# Detente Invitation to Pro-Trump and Anti-Trump camps. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 14, 2017, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171 "2017-03-14T16:30:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/61 "2017-03-15T00:23:23Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m not covered by the ACA, so I don’t think 1) applies to me. FWIW, the ACA eliminated my very good HSA plan, so I’m miffed at it in general. I was one of the people who was lied to about “if you like your plan, you can keep it”. I liked my plan, didn’t get to keep it. > > As for 2), I’m a bit more hardline in my views of the powers granted the federal government in the Constitution than Bone, so I’d oppose a federal-level universal healthcare system, but wouldn’t object if all 50 states chose to enact something like Massachusetts’ RomneyCare (or whatever number less than 50 chose to do it). I’m sorry that you find yourself in a worse situation with respect to medical coverage than before the ACA. I can understand why you’d be miffed at it in general. Are you currently covered by any health plan at all? I assume it’s through work, correct? Besides not being able to keep your doctor, in what specific way are you worse off under your new plan? FWIW, ACA has allowed me to have health coverage that I would not otherwise have. I’m quite happy because the alternatives would be such that I would likely not be able to afford to see any doctor, much less one I prefer. And I do not receive and kind of ACA subsidy for the plan I currently have. My income is above the threshhold. I pay a pretty high premium because I chose a gold plan (which makes sense for me), and since I registered my rate has gone up by approx. 40%. I’m not thrilled about it but I consider it better than no health insurance at all. My question to you, is simply this, do you support the current efforts to repeal ACA knowing that many people like me would lose out and be much worse off than perhaps you are because you are not able to see your previous preferred physician? I’m not trying to make this a gotcha question. I’m just wondering if you can appreciate my position with respect to the ACA. As to the second point, wouldn’t implementing RomneyCare in every state be essentially what the ACA is, or would be if states couldn’t opt out of the Medicare expansion provision? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/62 "2017-03-15T00:34:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I think common ground is possible on a lot of issues – pizza toppings, football, TV shows, movies, cooking tips, and much more. But probably not on politics, at least not yet, for the vast majority in both camps, IMO. The only thing that could create some common ground on politics is either a massive catastrophe on the part of Trump, or some incredible and undeniable success. If he starts another war and gets thousands of Americans killed, or if he and Bannon are caught on record talking about shipping out the brown people, or if the economy takes a big dive and isn’t turned around, then at least some Trump supporters will probably start to be critical of him. And if crime plummets in the big cities, or manufacturing, coal, and the economy in general soars, then at least some Trump haters will grudgingly start to praise him. > > But short of those two extremes, I think most of the two camps live in entirely different worlds and different realities, without enough overlap between them to create enough common ground to stand on. You’re probably right. My aim here is not to get people to switch camps but to try to at least see the other point of view IF it is at all possible. What I mean by that is, if the other point of view is based on bigotry, I do not expect anyone to grant that point of view any kind of legitimacy. Some things, as you say, do not lend themselves to common ground or compromise. But I do think that a better understanding (if not complete agreement) can be reached on things like immigration and healthcare. ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/63 "2017-03-15T00:58:26Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > What is not helpful or productive is the implication that in the disagreement there are two sides with legitimate points of view . . . > > Stranger of course there are two sides with legitimate points of view (probably more). but more importantly, i think **quicksilver’s** call for detente was for among the users of this board. if you think that your fellow dopers points of view are illegitimate why do you stick around? mc ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/64 "2017-03-15T01:04:26Z")
One question I have for Trump supporters and Republicans in general is this. Do you genuinely believe that the elected Republicans at the federal level are looking out for the White working class? The narrative of the 2016 election seems to be that Trump won based on his appeal to White working class voters in the upper Midwest. As a liberal and a Democrat, I believe that Republicans are mainly interested in helping the rich, which to me explains things like climate change denial, supporting tax cuts for the wealthy, wanting less government regulation etc. I think it’s obvious how these things would benefit the wealthy, but how do they benefit the working class or even the middle class? Am I missing something here, or am I incorrect in my belief that Republicans are all about reverse wealth distribution? These aren’t gotcha questions, I am genuinely curious as to what non-wealthy Republicans make of idea that the the Republican Party is the party of the rich. FWIW, my take on the issue is that Republican politicians have succeeded in playing the identity politics game to the point that working class White people who voted Republican did so against their own best interests. I realize that is an elitist position, but I’d like to know why it’s incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/65 "2017-03-15T01:05:28Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > What is not helpful or productive is the implication that in the disagreement there are two sides with legitimate points of view when one of those sides is perniciously lying and denying evidential information as fact. Addressing Trump and his supporters as if they have a reasonable disagreement of opinion based upon differing but legitimate interpretations is normalizing the abnormal distortion of fact and irrational views that come from it. As an example, when someone holds the view that we should reduce or more tightly control immigration, that is a potentially reasonable position to hold; however, when their opinion stems from the believe that immigrants at large are the major source of terrorist events and violent crime in America, it is no longer a rational opinion because it isn’t rooted in fact, and when you have a difference of opinion that are based not on evidence but “alternative facts” there is no real basis for having a rational discussion. > > Trump lies. He lies constantly. He lies unrepentantly. He lies in speeches, he lies on Twitter, he lies in the few press conferences that he bothers to hold, he hires people specifically to lie for him, and then he lies about what they do. None of this is opinion; it is objective fact, and while we’ve come to accept a certain level of distortion from politicians (sometimes even under oath) it is utterly abnormal for a president to lie in such a careless, persistent fashion. It not only speaks to the disrespect that Trump has for the American public but it also undermines the credibility of the institutions of the government. When Trump and his surrogates dispute the authenticity of the Congressional Budget Office report (without rationale), or claim that the Bureau of Labor Statistics employment numbers were falsified during the Obama administration but are legitimate under Trump (when the methodology for assessment is unchanged for decades), or claims that he was illegally surveilled during the election with no proof whatsoever, he isn’t just telling fibs; he’s persuading his base that the institutions of American governance are fundamentally untrustworthy, which is something no president should be doing without basis. The people who support Trump and excuse or deny these lies are contributing to the normalization of deviance, equivalencing these distortions with fact as if both are equally valid positions. This is how authoritarian and autocratic dictatorships operate, and giving this the patina of legitimacy by pretending that such positions are reasonable is not “detente”, it is facilitating the distortion of fact as a new normal. It is not my goal to normalize, forgive or forget the lies told by Trump, his cabinet and surrogates. I do not wish to legitimize these actions. I’ve been very vocal and critical of Trump in other threads and I make no apologies for making those criticisms in the most derogatory and unequivocal terms. I think they are justified. That said, I still want to make the attempt to step down the rhetoric to a level where we are not throwing insults and accusations at one another. In this thread, my goal is to hopefully understand the thinking of those Trump supporters who are not bigots, or idiots. I want to make the attempt to understand why they support him despite his very obvious character flaws. Likewise, to try to get them to see why many of us oppose him so vehemently, without making it personally about them. ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/66 "2017-03-15T07:26:59Z")
we have to remember, too, that theres a difference between trump and his administration, and republicans and those who voted for trump. back before the election i asked a middle class mexican american friend of mine why he was supporting trump: “dont you care about all the racist things he’s said against mexicans?” he looked at me as if i just didnt get it: “theyre all racists, why should that affect who i vote for?” i think the white middle class corollary might be “theyre all liars, what should that matter?” i think many people supported trump because they were sick and tired of the status quo, and thought that his administration would shake things up a bit. now we might think that they were deceived (as i do), but that doesnt make their hopes illegitimate. if we can find out what nearly half the country was hoping to get when they voted, we might find that there is some common ground afterall and we can fight together to hold the new administration accountable to their voter base, and indeed, to the country as a whole! mc ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/67 "2017-03-15T07:33:11Z")
> [@mikecurtis](#): > > i think many people supported trump because they were sick and tired of the status quo, and thought that his administration would shake things up a bit. > > now we might think that they were deceived (as i do) What, things didn’t get sufficiently shaky for you? Give him a few more months. ---
**Author:** ![HumbleThinker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@HumbleThinker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumbleThinker)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 10:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/68 "2017-03-15T10:20:53Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > One question I have for Trump supporters and Republicans in general is this. Do you genuinely believe that the elected Republicans at the federal level are looking out for the White working class? The narrative of the 2016 election seems to be that Trump won based on his appeal to White working class voters in the upper Midwest. As a liberal and a Democrat, I believe that Republicans are mainly interested in helping the rich, which to me explains things like climate change denial, supporting tax cuts for the wealthy, wanting less government regulation etc. I think it’s obvious how these things would benefit the wealthy, but how do they benefit the working class or even the middle class? Am I missing something here, or am I incorrect in my belief that Republicans are all about reverse wealth distribution? These aren’t gotcha questions, I am genuinely curious as to what non-wealthy Republicans make of idea that the the Republican Party is the party of the rich. FWIW, my take on the issue is that Republican politicians have succeeded in playing the identity politics game to the point that working class White people who voted Republican did so against their own best interests. I realize that is an elitist position, but I’d like to know why it’s incorrect. There were a lot of informative interviews on NPR after the election with people around the country who voted for Trump. Some genuinely bought into his claims that he’d magically bring back manufacturing jobs or create a better, cheaper health insurance for all, some voted because they were disaffected with Hilary/the Democratic Party and so rolled the dice on Trump, some voted because they bought into his populist rhetoric, some voted because they thought he would reduce crime or crack down on minorities, and other reasons. I want to say a lot of them were on All Things Considered, so I’m not sure if they are archived anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/69 "2017-03-15T13:32:11Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > As a liberal and a Democrat, I believe that Republicans are mainly interested in helping the rich, which to me explains things like climate change denial, supporting tax cuts for the wealthy, wanting less government regulation etc. I think it’s obvious how these things would benefit the wealthy, but how do they benefit the working class or even the middle class? Am I missing something here, or am I incorrect in my belief that Republicans are all about reverse wealth distribution? You are incorrect in your belief. Just to pick one example, Republicans do not support tax cuts only for the wealthy. In general, they support tax cuts. Since about 47% of the US population don’t pay federal income tax, a federal income tax cut doesn’t benefit them directly, and thus Democrats can say “this is a tax cut for the wealthy” because people who don’t pay taxes don’t benefit from having their taxes cut. Another factor is that a tax cut is not a transfer of wealth from the poor or middle class to the rich. Taking less money away from person A does not equate to taking more money from B, especially if you are also taking less money from B, or if you aren’t taking any money away from B in the first place. > [@](#): > > I am genuinely curious as to what non-wealthy Republicans make of idea that the the Republican Party is the party of the rich. I suppose I could be considered wealthy by some definitions, but I was a Republican back when I was poor. But even then I could recognize that what Democrats say when they lose elections is not necessarily gospel. I’ve seen most, if not all, of the arguments that “Republicans only care about the rich”, and frankly, they are BS. Or at least they are as close to BS as the argument that Democrats only care about blacks, transgenders, feminists, and abortion. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/70 "2017-03-15T13:38:53Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > I don’t see how there can be any legitimate “common ground” when one side so blatantly and pervasively promotes and accepts gross distortions, outright fabrications, and baseless assertions, much less hypocritical interpretations of the past and present credibility of independent measurements of economic indicators strictly to favor purported “successes” that cannot plausibly be credited to the current administration. The accusation that the Obama administration surveilled communications in Trump Tower prior to the election–which, if true, should be readily demonstrated by the current administration–is not only gross libel but also serves to undermine public confidence in law enforcement agencies. I’ll point out that these are exactly the same tactics used by the **Nazi propaganda machine to undermine the confidence by the German public in the institutions of the Weimar Republic and resulted in arms of the Nazi party taking over essential government functions, completely almost completely without regard to law or public interest.** > > This is not to overlook the normal hyperbolicism that is present in partisan politics. Trump critic Charles Schumer has been long noted for his drama queen proclamations of questionable veracity. But the actions by the Trump administration in promoting completely baseless conspiracy theories, totally unfounded complaints undermining confidence in democratic institutions (e.g. the alleged three to five million illegal voters), and the utter hypocrisy in championing the elimination of corrupting interests (“draining the swamp”) and the promotion economic and vocational well-being (claims of bringing back manufacturing jobs), then turning around and packing the cabinet-level positions with billionaire bankers, lobbyists, and people with deep financial and business conflicts. > > Talking about a common ground or _detente_ with such a deeply deceptive and divorced-from-reality movement is like playing three card monte with a street huckster writ large. Until one side makes the effort to police itself against its most extreme elements (particularly its most prominent leader) constantly and pervasively lying, there is no point in a supposed “honest dialogue”. > > Stranger Godwin’s law, man. How the fuck can we have an honest, serious debate about the issues when you’re so ready to compare us Trump supporters to damn Nazis, people who were responsible for the genocide of six million Jews? ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/71 "2017-03-15T13:48:30Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > What is not helpful or productive is the implication that in the disagreement there are two sides with legitimate points of view when one of those sides is perniciously lying and denying evidential information as fact. Addressing Trump and his supporters as if they have a reasonable disagreement of opinion based upon differing but legitimate interpretations is normalizing the abnormal distortion of fact and irrational views that come from it. As an example, when someone holds the view that we should reduce or more tightly control immigration, that is a potentially reasonable position to hold; however, when their opinion stems from the believe that immigrants at large are the major source of terrorist events and violent crime in America, it is no longer a rational opinion because it isn’t rooted in fact, and when you have a difference of opinion that are based not on evidence but “alternative facts” there is no real basis for having a rational discussion. > > Trump lies. He lies constantly. He lies unrepentantly. He lies in speeches, he lies on Twitter, he lies in the few press conferences that he bothers to hold, he hires people specifically to lie for him, and then he lies about what they do. None of this is opinion; it is objective fact, and while we’ve come to accept a certain level of distortion from politicians (sometimes even under oath) it is utterly abnormal for a president to lie in such a careless, persistent fashion. It not only speaks to the disrespect that Trump has for the American public but it also undermines the credibility of the institutions of the government. **When Trump and his surrogates dispute the authenticity of the Congressional Budget Office report (without rationale)**, or claim that the Bureau of Labor Statistics employment numbers were falsified during the Obama administration but are legitimate under Trump (when the methodology for assessment is unchanged for decades), or claims that he was illegally surveilled during the election with no proof whatsoever, he isn’t just telling fibs; he’s persuading his base that the institutions of American governance are fundamentally untrustworthy, which is something no president should be doing without basis. The people who support Trump and excuse or deny these lies are contributing to the normalization of deviance, equivalencing these distortions with fact as if both are equally valid positions. This is how authoritarian and autocratic dictatorships operate, and giving this the patina of legitimacy by pretending that such positions are reasonable is not “detente”, it is facilitating the distortion of fact as a new normal. > > I’m sorry if this comes across as “scream[ing] at the top of their lungs,” (and given that I’ve demurred from using personal disparagement or otherwise attacked Trump or his supplicants on a personal level, I don’t understand how you take it in this fashion) but it would be a disservice to pretend that we can have a rational discussion on the basis of non-factual claims. > > Improvements in infrastructure, based upon sensible planning and funded appropriately through bond issues and finding credible budget reductions elsewhere to balance expenditures would be an outstanding benefit, both immediately for employment, and long term for public safety and commerce. Simply claiming a trillion dollar infrastructure “plan” based upon some kind of “public-private partnerships” and funded by some kind of vague combination of tax incentives and toll or usage fees is not a plan; it’s a bullshit sandwich. When Trump or his surrogates actually propose something of substance that appears to be more than a giant corporate entitlements plan, then there will be something useable to discuss. > > Stranger Oh, there is plenty rationale for us conservatives, as well as Mr. Trump, to dispute the accuracy and authenticity of the CBO report, given how egregiously wrong they have been in the past. The CBO said that the Affordable Care Act would cut the deficit in its first decade by approximately $119 billion, as well as that in 2017 23 million people would be enrolled in its exchanges. As we all know, they were seriously wrong on that part. And as the CBO’s own report points out, the CBO’s current scoring of the GOP healthcare plan is itself constrained by many factors: “the way in which federal agencies, states, insurers, employers, individuals, doctors, hospitals, and other affected parties respond to the changes made by the legislation are all difficult to predict, **so the estimates in this report are uncertain.** ” ([http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/dont-trust-those-cbo-health-care-numbers/](http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/dont-trust-those-cbo-health-care-numbers/)) Plus, the current GOP healthcare replacement plan, or Trumpcare, whatever you want to call it, is not even the final version; there can still be, and will be, amendments added to it during the Rules Committee process to improve its goal of not leaving Americans in a ditch. I’m assuming the House Freedom Caucus will take point on that particular process to improve the current admittedly ill-advised version. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/72 "2017-03-15T14:20:17Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > Godwin’s law, man. How the fuck can we have an honest, serious debate about the issues when you’re so ready to compare us Trump supporters to damn Nazis, people who were responsible for the genocide of six million Jews? The main goal of this thread is to try to come to some mutual understanding about the valid concerns that each side has about the policies and rhetoric coming from the other. So while I appreciate that you don’t want to be associated with a group of people responsible for some of the worst crimes against humanity in recorded history, are you at least willing to acknowledge that there are certain similarities in Trump’s rhetoric that is very similar to extreme authoritarian rhetoric of the past? We certainly have no evidence that Trump and his advisers are Nazis. But they have engaged in discredited “alternative facts” and espoused limits on freedom of the press while calling opponents “enemies”. Would you agree or disagree that these are legitimate issues of concern? ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/73 "2017-03-15T14:42:20Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > The main goal of this thread is to try to come to some mutual understanding about the valid concerns that each side has about the policies and rhetoric coming from the other. > > So while I appreciate that you don’t want to be associated with a group of people responsible for some of the worst crimes against humanity in recorded history, are you at least willing to acknowledge that there are certain similarities in Trump’s rhetoric that is very similar to extreme authoritarian rhetoric of the past? We certainly have no evidence that Trump and his advisers are Nazis. But they have engaged in discredited “alternative facts” and espoused limits on freedom of the press while calling opponents “enemies”. Would you agree or disagree that these are legitimate issues of concern? People always seem to forget that Trump used the qualifier “fake” when he said the media were the enemy of the American people. He didn’t say the media were the enemy of the people, he said the FAKE NEWS media were the enemy of the American people. I agree that Kellyanne’s “alternative facts” comment was absurd; she probably meant to say that reasonable people can have an “alternative interpretation of the facts.” However, up to date, Trump has never blocked any media outlet from appearing in the Daily Press Briefing with Spicer, no matter how negative they were, and we all know how negative CNN was (and still is), and they were allowed. They may have been blocked from a “press gaggle”, but from what I understand he was working with a rotational press pool and as such there was a limit to how many reporters he could have. I’m just not comfortable with comparing your opponents to Nazis, not just per Godwin’s law, but because you’re essentially comparing them to people who murdered over six million people. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/74 "2017-03-15T14:48:15Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > I’m just not comfortable with comparing your opponents to Nazis, not just per Godwin’s law, but because you’re essentially comparing them to people who murdered over six million people. Are you also not comfortable with it when [Trump compares his opponents to Nazis](http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/11/trump-melts-down-on-twitter-are-we-living-in-nazi-germany.html)? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/75 "2017-03-15T15:05:30Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > People always seem to forget that Trump used the qualifier “fake” when he said the media were the enemy of the American people. He didn’t say the media were the enemy of the people, he said the FAKE NEWS media were the enemy of the American people. > > I agree that Kellyanne’s “alternative facts” comment was absurd; she probably meant to say that reasonable people can have an “alternative interpretation of the facts.” > > However, up to date, Trump has never blocked any media outlet from appearing in the Daily Press Briefing with Spicer, no matter how negative they were, and we all know how negative CNN was (and still is), and they were allowed. > > They may have been blocked from a “press gaggle”, but from what I understand he was working with a rotational press pool and as such there was a limit to how many reporters he could have. > > I’m just not comfortable with comparing your opponents to Nazis, not just per Godwin’s law, but because you’re essentially comparing them to people who murdered over six million people. It’s not clear to me you understand what this thread is about. I’m not asking you to defend Trump and Co. I’m asking people to take a step back and view things from the point of view of the other side. If you can’t or won’t do that, perhaps this isn’t the thread for you. Your call. I’m not here to keep you out, but there are plenty of other threads where you can defend the various Trump policies and statements. ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/76 "2017-03-15T15:08:26Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Are you also not comfortable with it when [Trump compares his opponents to Nazis](http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/11/trump-melts-down-on-twitter-are-we-living-in-nazi-germany.html)? That was inappropriate as well, yes. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/77 "2017-03-15T15:40:53Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Are you also not comfortable with it when [Trump compares his opponents to Nazis](http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/11/trump-melts-down-on-twitter-are-we-living-in-nazi-germany.html)? As loathsome as that is, isn’t this thread specifically not about Trump’s actions himself, but instead the interactions with the people that may oppose or support the administration? > [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > As a liberal and a Democrat, I believe that Republicans are mainly interested in helping the rich, which to me explains things like climate change denial, supporting tax cuts for the wealthy, wanting less government regulation etc. I think it’s obvious how these things would benefit the wealthy, but how do they benefit the working class or even the middle class? Am I missing something here, or am I incorrect in my belief that Republicans are all about reverse wealth distribution? I can’t get in the mind of various politicians, but I don’t think the intended purpose of policy should favor any group, the rich, middle, or lower income folks. As I mentioned upthread, I’m in favor of dramatically lower tax rates across the board. Because higher income people tend to be impacted by tax policy, this would incidentally result in a disproportionate benefit towards those folks. The point isn’t reverse wealth distribution, it’s increasing individual liberty. The [obvious rejoinder](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Anatole_France) is that _the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread._ I accept that true liberty means that there is an acceptable level of suffering and not all misfortune can be alleviated. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/78 "2017-03-15T15:56:15Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > Oh, there is plenty rationale for us conservatives, as well as Mr. Trump, to dispute the accuracy and authenticity of the CBO report, given how egregiously wrong they have been in the past. > > The CBO said that the Affordable Care Act would cut the deficit in its first decade by approximately $119 billion, as well as that in 2017 23 million people would be enrolled in its exchanges. > > As we all know, they were seriously wrong on that part. But you’re cherry-picking one aspect of the CBO analysis. CBO estimated how many would be enrolled in exchanges AS ONE PART of an estimate of how many people would gain insurance through the ACA. In the end, CBO projected that 30 million Americans would be uninsured in 2016 with passage of the bill. The bill passed, and 27.9 million Americans were uninsured in 2016. The Commonwealth Fund, a non-partisan health care analysis thinktank (funded with oil money, by the way) concluded: “Given the likelihood of additional reforms to national health policy in future years, it is reassuring that, despite the many unforeseen factors surrounding the law’s rollout and participation in its reforms, **the CBO’s forecast was reasonably accurate**.” So who do you trust more: politicians who are being told something that they don’t like so they attack the messenger, or a non-partisan research institute? > [@](#): > > Plus, the current GOP healthcare replacement plan, or Trumpcare, whatever you want to call it, is not even the final version; there can still be, and will be, amendments added to it during the Rules Committee process to improve its goal of not leaving Americans in a ditch. I’m assuming the House Freedom Caucus will take point on that particular process to improve the current admittedly ill-advised version. Plus, the other parts of Trumpcare must be passed over an expected filibuster, so saying, “Hold on, more is coming to fix this bill that nobody likes!” isn’t a good bet. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/79 "2017-03-15T16:52:33Z")
More to the point, it seems indisputable that millions and millions of Americans who have healthcare now stand to lose healthcare under the proposed Republican plan and there is no reason to think this will not affect people on the pro-Trump and the anti-Trump sides equally. How can that be viewed as a good thing regardless of what side you’re on? ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171/80 "2017-03-15T17:45:28Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > More to the point, it seems indisputable that millions and millions of Americans who have healthcare now stand to lose healthcare under the proposed Republican plan and there is no reason to think this will not affect people on the pro-Trump and the anti-Trump sides equally. > > How can that be viewed as a good thing regardless of what side you’re on? i dont know that its “indisputable that millions and millions of Americans who have healthcare now stand to lose healthcare”, surely many will be left out in the cold, but others will just see a change in options. by lowering the financial burden on the govt, its seen as a move thats good for the country as a whole, even if its not so good for some. its a pretty standard republican viewpoint. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/detente-invitation-to-pro-trump-and-anti-trump-camps/782171.md?page=5)