewing things purely in terms of like, whatever is within our black and white moral compass. So team-based. No attempt at nuance, understanding, or empathy. It’s insane, I think social media has truly kind of rotted people’s brains, in that respect, by shaping the contexts in which these kinds of interactions happen, reducing the means of people’s expression into pre-approved categories, into little sequestered realities. We’re maybe cooked cause of that, I don’t know.
There are plenty of people who are marginalized or lacking in education who don’t vote Republican because it doesn’t take a college degree to see that Trump tried to overthrow the government. Just because guys who are mad about not getting laid become neo-Nazis doesn’t mean the rest of us who are dealing with hardship do. Black people have been getting shit on since well before this country was even a country and they’re the most reliable Democratic demographic there is. Pretty much everyone has access to the internet and if they cared to learn about they world they could.
I mean, you can understand why black people have and have had historically a very unique position in this country as a kind of uniquely ostracized population, right? That’s not a 1 to 1 comparison we’d make in like, any other circumstance, I dunno why we’d start now. Effectively, what I’m saying is something that goes back quite a ways, you could come up with a lot of historical examples of this, it’s not new. Italian immigrants after ww2, eastern european immigrants, irish immigrants, even jewish immigrants to a certain extent, they were all able to be subsumed by the larger umbrella of whiteness precisely as they voted in accordance with more conservative interests which explicitly do not like them. The same thing that would have happened in this election with latinos, except we’ve run up on the rails of that process because things are materially different. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t really make sense to get mad at that voterbase for voting in that particular way.
The broader point I’m making is that there’s a difference between thinking about these things critically, and getting mad at the wind, and I see a lot of people getting mad at the wind. Except, unlike getting mad at the wind, their anger is actually harmful, actually creates a constant feedback loop in how it’s directed. Some people get mad at a dog for biting them. Certainly, it makes sense to get mad in general, since you’ve been bit, that’s painful, and the dog is the most directly at fault object for that. Some people get mad at the owner, since they can’t control their dog, you know, maybe that’s a step removed, maybe that’s even actually effective at preventing future bites, I dunno. Some people just start to move towards the medicine cabinet as soon as possible, so they can clean their bite. I would rather be the third person, in that example.
So team-based. No attempt at nuance, understanding, or empathy.
team-based???
In the sense that one team is fine dismantling our government and sending key demographics to camps or worse, and that’s not a team I’m willing to be on, yes I guess that makes me “team-based.”
I’m not going to have the Gaza argument here again other than to say I see where you are coming from, and although I disagree with it, I also understand why “Trump won’t be any better for Gaza” wasn’t enough of a reason for some to pull the lever for the Biden/Harris admin.
Maga has trampled all over anything resembling empathic discourse for oh, about 8-9 years, and the US right in general for years before that. The time for reconciliation was before they installed the dictator. Now that we’re all just descending into hell together atop the smoldering wreckage of our government, the folks I’m going to hug on the way down aren’t the ones who voted us here.
Empathy and nuance aren’t something that you do because you’re guaranteed to get something in return from the other person as a kind of, reciprocal action. They’re tools that you use to analyze your opposition, understand them better, and plan accordingly. They’re internally rewarding methods, rather than being something you just do to get a reward.
I think we’ve all understood it to be the case for quite a while now that plenty of conservatives, being relatively uninformed blank slate or single issue voters, will actually agree with communism, as long as you don’t use the word communism. Liberals, even, will not commonly do this, because they usually have much more pre-established and calcified opinions about the reasons why the world is the way that it is that go beyond just the surface level. That could even be considered a symptom of their higher education. We’ve understood that to be the case for like the last 20 years.
Why, then, is there still such a significant commitment towards mocking your rural conservative idiot voter, in the rhetoric of the left? I think there’s a lot of people who still hold onto some semblance of liberalism in their culture, their rhetoric, their attitudes, even after they become a part of the left. I think there’s probably also a significant proportion of actual liberals which, being controlled opposition, seeks exclusively to widen that divide and sort of, function as the pepsi to the coke, even as that strategy actively drives us towards more and more extremism and destroys the country. In any case, beyond the extremely cynical corporate institutional wing that actively desires for the country to be more right wing in service, at least theoretically, of tax breaks and a lack of regulations, or maybe more coherently, in service of short term gains, the regular individual should understand that this rhetoric, this strategy, it isn’t really getting them anywhere. It’s actively harmful. I think at some point with the individual participation in this behavior, people start to build up their own complexes around it, eerily similar to the complexes that conservatives begin to take, as I’ve described previously. A belief in a total and logic-defying free will, an innate moral character, meritocracy.
They fall for true liberalism. It shouldn’t be any mystery why I might not like that ideology, I should think. Not in my leftists, not in my liberals. We should understand that’s failed.
Why, then, is there still such a significant commitment towards mocking your rural conservative idiot voter, in the rhetoric of the left? I think there’s a lot of people who still hold onto some semblance of liberalism in their culture, their rhetoric, their attitudes, even after they become a part of the left. I think there’s probably also a significant proportion of actual liberals which, being controlled opposition, seeks exclusively to widen that divide and sort of, function as the pepsi to the coke, even as that strategy actively drives us towards more and more extremism and destroys the country.
Because I support policies that would help everyone, even “your rural conservative idiot voter” (your words), no matter how much disdain I have for their willingness to hurt everyone not like them. And that brings me to the point.
I could give a shit about them being rural. You won’t find me ever attacking them in a way that includes that facet of who they are. They support the party that is visibly, publicly, actively, destroying everything they claim to hold dear, AND they support the party who is ready and willing to do harm, big and small, to anyone outside a very specific demographic. In many cases, they are the people doing the harm, not just supporters of the people doing harm.
I can understand them just fine, from over here, where I will continue to keep myself and those who are dear to me out of their destructive path as best I can.
For fucking real. Are these pleas for nuance ever aimed at the people voting for real actual neo-Nazis, instead of the people the neo-Nazis are going after?
Are these pleas for nuance ever aimed at the people voting for real actual neo-Nazis, instead of the people the neo-Nazis are going after?
My point is that those people are often the same. We saw a lot of this in the immediate aftermath of the election, with people pointing towards the apparently shockingly large contingent of latino trump voters. These are people who will be explicitly targeted by the administration that they voted for, and many liberals are fully willing to turn around and blame them for their current circumstance, laugh at them, mock them, whatever. I kind of find that behavior disgusting, is what I’m getting at, basically. More than just being kind of, uncouth, in my mind, it’s unproductive. You’re not gonna win over a voter with which you would actually have much in common, with those methods. I think it’s easy to forget that in our current hyperpolarized social media age, the sort of, uninformed idiot centrist voter, even though they now have the pretense of being extremely informed and extremely radicalized after listening to two hour podcasts, they still exist. Those idiot bros now pretend to be super informed and edgy extremists, and we get that, again, even in your latino voters, but the fundamental lack of information still remains. These are just people who have been manipulated, they’re not actually real or substantial ideological opposition. They exist in this propagandized state, this eclectic and confused ideological ball of misinformation, as a kind of explicit rubber stamp for our current political landscape. Many of them can still be convinced.
Thanks for your nuanced take. Upvoting before mods delete it
To respond on to why the pol landscape is like so, I understand politics is a mind killer. It’s basically war with words. And people love to take jabs at their enemies. Kinda like they also love chocolate cookies
But they forget that not everything that feels pleasurable is good for you or your body
Social media really accelerated that particular kind of violent, hedonistic stupidity, I think. Explicitly monetized it, explicitly selects for it, even on platforms which would otherwise appear to be algorithmically agnostic in their format. I’m not sure how to solve that, or if it’s even solvable, in the current system in which the internet exists. I think I still need to watch that one zizek video where he talks about how the function of ideology is to kill hope, and I maybe kind of agree with that statement at face value even if he’s probably going to end up saying something much more complicated and nuanced in the actual video.
You don’t have to read all this if you don’t want to, but it feels as though many things which are otherwise politically agnostic, ideologically agnostic, are kind of, thrust into the political realm with great violence, mostly as a kind of hedonistic rhetorical game rather than through a legitimate desire to improve things. In order to score political points. Things like public transportation, something which is otherwise politically neutral, actually not that related, fundamentally, to any ideology inherently, get politicized, and then they’re guaranteed to die in that throes of that. The rights of transgender people is maybe another such example. These are things which, regardless of your ideological or political predisposition, are totally fine to have, right. Public transportation, or, maybe put more literally, regardless of public-private structure, trains, buses, trams, subways, even bikes and pedestrian-friendly development, is just explicitly more efficient than the car centric, overly privatized shit we currently have. That’s true in both a privatized context and in a public context, and you could have an orientation towards either method of development regardless of your politics. The elites, presumably, want a better standard of living, not even just long term, but on the scale of, say, the next five or ten years, right, and mass transit projects can achieve that goal, even for them, by virtue of letting them save on the costs spent on their peasantry, their underclass, and increases the level by which private roadways, a private transportation, can be used easily by them. Transgender rights are the same way, decreasing trans healthcare provides a maybe minor, yet still existent, cost, it imposes a cost on society. You hear this explicitly called out whenever some chud talks about the suicide rate. Ideally, you would want to avoid suicide! You would want that healthcare, you should want to prevent that, in an ideologically neutral context, because it’s strictly inefficient!
I think, then, maybe the great achievement of the social media superweapon in a post-nuclear, cold war context, is to manipulate these aesthetic ideological dispositions, disconnected from reality, to recreate the appearance of politics without any of the content. I think maybe cynically that it’s just a grand kind of illusion used by three letter security agencies and private capital interests to explicitly manipulate the population, not into necessarily being concerned with actual material reality, but into being lost in this kind of hedonistic game world. I dunno. I think even beyond that we’re kind of, as we’re seeing now, we’re now all explicitly lost in that illusion, the illusion that was created by the internet, or, maybe, the illusion that created the internet. Even at the highest levels of government, this is the case. There’s no concern with any basis in reality, anymore. So under the guise of that, right, I think maybe we’re cooked, is I guess what I mean. Nobody’s steering the ship, anymore, even.
Americans, regardless of generation, on average seem notoriously short term minded. They don’t think, “this minority’s chance of survival and equity directly affects the safety and well being of our local community at large” they think these poor/blacks/trans (used to be gays too but since we have gay republicans now you hear less about it… give it time) make me feel uncomfortable, we should make sure we never see them.
And not seeing something is it not existing, and therefore irrelevant
That huge walll of text to try to say that those republicans are not all stupid. Have you met them? Do you have to work with them? Shop next to them? I call them the stupid 30% and they are stupid.
Holy shit, what an Olympic somersault into fucking nothing. Missing the point would be a comically inaccurate way to describe both these responses LMAO 🤣
Liberals are sort of, fundamentally incapable of understanding that the republican voter is more than just like, some stereotypical idiot white southerner, or self-interested multi-millionaire, I think. They’re incapable of understanding that republican voters can often be some of the more marginalized in society. The disabled, and migrants, as we’ve seen. Dumb people, even, right, people with less education. Explicitly, explicitly this is the case, they bring it up all the time! As though that lack of education is some sort of moral failing, or thing to poke fun at. They don’t understand that conservatives will rightly point out that sort of mockery and call them cruel elitists. It takes this cruel and apathetic stance towards those groups, this unempathetic stance that has no interest in understanding how we got there, this incurious stance. It’s so overly moralized, to the point of incoherence. Well, that disabled person or migrant voted for trump, so, FAFO, they deserve to die, I guess. What am I to do? Well, looks like the palestinian voter in michigan decided not to vote, so, FAFO, guess their family is reserved to being buried under beachfront property. What am I to do?
It’s callous, it’s a self-callousing kind of reaction. It makes you number, and it makes you dumber. It’s cope, basically, I guess is what I’m saying. It’s a way to contend with a cruel reality by becoming crueler yourself.
It also has some intersection with two things. This assumption of free will, and thus a kind of innate moral character and disposition, a constant internal moral agency for all your actions, and so there’s obviously something it inherently shares there with liberalism philosophically, right.
It also, in the positive rhetoric, has an intersection with this sort of, political armchair jockeying, where everyone theorizes that rhetorical moves are being made by politicians for some theoretical person out there that isn’t them, but the fundamental character of the party is still agreeable, and okay. You can’t question the party’s positioning on Gaza. Even if you can cede that it’s immoral, explicitly, then it has to be done because it’s electorally advantageous. I don’t understand how they can’t see how this alienates a ton of people right off the bat, because it shows that you’re willing to do things which are actively morally detestable and still not win. It’s never the case for policy which itself is a positive end, like healthcare, that they are willing to violate legal and political norms in order to take action on that. Or even, say, violating political norms in order to stop a genocide. It’s only that they’re willing to keep up a genocide in order to win electorally, and then whatever follows is sort of what you’re just supposed to get as a reward for sitting through 200,000+ people dying.
So I dunno, that all just pisses me off. I wish people could argue about actual tangible policy, and then pursue that unabashed as an unqualified good, rather than being tricked into believing that their own sense of good, their own goals, are naive, and they need to settle for more exploitation as the cost of doing business. It’s both a cope that makes you callous and it’s a nihilism that grinds you down. An apathy, in the face of politics.
I also don’t understand why in the political realm we have all been so reduced to viewing things purely in terms of like, whatever is within our black and white moral compass. So team-based. No attempt at nuance, understanding, or empathy. It’s insane, I think social media has truly kind of rotted people’s brains, in that respect, by shaping the contexts in which these kinds of interactions happen, reducing the means of people’s expression into pre-approved categories, into little sequestered realities. We’re maybe cooked cause of that, I don’t know.
There are plenty of people who are marginalized or lacking in education who don’t vote Republican because it doesn’t take a college degree to see that Trump tried to overthrow the government. Just because guys who are mad about not getting laid become neo-Nazis doesn’t mean the rest of us who are dealing with hardship do. Black people have been getting shit on since well before this country was even a country and they’re the most reliable Democratic demographic there is. Pretty much everyone has access to the internet and if they cared to learn about they world they could.
I mean, you can understand why black people have and have had historically a very unique position in this country as a kind of uniquely ostracized population, right? That’s not a 1 to 1 comparison we’d make in like, any other circumstance, I dunno why we’d start now. Effectively, what I’m saying is something that goes back quite a ways, you could come up with a lot of historical examples of this, it’s not new. Italian immigrants after ww2, eastern european immigrants, irish immigrants, even jewish immigrants to a certain extent, they were all able to be subsumed by the larger umbrella of whiteness precisely as they voted in accordance with more conservative interests which explicitly do not like them. The same thing that would have happened in this election with latinos, except we’ve run up on the rails of that process because things are materially different. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t really make sense to get mad at that voterbase for voting in that particular way.
The broader point I’m making is that there’s a difference between thinking about these things critically, and getting mad at the wind, and I see a lot of people getting mad at the wind. Except, unlike getting mad at the wind, their anger is actually harmful, actually creates a constant feedback loop in how it’s directed. Some people get mad at a dog for biting them. Certainly, it makes sense to get mad in general, since you’ve been bit, that’s painful, and the dog is the most directly at fault object for that. Some people get mad at the owner, since they can’t control their dog, you know, maybe that’s a step removed, maybe that’s even actually effective at preventing future bites, I dunno. Some people just start to move towards the medicine cabinet as soon as possible, so they can clean their bite. I would rather be the third person, in that example.
team-based???
In the sense that one team is fine dismantling our government and sending key demographics to camps or worse, and that’s not a team I’m willing to be on, yes I guess that makes me “team-based.”
I’m not going to have the Gaza argument here again other than to say I see where you are coming from, and although I disagree with it, I also understand why “Trump won’t be any better for Gaza” wasn’t enough of a reason for some to pull the lever for the Biden/Harris admin.
Maga has trampled all over anything resembling empathic discourse for oh, about 8-9 years, and the US right in general for years before that. The time for reconciliation was before they installed the dictator. Now that we’re all just descending into hell together atop the smoldering wreckage of our government, the folks I’m going to hug on the way down aren’t the ones who voted us here.
Empathy and nuance aren’t something that you do because you’re guaranteed to get something in return from the other person as a kind of, reciprocal action. They’re tools that you use to analyze your opposition, understand them better, and plan accordingly. They’re internally rewarding methods, rather than being something you just do to get a reward.
I think we’ve all understood it to be the case for quite a while now that plenty of conservatives, being relatively uninformed blank slate or single issue voters, will actually agree with communism, as long as you don’t use the word communism. Liberals, even, will not commonly do this, because they usually have much more pre-established and calcified opinions about the reasons why the world is the way that it is that go beyond just the surface level. That could even be considered a symptom of their higher education. We’ve understood that to be the case for like the last 20 years.
Why, then, is there still such a significant commitment towards mocking your rural conservative idiot voter, in the rhetoric of the left? I think there’s a lot of people who still hold onto some semblance of liberalism in their culture, their rhetoric, their attitudes, even after they become a part of the left. I think there’s probably also a significant proportion of actual liberals which, being controlled opposition, seeks exclusively to widen that divide and sort of, function as the pepsi to the coke, even as that strategy actively drives us towards more and more extremism and destroys the country. In any case, beyond the extremely cynical corporate institutional wing that actively desires for the country to be more right wing in service, at least theoretically, of tax breaks and a lack of regulations, or maybe more coherently, in service of short term gains, the regular individual should understand that this rhetoric, this strategy, it isn’t really getting them anywhere. It’s actively harmful. I think at some point with the individual participation in this behavior, people start to build up their own complexes around it, eerily similar to the complexes that conservatives begin to take, as I’ve described previously. A belief in a total and logic-defying free will, an innate moral character, meritocracy.
They fall for true liberalism. It shouldn’t be any mystery why I might not like that ideology, I should think. Not in my leftists, not in my liberals. We should understand that’s failed.
Because I support policies that would help everyone, even “your rural conservative idiot voter” (your words), no matter how much disdain I have for their willingness to hurt everyone not like them. And that brings me to the point.
I could give a shit about them being rural. You won’t find me ever attacking them in a way that includes that facet of who they are. They support the party that is visibly, publicly, actively, destroying everything they claim to hold dear, AND they support the party who is ready and willing to do harm, big and small, to anyone outside a very specific demographic. In many cases, they are the people doing the harm, not just supporters of the people doing harm.
I can understand them just fine, from over here, where I will continue to keep myself and those who are dear to me out of their destructive path as best I can.
For fucking real. Are these pleas for nuance ever aimed at the people voting for real actual neo-Nazis, instead of the people the neo-Nazis are going after?
My point is that those people are often the same. We saw a lot of this in the immediate aftermath of the election, with people pointing towards the apparently shockingly large contingent of latino trump voters. These are people who will be explicitly targeted by the administration that they voted for, and many liberals are fully willing to turn around and blame them for their current circumstance, laugh at them, mock them, whatever. I kind of find that behavior disgusting, is what I’m getting at, basically. More than just being kind of, uncouth, in my mind, it’s unproductive. You’re not gonna win over a voter with which you would actually have much in common, with those methods. I think it’s easy to forget that in our current hyperpolarized social media age, the sort of, uninformed idiot centrist voter, even though they now have the pretense of being extremely informed and extremely radicalized after listening to two hour podcasts, they still exist. Those idiot bros now pretend to be super informed and edgy extremists, and we get that, again, even in your latino voters, but the fundamental lack of information still remains. These are just people who have been manipulated, they’re not actually real or substantial ideological opposition. They exist in this propagandized state, this eclectic and confused ideological ball of misinformation, as a kind of explicit rubber stamp for our current political landscape. Many of them can still be convinced.
DARVO
Deny
Attack
Reverse Victim and Offender
Thanks for your nuanced take. Upvoting before mods delete it
To respond on to why the pol landscape is like so, I understand politics is a mind killer. It’s basically war with words. And people love to take jabs at their enemies. Kinda like they also love chocolate cookies
But they forget that not everything that feels pleasurable is good for you or your body
Social media really accelerated that particular kind of violent, hedonistic stupidity, I think. Explicitly monetized it, explicitly selects for it, even on platforms which would otherwise appear to be algorithmically agnostic in their format. I’m not sure how to solve that, or if it’s even solvable, in the current system in which the internet exists. I think I still need to watch that one zizek video where he talks about how the function of ideology is to kill hope, and I maybe kind of agree with that statement at face value even if he’s probably going to end up saying something much more complicated and nuanced in the actual video.
You don’t have to read all this if you don’t want to, but it feels as though many things which are otherwise politically agnostic, ideologically agnostic, are kind of, thrust into the political realm with great violence, mostly as a kind of hedonistic rhetorical game rather than through a legitimate desire to improve things. In order to score political points. Things like public transportation, something which is otherwise politically neutral, actually not that related, fundamentally, to any ideology inherently, get politicized, and then they’re guaranteed to die in that throes of that. The rights of transgender people is maybe another such example. These are things which, regardless of your ideological or political predisposition, are totally fine to have, right. Public transportation, or, maybe put more literally, regardless of public-private structure, trains, buses, trams, subways, even bikes and pedestrian-friendly development, is just explicitly more efficient than the car centric, overly privatized shit we currently have. That’s true in both a privatized context and in a public context, and you could have an orientation towards either method of development regardless of your politics. The elites, presumably, want a better standard of living, not even just long term, but on the scale of, say, the next five or ten years, right, and mass transit projects can achieve that goal, even for them, by virtue of letting them save on the costs spent on their peasantry, their underclass, and increases the level by which private roadways, a private transportation, can be used easily by them. Transgender rights are the same way, decreasing trans healthcare provides a maybe minor, yet still existent, cost, it imposes a cost on society. You hear this explicitly called out whenever some chud talks about the suicide rate. Ideally, you would want to avoid suicide! You would want that healthcare, you should want to prevent that, in an ideologically neutral context, because it’s strictly inefficient!
I think, then, maybe the great achievement of the social media superweapon in a post-nuclear, cold war context, is to manipulate these aesthetic ideological dispositions, disconnected from reality, to recreate the appearance of politics without any of the content. I think maybe cynically that it’s just a grand kind of illusion used by three letter security agencies and private capital interests to explicitly manipulate the population, not into necessarily being concerned with actual material reality, but into being lost in this kind of hedonistic game world. I dunno. I think even beyond that we’re kind of, as we’re seeing now, we’re now all explicitly lost in that illusion, the illusion that was created by the internet, or, maybe, the illusion that created the internet. Even at the highest levels of government, this is the case. There’s no concern with any basis in reality, anymore. So under the guise of that, right, I think maybe we’re cooked, is I guess what I mean. Nobody’s steering the ship, anymore, even.
Americans, regardless of generation, on average seem notoriously short term minded. They don’t think, “this minority’s chance of survival and equity directly affects the safety and well being of our local community at large” they think these poor/blacks/trans (used to be gays too but since we have gay republicans now you hear less about it… give it time) make me feel uncomfortable, we should make sure we never see them.
And not seeing something is it not existing, and therefore irrelevant
Facts facts facts facts facts facts facts all round
That huge walll of text to try to say that those republicans are not all stupid. Have you met them? Do you have to work with them? Shop next to them? I call them the stupid 30% and they are stupid.
I live in the Midwest and I have not met a Republican that wasn’t a moron.
Sure there obviously are Republicans that aren’t morons. But they still voted with the MAGAts.
Republicans = moron or bigot
Either way you shouldn’t trust them.
Both of y’all are aggressively missing the point.
Holy shit, what an Olympic somersault into fucking nothing. Missing the point would be a comically inaccurate way to describe both these responses LMAO 🤣