No, I am merely being polite that there is the possibility that your comment in the OP might have been taken out of context, since it is a quote from another thread.
As for questions to you, I am fine with the last post I wrote: which is just a statement and you can respond to it if I got something wrong.
On the notion of “free” college.
Alot of people will have problems with it.
For example, the people who didnt go to college at all. Why should they have to pay for those who did? The people who just went to tech school or a lower cost community college. Why should they have to pay for some yahoo who spent #100k on some crazy degree at a 4 year college? Or the people who scraped and saved and then worked their way thru college. Why should they pay for the others who just partied?
Also from I am hearing, those countries that offer “free” college, dont actually have alot of spaces in their colleges so hence, not alot of college students going for free. The others have to pay to go to colleges abroad.
Are you suggesting that having implemented such systems “decades ago when the costs were not as high” is somehow a crucial factor in making them affordable in the present day? Or that there’s something about the “current system” in the US being “such a part of society” that somehow makes it cheaper? Because I don’t think you’re right about either of those.
Some people drop out of high school, or get homeschooled. They still have to pay for public education, because we, as a society, understand that public education is important and worth providing to everyone. If you come at this with “how is it fair to X”… well, you’re coming at the issue exactly backwards, mate.
As for the main topic of the thread… What common ground is there to stand on? Republicans don’t hold the same beliefs as democrats. They also don’t hold the same facts. Any attempt to communicate with them requires a preliminary phase where you try to get straight what the actual facts are, and are forced to slog through a miasma of insane conspiracy theories - insanity that congressional republicans are intentionally spreading, mind you - just to be able to get to the point where we discuss what the president is actually doing - let alone what effects it might have, or what context is involved.
I will continue to hold up, as an example, a post in this forum from my thread on the concentration camps that Trump is running near the southern border.
This was after seven pages or so of sources backing up that the conditions in the camps were both horrendous and intentionally horrendous. His response, boiled down to two words: “fake news”. The actual facts don’t matter - if they’re inconvenient, they’re fake.
(And I will continue to say that such a viewpoint is fundamentally incompatible with “fighting ignorance”. And that’s not even the worst thing he said on that page.)
This is what Ian Danskin refers to as “postmodern conservatism” in his video, “The Card Says Moops”, a crucial document for understanding conservatism online. One key takeaway: “if you that they don’t believe what they say and instead are simply trying to win a game with you, you get very useful results.” The beliefs they hold are malleable… But, more importantly, so are the facts. The camps at the borders aren’t that bad, it’s just a few fake news outlets trying to make the president look bad. Russia didn’t interfere to help get Trump elected, but Ukraine was involved with Hillary’s email server. And so on and so forth.
How do you argue with that? How do you find common ground with that? How do you, in any way, shape, or form, form a society with someone who not only disagrees on moral precepts, but fundamentally will not acknowledge facts or reality? Even leaving aside that a great many of them hold some truly fucking heinous beliefs (example: Ditka’s post in the same thread cracking wise about the horrendous conditions under which we are keeping children which he would later call fake news).
There is little of value to be gained from talking to high-information Trump voters. They know what he does. They know what he’s about. They support it, either openly or hidden behind concern trolling about how much worse the democrats are, and no amount of banging on about how fucking evil the Trump administration is is going to change their minds, because they are just as evil.
There is little of value to be gained from talking to low-information Trump voters. They don’t know… But they also don’t care, and they’re pretty sure whatever you want to show them is fake news anyways. No amount of banging on about how fucking evil the Trump administration is is going to change their minds, because they are part of a media ecosystem that teaches them to ignore anything that could change their minds.
So… yeah. What do you expect?
You’re absolutely right. It would be an utter waste of your time trying to convince me that what’s happening isn’t happening.
Related to this:
Postmodern republicanism. The facts don’t matter. What matters is power. They know for a fact it’s wrong. They know for a fact it’s a lie. They spread it anyways, because what they’re doing is indefensible otherwise.
If your mind is made up, that’s fine. But you’re basically saying that you are immune to facts and arguments.
If I repeat my argument it is because you mistate it, misunderstand it or both.
Yes, she doesn’t trust you or your judgment. It’s that simple.
There is a case for Trump aside from racism. The economy, reduces military footprint, fighting back against unfair trade practices, securing the border. The case against Trump is the continuation of an economic system that rewards those at the top a lot more than the bottom (which really rubs Democrats the wrong way, but which almost any Republican would do); disengagement and isolationism (which gets him lots of criticism from establishment Republicans); trade war with China and tariffs (which gets him a lot of criticism from free market types on both sides of the aisle); the racist and xenophobic overtones to his immigration policy and the paramilitary way it is enforced.
It may be that “simple”, but it has nothing to do with anything you outlined in your second paragraph. She said nothing of the kind. And even if she did claim that she thinks Trump stand for the little guy, she’d be demonstrably wrong. Trump has famously screwed the people “at the bottom” by not paying contractors for the work they did.
You can continue to try to defend her motives if you want, but I think it’s best if she were to come back and do it for herself. Less guesswork for you.
No, it was after a few anecdotes and page after page of outraged liberals trying hard to make a federal case out of those few anecdotes. There’s scant data about the condition of detainees, just a few anecdotes that have been hyped up to ridiculous proportions.
No, you just declared the findings to be invalid due to bias. You didn’t show this to be the case, just declared it so. Much like people who base their opinions on their right-wing beliefs and not the facts have declared global warming to be a hoax because scientific results contradict Republican talking points.
You missed some of the big ones in my view:
Sorry for the rant, but I encounter lots of people in my daily life that say things like “There could be worse things than Trump’s tweets” as if the tweets are the only bad thing he does.
Speaking of no common ground, another right-winger here just spent quite a few posts hedging on whether or not Heather Hayes, the protester who was murdered at Charlottesville by neo-nazis, had it coming, because she was in the kind of place these sort of things happen. I’m not sure what common ground can or should be found with opinions like that.
I do not wish to find or share “common ground” with fucking nazis. YMMV.
Furthermore, it’s not my judgement that she should question because Trump’s administration has made it much harder for 8.2 Million hourly wage earners to get overtime pay. I’d very much like to hear her opinion about that and whether she still believes that Trump is interested in the dignity of workers.
I legit can’t pin you down. Here you are spitting on nazis, there you are licking that nationalistic, militaristic boot. Where are you really at, man ?
Once again, something pretty much any Republican would do.
Presidents didn’t used to be able to get away with this. I think the evaporation of credibility of the media has a lot to do with this. Other than NPR and CSPAN, the media just ain’t trustworthy anymore. You can no longer trust the media to look at the information and then present it in a digestible format for you.
If Vladimir Putin came to the eventual nominee of the Democratic primary and offered proof that Trump cheated during the Republican primary and you knew that this would lead to an overwhelming landslide election in favor of Democrats across the country (affecting redistricting in every state in the union and giving RBG the latitude to take a sick day in peace) would you want the nominee to turn that proof away?
It’s how he got elected. That’s why its so important to beat him by the biggest margin possible, even if we don’t get your favorite candidate or my favorite candidate as longa s they can humiliate Trump at the polls.
Trump has not yet started a war that has killed 100,000 people.
If you want to have a Trump hating contest, we can have one. I bet it’s a tie.
I’m pretty sure you can be a patriot without being a Nazi.
“Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more ?” goes a little beyond “being a patriot” IMO.
My reasons to enlist did not include aiding fascism. IMHO putting one’s ass on the line for the nation is not fascistic. And I see no need to heed dodgers, cowards, nazis, or traitors.