You talk like Donald Trump is some fringe phenomenon on the right.
Conservatives support Trump. We are allowed to take his words and assume they are representative of your position.
You are allowed to explain in specific cases where you disagree with Trump, but the default is that you agree with him.
(it is the same with Catholics – You can be a Catholic, you can disagree with the Pope; you cannot disagree with the Pope and be a Catholic)
They are related, if not the same thing. Trump won as an “outsider” because he tapped into a base who felt like America’s establishment was not working in their interests.
More like “mouth” reading.
That’s ok. A lot of people get mixed up with things people think and things people say.
So you don’t actually have a point to make with your lives experiences content?
Or do you accept that mrmrmr men’s are every bit as well substation and valid as yours?
Can’t argue with your opinion. Because it’s your opinion.
While we can quibble over the use of the word “conspired”, it has been substantively proved that Russia heavily interfered and assisted in the 2016 election (and almost certainly in the 2020 one as well) to the benefit of Donald Trump, that the Trump campaign welcomed and occasionally solicited that assistance, and that there was a considerable number of interactions between the Trump campaign and representatives/agents of the Russia government. This has been set out in great detail in multiple US intelligence agency reports, in the Mueller report and in a bipartisan Senate committee report (among other sources), not to mention corroborating evidence such as the willingness of several individuals associated with the Trump campaign to commit felonies to hide or downplay their meetings with Russia.
So unlike the current “massive voter fraud” story (for which there remains no evidence), the belief that the Trump campaign was working with Russia to get Trump elected was never a “crazy conspiracy theory” and has been shown to be true several times over.
I’m sure one can find actual “crazy conspiracy theories” the left believe. But you may struggle to find ones that have widespread support up through the entire party apparatus and which are being heavily promulgated by the most senior politicians in the party (again, unlike the “massive voter fraud” story).
But not remotely on the same scale.
In fact, the “both sides do it” argument crucially leaves off (sometimes deliberately so) consideration of the scale of, the impact of, and the tolerance for the actions in question. One can characterize a jaywalker and a serial killer as both being criminals and thus “both do it [break the law]”. But doing so in a way to imply even a tenuous equivalence is not a particularly constructive approach.
And yet the “few riots” attributed to the left were roundly condemned by Democratic politicians.
When the right-wing vigilante groups waded into Portland, Republicans (up to the President himself) cheered them on.
When armed right-wing mobs swarmed into state houses to protest the requirement to wear masks, the police stood back and let them, and Republicans politicians said, “We’re fine with that”.
When a rich white couple illegally threatened protesters with guns, the Republicans invited them to speak at the RNC.
When Kyle Rittenhouse crossed a state line to join a protest after curfew and threaten protesters with a gun he wasn’t legally allowed to carry (at the invitation of the local police) and then shot at the protesters and was allowed to leave by those local police, before being eventually arrested, he was praised by Republican politicians and Republicans paid his bail.
And all across the country now, election officials are being threatened with death simply for doing their jobs and refusing to overturn a legitimate election - and this intimidation is being not just tolerated but actively encouraged by Republicans up to and including the President of the United States.
So you want to compare the worst elements of the right to the worst elements of the left? Sure. Because the right elect their worst elements, and elevate them to high office. And the few Party members still willing to object are sidelined, harassed and/or removed from office. The violence and malignity that is a bug on the left is not just a feature of the right, it’s becoming the feature of the right. The Republican Party have made it very, very clear that they are willing to destroy democracy and the rule of law in America rather than admit to losing an election.
And only one side is doing that.
Your belief is noted.
How is that relevant? Did anyone on the left indicate that COVID was a hoax just because people were protesting extralegal murders? I know the right chimed in with their “Look, this proves COVID was a hoax!” narrative, but the reality was that most of the protesters wore face masks and took precautions, and the evidence indicates that there were no significant spikes in infection due to the protests (unlike, say, Trump rallies, which were a string of superspreader events).
Nobody on the left denied that COVID was serious nor that there was some risk in protesting; they just felt that protesting people being tortured to death in the street by police was a sufficiently material threat to require action. There were no contradictory beliefs in play, and certainly not two contradictory false ones.
Put kindly, this was a non-sequitur.
I happen to have the best looking lawn in my entire neighborhood; therefore, ignore at your peril my opinions about the balance of trade with China, the wisdom of using the mRNA approach to COVID vaccines, and what – if anything – Duterte’s intransigence means to our geopolitical position in that part of the world.
Uh… I guess sure? You’re putting words in my mouth and arguing with them, so just keep on doing that if it amuses you. Seems pointless to correct you.
Well that might be the mantra of the left but the right but my problem with the overly woke left is the anti-asian discrimination.
Of course he is. He is nothing like the mainstream conservatives we encountered before.
[quote]Conservatives support Trump. We are allowed to take his words and assume they are representative of your position.
You are allowed to explain in specific cases where you disagree with Trump, but the default is that you agree with him.[/quote]
I’m not a conservative but the default is not that you agree with him any more than the default for all liberals is that you agree with biden on everything. If i ever find a politician i agree with on even 70% of issues, I think I would faint.
[quote](it is the same with Catholics – You can be a Catholic, you can disagree with the Pope; you cannot disagree with the Pope and be a Catholic)
[/quote]
The president isn’t the pope.
And even the pope can be disagreed with except in VERY limited circumstances.
Yes, that’s kind of what was said much earlier up and that is the position i was defending before the dogpile. Donald Trump was in part a reaction against the eliteness of the political parties paying attention to the well heeled elements of their party and disregarding the working man. Both sides were doing it.
That’s one person. He talks a lot of shit. Can we agree on that. The things that come out of his mouth does not represent what is going on inside the conservative brain.
Not really. There was no conspiracy, conspiracy requires actually conspiring to do something. Russia also helped JFK get elected. There was no conspiracy there either. This was just a self inflicted wound made by overly eager folks who were just as convinced that their side won (despite having actually lost). They didn’t engage in the sort of sedition and borderline treason that the republicans are engaging in but it comes from the same inability to accept that America is just not that into you.
How many is a few?
George Floyd murdered in May. Biden of riots in August. Why wait so long? Of course we know that answer to this. Both sides do it.
And for the record I agree that many republicans are engaging in sedition and borderline treason right now. But folks like romney are objecting but there don’t seem to be any cameras for him.
Because it undermined the efforts to confront this pandemic. Now, I tend to agree I think republicans and conservatives are worse but that may be because I’m a center left liberal and apt to see their actions in a negative light. But both sides do it. Neither side has clean hands.
And as it has been pointed out many times before and elsewhere, that is in reality a misleading point from the right when on the way to reach that conclusion the discrimination against blacks and Hispanics is ignored.
The right is getting many to sleep on it and kick the can further into a future date.
What comes out of his mouth is more representative of what is happening in a conservative’s brain than the things that come out of Democratic politicians’ mouths; otherwise they wouldn’t vote for him.
So the only way to conclude that there is anti-asian discrimination is if you ignore anti-black/hispanic discrimination? Can you expand on that? How does it require blindness to anti-black/hispanic discrimination to see the anti-asian discrimination?
If you see the statements by the asian groups that are against anti-asian discrimination, I think they make a good argument that it is the woke left that is kicking the can down the road.
It’s actually the woke left that is kicking the can down the road with perpetual bband aid (paid for by discrimination against asians) and the folks fighting anti-asian discrimination that want fundamental improvements in k-12 education.
"Zhao had a message for politicians in other states. “Going forward, I’d like to warn liberal politicians in California and nationwide: focus your efforts on devising effective measures to improve K-12 education for Black and Hispanic children, instead of introducing racially divisive and discriminatory laws time and again.”
Yes, I agree conservatives agree with him more than Joe Biden. So?
Having talked to a lot of conservatives, they realize that he talks a lot of shit. That’s not why they support him.
Nope, previous discussions showed that one important component of conservatives talking about Asians that previously where helped by AA or other social justice efforts, is to ignore constantly that Blacks and Hispanics are less helped nowadays.
I saw those statements before, another thing you get wrong. As pointed before it is peculiar that one thing that is omitted is that they are usually conservative Asians the ones that are like that. And again, “woke” in this context is just to continue being insulting needlessly.
You are claiming that Donald Trump, who got the was nominated twice by the GOP as their candidate for the presidency is a fringe phenomenon?
That there is a logical, internally consistent position that can be called “conservative” without supporting Trump?
This is what I would call an extraordinary claim. Since I don’t see extraordinary evidence I’m calling bullshit.
We’re done here. I’m not discussing this when you make outrageous claims and say “off course” your claim is true.
Do you have a cite for when and how this occurred? Aside from the article by a college student that you cite as authority for … something… where a college student claims this occurred, it is not clear to me the context of this affirmative action.
How much help did they used to get compared to today? Do you really think there is less help for blacks and hispanics today than in the 1960s? 1970s? 1980? 1990? 2000? When was this golden era when we helped blacks and hispanics so much more than today?
So the above quoted text where one of the leaders to defeat prop 16 says “focus your efforts on devising effective measures to improve K-12 education for Black and Hispanic children, instead of introducing racially divisive and discriminatory laws” is constantly ignoring that blacks and hispanics?
This is not good, you already forgot that there was more diversity in the example of the schools in San Francisco that was ended in the 80s thanks to the settlement in the 90s, judges then found that instead of keeping diverse the schools became more segregated and so ended the settlement in 2005.
The solutions are not really a one size fit all, this has to be looked at in a case by case basis, hence the realization that it is in specific places that the evidence points at discrimination on some places that has to be dealt with.
Asians voted overwhelingly to defeat prop 16.
Asians in california voted overwhelmingly for Biden.
And if saying “focus your efforts on devising effective measures to improve K-12 education for Black and Hispanic children, instead of introducing racially divisive and discriminatory laws” is your benchmark for “conservative” then the whole damn world must look conservative to you.
Just because you’re insulted for them doesn’t mean it’s insulting to them. Woke white people have a racist streak in them that deserves as much ridicule as the racism on the right.
Yet another thing you get wrong, I’m not opposed to that.
Not so, many examples I have seen point at the reasoning to be once again a denial that white people can be fair too, and support diversity with no quotas. Same with Asians that are involved in decisions to change. If not again blaming victims, the effort from the right is to also disparage people that want to be fair.
One correction: the diversity was not ended in the 80s, I meant to say that :
You already forgot that there was more diversity in the example of the schools in San Francisco that was made thanks to changes in the 80s, but ended thanks to the settlement in the 90s, judges then found that instead of keeping diverse the schools became more segregated and so ended the settlement in 2005.
You mean the one that eliminated the unconstitutional race based quotas and implemented SES elements instead?
OK, so if you mean that blacks and hispanics used to get unconstitutional preferences that they no longer get, then I guess you’re right but is that really an argument you want to make?
I am very encouraged by the quality of argument that is being presented in favor of discriminating against asians in favor of blacks and hispanics. If viewpoints like yours cannot gain any traction on a leftward tilting site like this, then I am fairly confident we will see a significant reduction in anti-asian discrimination in my lifetime. Thank you for showing me the weakness and intellectual bankruptcy of your side of the argument. It instills me with confidence and hope.