Reply to When the smallest doubt is treated as support of the other side

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "When the smallest doubt is treated as support of the other side"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]We don’t debate ideas anymore, we debate loyalties.  [/quote]
Whew. This says it all. Whoever you are, you’ve nailed it.[/quote]
+100000[/quote]

People are tribal.  As more an Americans identify less with a religious identity, they replace their tribalism with a political identity.  [/quote]

And what happens when religious identity and positions are intertwined with politicians and policy? ie the Evangelicals [/quote]

What about it? The point is the amount of people with strong religious identity is declining. Secular religion is the new wave.[/quote]

Secular religion? Like worshipping a politician or political party? [/quote]

Not necessarily, though it could be. Fervent, bordering on religiously zealous, adherence to a cause, belief or person.

To take it out of a political context, the increase in celebrity stan culture is an example. BTS Army, Swifties, Sussex Squad, BeyHive etc.[/quote]

Yup.

Trump is a religion for his hardcore MAGA followers. They speak about him as if he's the messiah and a prophet. It's very similar to fervent religious adherents. [/quote]

Religion?  Then we have DEI, Climate Change and Woke.  You can't even see it, can you?[/quote]

These examples are two sides of the same coin. Same thing, but one side blindly idolizes Trump, the other blindly follows DEI/social justice/equity nonsense. Blind belief in these competing ideologies gives them a sense of belonging, direction, and purpose that would have previously been filled by religion.[/quote]

You wouldn't think the equity stuff was nonsense if you were one of the people on the short end of the stick.[/quote]

You wouldn't think of MAGA as a cult if you were one of the people trying to save America from ruin.[/quote]

Ah, but here is the rub. MAGA are the ones who staged a coup. After that, you can complain about the left and their policies until the cows come home. No one who actually loves their country tries to overturn an election in a violent manner, particularly now, in hindsight, when we see the planners and plotters admitting it was all a lie. Shocking that you somehow still think it was a fake election and that the coup plotters are still patriots.[/quote]

Yawn. You are trying to make this some competition and are missing the point. Still stuck of the belief rather than the behavior

No one who truly believes in justice, equity and inclusion would engage in massive destruction and looting of small businesses (many of which were owned by minorities). We could do this all day. You're just so caught in your bubble, you can't see past your own "righteousness".

Do you take pamphlets with you when you proslytize? [/quote]

And you are missing the point. The people protesting Floyd's death were peaceful. There is evidence, based on charges, that the deaths and rioting that took place were instigated by right wingers. You are so caught up in your bubble, you didn't know that. I posted links already in this thread and you have chosen to ignore them.[/quote]
The [b]RWNJ[/b] you’re going back and forth with is too far gone (or too well paid). All the proof in the world can’t convince someone whose sense of self is bound up in his victimhood like his is.[/quote]

Use of this term is a telltale sign that you are probably in a bubble. So far gone, indeed. [/quote]

Prove the bubble wrong.  Prove that you aren't a nutjob.  Give us credible citations of some big deep state antifa scheme.[/quote]

You are completely missing the point. The whole invocation of J6 is a non-sequitur anyway.

As if differing degrees of a particular behavior negates the existence of the same behavior for the other side. No; not how it works.[/quote]

Not at all missing the point.  J6 is a perfect illustration.  There's position A, that Trump got right wingers riled up with his lies that the election was stolen from him, along with floating the crazy idea that they result of Trump's loss could be overturned, and they stormed the Capitol as a result.  There's probably a literal million data points that point to this.   And then there's position B, that none of that happened, that instead somehow it was all a false flag by the "deep state" and anarchocommunists designed to make Trump and the right wing look bad.  And, there's hardly any evidence at all to support this, and what little weak nonsense they have to point at, has either been repeatedly debunked, has been twisted and contorted beyond recognition (such as Epps), or was outright fabricated and circulated on social media.

[/quote]

Yup, still missing the point. And keying on incident as if it is determinative of the entire phenomenon. Next you are going to tell me it was actually Republicans who initiated the "Defund the Police" mantra  :roll: .

You are lost in the sauce, my friend.[/quote]

Clearly it was very progressive left wingers who coined the term "Defund the Police" to mean certain resources should be allocated to mental health and public safety professionals because you don't need someone who looks like they are ready for combat in the Sandbox approaching a person who might be publicly intoxicated or having mental distress; and certainly you can admit that training for police who shoot people in the back when they are running away or in their bedroom, is lacking?

But then it was the right who took the term and weaponized it to imply the left was fully anti- law enforcement all together, which of course is nonsense.

Same thing with "open borders" - of the borders were open, there wouldn't be record apprehensions and interdictions....at the border, now would there?[/quote]

DP.
Doesn’t matter how many are apprehended; what matters is how easy it is to be released into the country.
By that definition, it IS an open border. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics