# Stop villainizing people whose political opinions differ from yours. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 21, 2016, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286 "2016-10-21T22:54:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/101 "2016-10-24T18:26:28Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > I know that today’s conservatives think that they are clever in trying to link today’s liberal democrats with the racist conservatives from 155 years ago, but it’s just one of the many things that today’s conservatives are wrong about. I think it’s at least as wrong to try to link today’s Republicans to Democrats from 155 years ago? ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/102 "2016-10-24T18:33:04Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I realize this is a strongly held belief during a contentious time. However, I’d really prefer not to see this sort of thing in Great Debates. If you must express yourself this way, please do so in the Pit. > > No warning given. But ease up. I do know genuinely good people who support Trump. They are classic “low information voters” who are also single issue - abortion. All the science in the world will not sway them, to them a soul appears as soon as the egg is fertilized and abortion is murder (I haven’t had the heart to ask them about all the spontaneous “abortions” that happen every time a fertilized egg fails to implant. Guess God has lots of spare souls.) ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/103 "2016-10-24T18:41:10Z")
> [@gaffa](#): > > I do know genuinely good people who support Trump. They are classic “low information voters” who are also single issue - abortion. All the science in the world will not sway them, to them a soul appears as soon as the egg is fertilized and abortion is murder (I haven’t had the heart to ask them about all the spontaneous “abortions” that happen every time a fertilized egg fails to implant. Guess God has lots of spare souls.) This may deserve to be in another thread, but I think with Donald’s flailing trainwreck of a campaign, and the utter lack of time he’s devoted to typical conservative social issues, the time is ripe for Democrats to make inroads with Evangelicals and other single-issue voters on the subject of abortion. I think an argument that may sway some people is that under Democratic legislation permitting abortion and contraception, there is an overall decline of abortion in the first place. We may not ban it, but we will make it so that people won’t want or need abortion as much. Some enterprising Democrat should take advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of Donald’s disaster to break these people of their voting habits once and for all ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/104 "2016-10-24T18:52:38Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I think it’s at least as wrong to try to link today’s Republicans to Democrats from 155 years ago? And you are wrong on this, many Republicans were progressive before (some even would had been called liberal), but many that could be Republicans are nowadays Democrats. > **[Were Republicans really the party of civil rights in the 1960s? | Harry J Enten](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/28/republicans-party-of-civil-rights)** > > Harry J Enten: Once you control for region, it turns out that Democrats were actually more likely to support the 1964 Civil Rights Act > [@](#): > > With Republicans having trouble with minorities, some like to point out that the party has a long history of standing up for civil rights compared to Democrats. Democrats, for example, were less likely to vote for the civil rights bills of the 1950s and 1960s. Democrats were more likely to filibuster. Yet, a closer look at the voting coalitions suggests a more complicated picture that ultimately explains why Republicans are not viewed as the party of civil rights. > > Let’s use the 1964 Civil Rights Act as our focal point. It was arguably the most important of the many civil rights bills passed in the middle part of the 20th century. It outlawed many types of racial and sexual discrimination, including access to hotels, restaurants, and theaters. In the words of Vice President Biden, it was a big “f-ing deal”. > > When we look at the party vote in both houses of Congress, it fits the historical pattern. Republicans are more in favor of the bill: > [@](#): > > Today, the transformation is nearly complete. President Obama carried only 18% of former Confederate states, while taking 62% of non-Confederate states in 2012. Only 27% of southern senators are Democrats, while 62% of Union state senators are Democrats. And 29% of southern members in the House are Democrats compared to 54% in states or territories that were part of the Union. > > Thus, it seems to me that minorities have a pretty good idea of what they are doing when joining the Democratic party. They recognize that the Democratic party of today looks and sounds a lot more like the Democratic party of the North that with near unity passed the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 than the southern Democrats of the era who blocked it, and today would, like Strom Thurmond, likely be Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/105 "2016-10-24T18:52:49Z")
> [@YogSothoth](#): > > This may deserve to be in another thread, but I think with Donald’s flailing trainwreck of a campaign, and the utter lack of time he’s devoted to typical conservative social issues, the time is ripe for Democrats to make inroads with Evangelicals and other single-issue voters on the subject of abortion. I think an argument that may sway some people is that under Democratic legislation permitting abortion and contraception, there is an overall decline of abortion in the first place. We may not ban it, but we will make it so that people won’t want or need abortion as much. Some enterprising Democrat should take advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of Donald’s disaster to break these people of their voting habits once and for all Sadly, they are absolutists. To them, a single abortion is the equivalent of the Holocaust. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/106 "2016-10-24T18:55:00Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And you are wrong on this, many Republicans were progressive before (some even would had been called liberal), but many that could be Republicans are nowadays Democrats. The best line from Saturday Night Live’s 3rd debate “Cold Open”: _“Do you want to vote for the Republican? Or Donald Trump?”_ ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/107 "2016-10-24T18:57:22Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > Meanwhile, conservative conclusions can sometimes be quite naive regarding human nature, e.g. The foreigners will greet us as liberators. The rich won’t take advantage of the system so no need to regulate. Charities will be enough to aid the poor. Teenagers won’t have sex if you don’t teach them about it. Some of these are born out of a “just world” ideology which isn’t usually characterized as cynical, though perhaps can be interpreted that way in some cases. It isn’t quite that simple; a LOT of conservative/Republican propaganda is focused on the proposition of loss Not so much outright fearmongering, but fearmongering centered around the notion of loss- actual or potential. They worry about loss of wealth, loss of stature, and loss of their community to reflect them and their beliefs, religious or otherwise, just to name a few. This runs more or less counter to a lot of liberal/progressive treasured concepts, and is reinforced by the politicians by pointing out that in many (not all) cases, the beneficiaries of said losses are members of some \*other \*group- blacks, gays, hispanics, foreigners/immigrants, etc… Look at it this way- if you are a 50-something white man in a rural area who is middle/lower-middle class, and you have busted your ass and are finally making ends meet with a little bit to spare, and you have a belief system that you are invested in, and want your children taught, and you hope to send your kids to college some day, how are you going to feel if one side of the political debate comes in and says that you should pay more in taxes, so they can give it to inner-city blacks, or that gays can now marry, contrary to your beliefs, or that the universities are going out of their way to let in underqualified minorities and reducing scholarship opportunities for white people in order to do so? You’re going to feel like that side has NONE of your interests at heart. It’s not that you’re a bad person, but that side is doing things that seem explicitly against what you want and believe. Conversely, the side that says that all of that stuff is nonsense and wrong, and seems to advocate for you and yours, is the one you’ll listen to. That’s a somewhat simplified explanation, but that’s, IMO, the way the thought process goes. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/108 "2016-10-24T18:57:38Z")
> [@YogSothoth](#): > > This may deserve to be in another thread, but I think with Donald’s flailing trainwreck of a campaign, and the utter lack of time he’s devoted to typical conservative social issues, the time is ripe for Democrats to make inroads with Evangelicals and other single-issue voters on the subject of abortion. I think an argument that may sway some people is that under Democratic legislation permitting abortion and contraception, there is an overall decline of abortion in the first place. We may not ban it, but we will make it so that people won’t want or need abortion as much. Some enterprising Democrat should take advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of Donald’s disaster to break these people of their voting habits once and for all Did you watch the [third debate discussion about abortion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfdRmnT0Weo&feature=youtu.be&t=2m20s)? You really think the candidate that supports late-term abortions is the one to win over pro-life evangelicals? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/109 "2016-10-24T19:02:28Z")
People villainize and broad-brush because it gives visceral satisfaction. Trying to understand the other side and avoid stereotyping doesn’t give that same vicious pleasure. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/110 "2016-10-24T19:06:19Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Many Americans pay little attention to politics; party alignment for them may be based on accident or vague memory. I myself was aligned with moderate Republicans in my early adulthood. I hardly paid attention to partisan politics until the excesses of Gingrichism. > > But in this election, many Americans\* including a large majority of Republicans\* will vote for Donald Trump. Please tell us what you think of these Trump voters, **Velocity**. Are they well informed, with or without doctorates? Should their opinions on political matters be given equal weight as that of citizens who _do_ have a clue? > > ETA: A sincere “hats off” to all Republicans who vote for Hillary. But those who do vote for Trump are worthy only of contempt, whether they “have doctorates” or not. Prattling a list of a dozen different occupations these vile or misinformed creatures have doesn’t change that. With onyl 2 options, I know a ton of people voting “against the status quo” or same old tired political powerbase. ANYTHING but that. The fact that Trump could win a nomination or have anything remotely like 43% of the population willing to vote for him over HRC, isn’t damning of Republicans. It’s damning of the political process and those political people not bowing to the will of the people. 4 day old Papa John pizza or a bag of diarrhea filled with broken glass indeed. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/111 "2016-10-24T19:36:04Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Did you watch the [third debate discussion about abortion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfdRmnT0Weo&feature=youtu.be&t=2m20s)? You really think the candidate that supports late-term abortions is the one to win over pro-life evangelicals? Do most evangelicals are so wacky that they also think it is good to prohibit abortions also in cases of rape and incest or the life and health of the mother? > **[Fact-Checking Trump's Statements On 'Partial-Birth' Abortion](https://www.npr.org/2016/10/20/498667418/fact-checking-trumps-position-on-partial-birth-abortion)** > > In the final debate, Trump said he supports the federal ban on "partial-birth" abortion because it can happen "as late as one or two or three or four days prior to birth." That is not at all likely. > [@](#): > > When she was a U.S. senator, Hillary Clinton voted against the partial-birth abortion ban. In last night’s debate, she said she opposed it because it did not include an exception to protect the health of the mother. She said she has met with women who learned late in a pregnancy “that their health is in jeopardy if they continue to carry to term” or “that something terrible has happened or just been discovered about the pregnancy.” Providers say that often means a severe fetal abnormality. > > According to the landmark ruling Roe v. Wade, any restriction on abortion must include an exception to protect the health of the mother, both physical and mental. A number of lower courts ruled the partial-birth ban was unconstitutional because it did not do that. President Bill Clinton also vetoed the measure twice. But, in a move that one liberal justice called “alarming,” the Supreme Court ruled the health exception was not needed in this case. It said there were questions about the safety of a D&X procedure and that there are alternative ways to terminate a pregnancy. > > Last night, Trump called the procedure “not acceptable,” but that’s a change in position. When asked on Meet the Press in 1999 if a President Trump would ban partial-birth abortion, he said no. He said he “hated” abortion, but since he had grown up in New York, “I am pro-choice in every respect.” In essence, Trump did misrepresent the actual position of Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/112 "2016-10-24T19:47:24Z")
> [@gaffa](#): > > I do know genuinely good people who support Trump. They are classic “low information voters” who are also single issue - abortion. Personally, I have a hard time considering someone who thinks that a woman should be forced to carry her rapist’s baby to term a ‘genuinely good person’. “They’re good people but want to use the full force of the legal system to force a woman to act as a human incubator for the spawn of the man who forced her to have sex” just doesn’t ring true for me, especially when they’re willing to vote for a man who brags about raping women for their ‘single issue’. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/113 "2016-10-24T19:49:16Z")
> [@glowacks](#): > > I don’t mean in any way to imply that the Republican platform is anything but utter drivel, or that their candidate deserves any respect at all. > > […] > > But I’ve gotten sick of liberals who espouse liberalness for the sake of taking sides against the conservatives on the issue, instead of rationally trying to determine what the best and most reasonable course of action is. (Snippage mine) Ummmm… Dude? Most of the liberals here espouse liberal policies because they demonstrably work, and reject conservative policies because they demonstrably don’t. They do so for _all_ the reasons you just listed - the republican platform _is_ utter drivel, and their candidate is not worth the ground he walks on. If you’re looking for the kind who’s just liberal for bad reasons, consider trying DemocraticUnderground. > [@Velocity](#): > > There are 55 million registered Republicans in the country. Many of them hold college degrees; some of them doctorates. Many of them have been involved in academics or careers pertaining to business, political science, technology, aerospace, engineering, economics, history, etc. Some have worked in the State Department. Some have served in the military. Some work in health care. Some work in tech start-ups. Some work in education. Some work in agriculture. Some have traveled extensively abroad. The elderly generation of Republicans has lived through many different presidential administrations. Some are very low-income, some are very high-income. Some live in cities, some live in rural areas. > With all due respect, when you say that Republicans don’t have the “slightest clue,” or that their opinions aren’t based off of anything but ignorance…maybe the ignorant one is you. Certainly some or even many are ignorant, but plenty are not. The one making broad generalizations here, is _you_. The one painting with a broad brush, is _you_. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > If you can’t imagine half of the people voting differently without assuming that they are more ignorant, evil, or stupid that the other half, perhaps you should consider learning a bit more about them - and not by reading dissections of them written by your fellow travelers. Uh… Guys… I did. I used to spend a lot of time on a _heavily_ conservative forum, and most of what I did was try to figure out why these people supported Trump, why they supported his policies, and what their thought processes were. And I gotta say, I’m sorry, but _these people don’t fucking think_. At least, not in the way the average Doper does. Their arguments were a cascade of bizarre fallacies, inane nonsense, long-debunked claims from unreliable sources (with the constant refrain that “Snopes/Politifact/\ can’t be trusted” when you try to correct the misinformation) and completely blowing things out of proportion. Every single answer I got was wrong, inane, and dishonest to the point where if it were espoused by a poster here, that poster would be called a troll and probably banned. _These people do not fucking think._ They feel. They _feel_ like Clinton’s email server was a huge deal. They _feel_ that Clinton is dishonest and flip-flops far more than her opposition. They _feel_ that BeforeItsNews is reliable, but The New York Times is just a leftist shill. So I dunno what you want from me. I’ve encountered quite a few Trump supporters, and I have yet to find any single one of them having a decent reason to support him, or even to oppose Clinton more than him. Instead, they’re more directly characterized by an encounter I had with a trump supporter where the conversation gradually devolved into complete insanity as she expressed her certainty that the government was killing us all with chemtrails, and I could easily see it by just looking out the window and determining between the normal, fluffy clouds and the wispy, fake chemical ones. From there, she made it clear global warming was a hoax, the world was going to end anyways soon but god was watching out for us, and Obama was a Kenyan Muslim. That’s the level I’ve found _most_, if not all, Trump supporters to be operating on. Maybe not that explicitly crazy, but definitely that incapable of rational thought. I don’t know if it’s tribalism to blame, I don’t know if it’s the right-wing misinformation bubble, I don’t know if a third of the country was dropped on their heads as a kid, but these claims, that maybe we should get to know these people better? I’m sorry, but I know these people. I’ve gone out of my fucking way to figure out _why_ they’re voting for this guy. And they don’t have good reasons. They have really, really _shitty_, poorly-thought-out reasons. Because there _are_ no good reasons to vote for Trump. And they don’t get that. It’s not about not understanding them. It’s about there not being anything remotely rational to understand. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/114 "2016-10-24T20:18:51Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > … _These people do not fucking think._ > > They feel. … This is the exact same criticism I hear about liberals from conservatives: ‘they are guided by emotions, not logic.’ [Here](http://louderwithcrowder.com/opinion-liberals-are-feeling-the-issues-not-thinking-about-them/) is just one quick example: > [@](#): > > Why? Why did the facts make no dent whatsoever with the leftist? > > Because today’s leftist isn’t _thinking_, he (or she, or ze) is _feeling_ about the issues. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/115 "2016-10-24T20:30:01Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > Personally, I have a hard time considering someone who thinks that a woman should be forced to carry her rapist’s baby to term a ‘genuinely good person’. “They’re good people but want to use the full force of the legal system to force a woman to act as a human incubator for the spawn of the man who forced her to have sex” just doesn’t ring true for me, especially when they’re willing to vote for a man who brags about raping women for their ‘single issue’. I’m not going to make their argument for them, but they would probably consider an unwanted pregnancy less than murder. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/116 "2016-10-24T20:40:34Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This is the exact same criticism I hear about liberals from conservatives: ‘they are guided by emotions, not logic.’ [Here](http://louderwithcrowder.com/opinion-liberals-are-feeling-the-issues-not-thinking-about-them/) is just one quick example: Which cite nicely demonstrates that, while both side make the accusation, only one side makes it accurately. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/117 "2016-10-24T20:47:43Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Which cite nicely demonstrates that, while both side make the accusation, only one side makes it accurately. True or false: Women make $0.70 for every $1 a man makes because of their sexist bosses. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/118 "2016-10-24T20:51:38Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Which cite nicely demonstrates that, while both side make the accusation, only one side makes it accurately. IMHO, animal-rights activists who squeal about cute animals that give them the “awww” feelings, but care not for ugly (but equally endangered and important) animals, tend to be liberal-progressive. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/119 "2016-10-24T21:05:52Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This is the exact same criticism I hear about liberals from conservatives: ‘they are guided by emotions, not logic.’ [Here](http://louderwithcrowder.com/opinion-liberals-are-feeling-the-issues-not-thinking-about-them/) is just one quick example: And as usual, (really this is what I usually see) the conclusion the conservative got was based on a study that misses a lot of other factors: [http://www.citylab.com/weather/2015/07/4-key-problems-with-measuring-ev-pollution-vs-gas-cars/398093/](http://www.citylab.com/weather/2015/07/4-key-problems-with-measuring-ev-pollution-vs-gas-cars/398093/) > [@](#): > > At least one recent lifecycle analysis, published late last year in PNAS, reached similar findings about the relative air quality impact of different types of vehicles. EVs running on electricity generated through coal produced more air pollution than conventional gasoline and hybrid cars, while those running on electricity generated by cleaner energy sources—such as natural gas or renewables (wind and solar power)—produced less. And similarly it goes for the birds being affected by wind turbines, if you really want to make a dent on saving birds we need all to put bells in our cats. What I usually do see is just incomplete information (that ends up misleading many) being passed as the whole truth by many conservative sources. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286/120 "2016-10-24T21:10:17Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > What I usually do see is just incomplete information (that ends up misleading many) being passed as the whole truth by many conservative sources. And [liberals do it too](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/21/barack-obama/barack-obama-ad-says-women-are-paid-77-cents-dolla/). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-villainizing-people-whose-political-opinions-differ-from-yours/769286.md?page=7)