Is there anyone interested in finding common ground? Instead of hating people because of their perceived political beliefs?

[Comshaw]

When I first read the OP, I thought I might need to reassess my claim that ALL “both sides” arguments are apologia for conservative misdeeds. Now after reading the last few hours of posts, I can see that I was right all along. Many “centrists” are just embarrassed conservatives. They can’t own up to the real-world consequences of their toxic beliefs, so they pretend that liberals are just as bad to salve their egos.

Bullshit. Total, utter, embarrassingly emotion-based bullshit. What most centrist are, are people that hold views from both sides of the political spectrum, but do not hold ANY extreme views from either side. Because I hold a view that is tagged "conservative" by extremists on the left, I'm labeled as a Trumpist, a mindless conservative. Because I hold views that are considered to be from the left side of that indefinable (but concrete to extremists) line separating the two sides, I'm labeled a "fucking lib" by those extremists on the right. Centrists are the sensible section of the populous, the ones who argue for freedom of speech and will allow those they disagree with their say without trying to drown them out or silence their voices.

So what am I talking about? Let's take the gun debate for example.

I'm a legal gun owner. I obey all the laws. I'm trained in the use and safety of firearms. I believe that law-abiding citizens should have the right to own a gun. With all that the extreme left calls me a fucking brainless conservative gun nut who wants to allow all those gun deaths we have every year so that no more gun laws are enacted.

But when I tell people I support red flag laws, I support registration of gun owners, I support not letting convicted felons have guns, I'm labeled as a lily-livered, pansy-ass Lib who wants to take away ALL the guns by those on the extreme right.

Most of those on the extremes use the exact same argument you have, an appeal to emotion rather than a logical fact-based argument.

I do hold some views from the conservative side of what you consider the dividing line. I'm not embarrassed about it, nor if all my views are taken into account can I in any way be classified as conservative, or a liberal for that matter. I can state though that anyone from either side who would ignore facts and dismiss a viewpoint out of hand for emotional reasons isn't someone whos argument I'll be taking seriously.


Comshaw

 

[Rightguide]

This is my first (likely my onl) post in the politics world…

I no longer belong to a political party, because I think both sincerely believe they “clearly“ have moral high ground. And missed the point - we need to find our commonality instead of hating on the “other people”. I now just want to see people recognize that they agree on far more than they disagree with. And the current trend of believing “if you did this, you are that” is stupid. That is just about the best way to destroy harmony by saying if someone has a stance you do not agree with on “this” (no matter what that is), then you should be destroyed and eliminated from existance.

I want to see people find their commonalities instead of negatively focusing on their differences.

And you know what the worst part is? People reading this, are likely spending more energy trying to figure out which “side” I am on, instead of thinking about my lamely presented message. I think both sides are correct… and both sides are wrong.

And I hope I don’t have some ass-hat saying I am a shill for whichever side they hate… instead of actually considering that someone could be asking a sincere concept….

Vote your beliefs and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[butters]

common ground can be found amongst most people: the desire for a roof over our heads, food on the table, education for our kids and so on. Oppositional viewpoints don't mean you can't work with most people, but when one 'side' (be it religious, political, or moral) attempt to force those views on others there's always a problem. Too often it's simply a case of ignorance, of not having the information or truth to make a sound assessment and form an opinion... sometimes that's through deliberate misinformation, more and more lately. But when those people have the best scientific & factual information yet opt to choose to believe in conspiracies/lies or, worse still not believe them but push them anyway, then there's no compromising at least on a morality level. You can live in a community where depending on others is vital...and in those instances it's generally best not to discuss religion or politics in case you get too disgusted with who you live next door to.

Sure… sounds great. But what about candidate A that supports… oh I don’t know… recycling. I am all for recycling! Yeah! Go! Then I heard out, recycling is expensive, and being outsourced…to China… and they just dump our “recycling“ in the ocean. Is it true? I have no idea. Maybe, maybe not at all. I would rather it goes into the local landfill than gets dumped into the ocean… after using all the fuel to get the barge out to the ocean.

My point is only that you need to do more than just like a buzzword on a candidate.

I would suggest you inform yourself better on topics which you make judgement calls on. And if you find out American recycled materials end up dumped in the ocean, then that doesn't make the concept of recycling something to let drop but rather a point on which you make calls or send emails to your representatives about in order to try and bring awareness and action on the subject.

Politics is not a zero sum game. It’s about compromise. You are never going to get everything that you want. It is a legitimate criticism to level on the Democrats for not codifying Roe. But it’s not as simple a thing to accomplish as you believe it to be. I never wanna put myself in the position of faulting more the people who failed in insuring a woman’s bodily autonomy over those actively working to take it away.

^^this, plus Roe v Wade was considered so established that there seemed no need to revisit a working solution suiting most women.

How delightful… why would that matter? Why does the color of ones skin, or their sexual orientation, or gender, or opinion about the Kennedy assassination make anyone more or less important?

I am not asking for a ”pass”. I am just trying to point out, that assuming anything about another person is easily a wrong assumption.

^^that's true

Okay. I found the news stories about Kate Cox. And of course, I do not even remotely agree with what happened to her! And I had heard that story, just didn’t recognize the name. Sorry.

And to say Google is not biased, means your head is so far up your ass, you probably stick forks of food in your belly button. And I reiterate, I do not at all identify with the right. If Donnie cared about this country, he would leave politics forever! That fucking ego maniac has fucked up all kinds of shit… in all fairness, so did Obama. We haven’t had a good president for years. Decades, at best. But to deny Biden is senile is as ridiculous as saying Trump is a “good guy”.

Time for me to bail here… this political world is not where I belong.

the problem is, stories like Kate's are not rare today—and should have never been "stories" in the first place.

I think your concept of what things Obama fucked up might differ from mine so I accept your right to believe it without giving it credit for being factual, just like the insisting President Biden has senility, the implications being 'too senile to be president' and yet his administration has achieved more for the advancement of America out of the 50's than any government since those days, DESPITE all the blatant attempts to send it hurtling back there and with such small advantages in the senate and republican house representatives backing trump's attempts to overthrow the 2020 election results. If he can achieve all this, using the team of knowledgeable people in place to advise and effect his goals, how can he be viewed as senile? I think, for his age, his mental acuity is pretty damned good.

 

[Rob_Royale]

People are by nature tribal. It is in their DNA to find a group to belong to and thus, a them vs. us scenario occurs. Looking for common ground requires intelligence and common sense, and the knowledge that the way things are, ISN'T working regardless of who's team is in charge. I don't see a lot of that these days.

 

[mpeters]

For that tiny minority of Litsters who actually ARE interested in hearing both sides... this website will be a font of information for you.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/

It seems to lean right-center according to bias studies, unfortunately.

 

[Bray123]

For those who would 'Make America Great Again', please define the ideal time as that when people said things like 'If you can't say anything nice, don't say nothing at all.'

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

It seems to lean right-center according to bias studies, unfortunately.

Even a cursory glance at their homepage confirms this. It's a right-wing site pretending to be neutral.

 

[Bray123]

People are by nature tribal. It is in their DNA to find a group to belong to and thus, a them vs. us scenario occurs. Looking for common ground requires intelligence and common sense, and the knowledge that the way things are, ISN'T working regardless of who's team is in charge. I don't see a lot of that these days.

That applies to Republicans.

Democrats are tribal in that they belong to a group that dislikes a group of people who have it in their DNA to find a group to belong to and thus, a them vs. us scenario occurs.

 

[Lazaran]

It seems to lean right-center according to bias studies, unfortunately.

Leans right???

More like pegs the needle right.

See also:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/us/politics/real-clear-politics.html

From the article:

“But less well known is how Real Clear Politics and its affiliated websites have taken a rightward, aggressively pro-Trump turn over the last four years as donations to its affiliated nonprofit have soared. Large quantities of those funds came through two entities that wealthy conservatives use to give money without revealing their identities.

Real Clear’s evolution traces a similar path as other right-leaning political news outlets that have adapted to the upheaval of the Trump era by aligning themselves with the president and his large following, its writers taking on his battles and raging against the left.

As the administration lurched from one crisis after another — impeachment, the coronavirus, a lost election the president refuses to concede — Real Clear became one of the most prominent platforms for elevating unverified and reckless stories about the president’s political opponents, through a mix of its own content and articles from across conservative media.”



"Real Clear Politics” is anything but, and should not be trusted or cited imho.

*nods*

 

[HisArpy]

The YIMBY movement is growing. It will take decades for us to undo the past century of car-centric central planning, but we have the advantage of people hating traffic and liking walkable neighborhoods.

This complete and utter fantasy. Just like the idea of mandating EV's, the people don't want it. Some people might like the idea but the thought that a majority of people support it is nothing but fantasy.

 

[RobDownSouth]

This complete and utter fantasy. Just like the idea of mandating EV's, the people don't want it. Some people might like the idea but the thought that a majority of people support it is nothing but fantasy.

Happy Holidays, HisArpy!

The sale of Electric vehicles in the United states was 9% of all new care sales in 2023, up from 7% in 2022.
To blithely say "the people don't want it" is not based on facts.
Granted, total market penetration is only something like 1.5% because used cars last so long, but there is definitely interest out there.

Vehicle cost for an EV is still three grand higher than conventional gas cars so it's probably still out of your price range.

 

[ByteMe13]

Once the MAGA crowd and all the other crazies are gone, we can discuss common ground.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

This complete and utter fantasy. Just like the idea of mandating EV's, the people don't want it. Some people might like the idea but the thought that a majority of people support it is nothing but fantasy.

I don't support government subsidies for electric vehicles. EVs are merely a temporary stopgap to squeeze a little more utility out of our flawed car infrastructure, but public subsidies for electric cars (such as building charging stations) should be redirected to building more trains and bike lanes.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I no longer have any interest in finding "common ground" with Maga Republicans.

There is no common ground to be had. Not one God damned bit.

Maga is anathema to Truth, Justice And The American Way.

You're more than welcome to sit on the fence for as long as you like....that is your choice. I won't judge you.

I chose a side.

 

[Bray123]

I don't support government subsidies for electric vehicles. EVs are merely a temporary stopgap to squeeze a little more utility out of our flawed car infrastructure, but public subsidies for electric cars (such as building charging stations) should be redirected to building more trains and bike lanes.

If government subsidies for the oil industries were discontinued it might be easier to compare the two.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

If government subsidies for the oil industries were discontinued it might be easier to compare the two.

I don’t want the government subsiding private cars at all. The oil industry makes enough money it should be able to pay its own way without government help.

Everything we can do to get personal cars off the road is a win. It’s good for the environment. Good for public safety. Fewer private cars on the road makes it easier for emergency and commercial vehicle to get to their destinations quickly.

 

[Bray123]

I don’t want the government subsiding private cars at all. The oil industry makes enough money it should be able to pay its own way without government help.

Everything we can do to get personal cars off the road is a win. It’s good for the environment. Good for public safety. Fewer private cars on the road makes it easier for emergency and commercial vehicle to get to their destinations quickly.

I don't disagree with that, how about using some of that money to fix the roads so that they are more comfortable for cycles and busses (and maybe for taxis & even cars as well).

In fact, the oil industry should be subsidizing the nation not the other way round.

 

[RoryN]

"Is there anyone interested in finding common ground?" usually equals someone not really interested in finding common ground.

 

[RobDownSouth]

"Is there anyone interested in finding common ground?" usually equals someone not really interested in finding common ground.

 

[v_indigo]

I can’t find common ground when part of your definition for me is ‘breeding stock’

 

[v_indigo]

I no longer have any interest in finding "common ground" with Maga Republicans.

There is no common ground to be had. Not one God damned bit.

Maga is anathema to Truth, Justice And The American Way.

You're more than welcome to sit on the fence for as long as you like....that is your choice. I won't judge you.

I chose a side.

And since they are all going to vote for Trump, they are all MAGA

 

[Lazaran]

That ^ didn’t just end the thread - it murdered it.



Well played

*nods*

 

[Chernosoth]

Common ground became scorched earth. "You're with us or against us" worked well enough to get Bush reelected, so that tactic will be used by both sides until it stops working and starts losing voters and donors.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

The sides of the polity have grown in directions where there can be no common ground. How do you sit just one Socialist down with one Individualist and get them to agree politically?

The Venn diagram intersection is a null. The circles don't even touch.

A can-do spirited person who abhors government, especially at the national level, can never see eye-to-eye with a person who believes that government is absolutely necessary to order our lives and protect us from ourselves.

We are fundamentally in a war for the soul of the nation. We will either move back towards the Founder's vision or we will march in forced solidarity(by force, implied and otherwise) into a Brave New World.

1984 wasn't just a kick-ass album. Like Anthem it was a warning. A 2112 warning...

 

[Bn2f]

The sides of the polity have grown in directions where there can be no common ground. How do you sit just one Socialist down with one Individualist and get them to agree politically?

The Venn diagram intersection is a null. The circles don't even touch.

A can-do spirited person who abhors government, especially at the national level, can never see eye-to-eye with a person who believes that government is absolutely necessary to order our lives and protect us from ourselves.

We are fundamentally in a war for the soul of the nation. We will either move back towards the Founder's vision or we will march in forced solidarity(by force, implied and otherwise) into a Brave New World.

1984 wasn't just a kick-ass album. Like Anthem it was a warning. A 2112 warning...

You abhor government but wanna be part of the government to then not do government things for people who vote for people to go into government and you call these people Individualists? Your head is up your ass and Van Halen wants their t-shirt back.