Stingray3906
1mo ago
What is the point of politics if it no longer tracks with civility?
I've touched on this before, but it makes no logical sense for people to accept uncivil words and behavior from politicians when we expect civil words and behavior in most other areas of society. And why should anyone participate in politics unless and until we establish a baseline?
Stingray3906
1mo ago
The idea is for a leader who the public can believe in to make the right decisions.
Well, that's just it. The "right decision" is often a subject to with the people believe it is.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Goodguy 9hr ago · Edited 8hr ago
I think that in reality if elected Trump would probably just spend all day tweeting and failing to implement his promises. However, to many Democrats it is almost as if Trump is a Lovecraftian god the mere mention of whom leads to insanity. Such Democrats view him as some sort of annihilating force the very presence of which in the universe warps and endangers the sane, wholesome building blocks of existence itself. Meanwhile I just see a fat old huckster sociopath who talks a lot of shit but is effectively restrained by checks and balances. Not a savory person, maybe even a rapist, pretty certainly a bad guy, but not some sort of fundamental essential threat to the entire being of American democracy or to sanity.
I lean left on most issues, but I think the Democrats are seriously gaslighting their voter base into believing America will become a dystopia under a second Trump presidency. I think it's always better to have a more realistic perspective. When Trump was in office, it was IMO unpleasant, but government institutions didn't break down. It would be the same thing if he won again, and even then, it would be his last term ever. In that way, it might be better for the Democrats to level with voters and be like, "If Harris doesn't win, we will make it through another Trump presidency, just as we did his first one. The grass will be greener on the other side, especially as he won't be able to seek a third term."
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Now that I’m writing this out I don’t think it’s really possible. A lot of people have heard the phrase “I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation” one too many times. They feel like their government is working against them and will happily just lie directly to their face, and until a LOT of that is undone I don’t think they’re really going to accept the election outcome.
It sounds like you desire more transparency in government.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Is there anything the government could feasibly do to nudge Republicans towards accepting the results of the election in the event that Trump loses?
I'm a big proponent of transparency in government, so anything that would help citizens monitor the election process would be welcome.
I would also suggest independent audits of our federal elections.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
That sounds rather apathetic.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
It's also worth pointing out that there are plenty of adults who do act the way we teach kids how to act.
So then lets platform those people and not anyone else.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
This all seems really dumb to me: we spend all this time and energy learning as children (and as parents teaching our own children) how to problem solve, practice mutual respect, agree to disagree, and form amicable relationship, but then adults throw that shit completely out the window when it comes to politics.
Why is that?
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Posted this in the Friday Fun Thread, but seeing as how you've made a post about it here, I'll paste it here as well.
--
[Referring to the first film,] I feel like they could have gone a different route with the talk show character Murray. They made him too much like Johnny Carson. A show and character resembling Dick Cavett would have been able to navigate the complex emotional aspects of what Arthur did on the subway. I thought that was the weakest point of the film. Murray didn't give Arthur what he wanted, IMO, which was understanding. Instead he got ridicule.
Joker (the 2019 film) always reminds me of Christine (2016), which is about the on-air suicide of Christine Chubbuck, and anecdotally, I heard that she is somewhat of a martyr for the incel community, as well. I sympathize with her more than I do Arthur from Joker because she wrestled with her interpersonal and intrapersonal struggles for as long as she could before they became too burdensome.
I feel like they could have gone a different route with the talk show character Murray. They made him too much like Johnny Carson. A show and character resembling Dick Cavett would have been able to navigate the complex emotional aspects of what Arthur did on the subway. I thought that was the weakest point of the film. Murray didn't give Arthur what he wanted, IMO, which was understanding. Instead he got ridicule.
Joker (the film) always reminds me of Christine (2016), about the on-air suicide of Christine Chubbuck, and anecdotally, I heard that she is somewhat of a martyr for the incel community, as well. I sympathize with her more than I do Arthur from Joker because she wrestled with her interpersonal and intrapersonal struggles for as long as she could before they became too burdensome.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
I'm thinking about seeing it this afternoon to see how I feel about it, but the reviews don't bode well.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
My state did not shut down package stores during the pandemic because it would cut off chronic alcoholics. There are people who are so alcohol-dependent that if they don't continue to consume it at a regular pace, they will end up in the Emergency Department, or worse.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
This sort of naked self serving intellectual autofellatio is reminiscent of all the 'liberals are smarter than conservatives' drivel that gets repeatedly updooted on reddit and shared breathlessly by irritatingly smug college kids on facebook from 2004 to likely forever.
Many people like to use fancy words and sayings and jargon to give the appearance that their position is more profound than it really is. Case and point: sovereign citizens.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
The word "empowering" no longer means anything, if it ever did. Women raising their children is empowering; women getting abortions is also empowering. Women posting thirst traps on social media is empowering; women posting deliberately unflattering selfies to combat "toxic social media beauty standards" is also empowering. Women putting their career ahead of other things in their life is empowering; women deliberately refusing career opportunities in order to focus on their "mental health" and promote "self-care" is also empowering.
Aside from abortion, what if we change this whole statement from women to men?
"Men raising their children is empowering." "Men posting thirst traps on social media is empowering." "Men deliberately refusing career opportunities in order to focus on their 'mental health' and promote 'self-care' is empowering"
Etc.
Does the word "empowering" still mean nothing if the genders are reversed?
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Well, that's what politics in 2024 feels like to me -- arguing with a bully.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
CNN wants Harris to win and will do everything they think they can get away with to make it happen. The same could be said of all establishment media. I'm not sure what else you expected.
I think all media wants their preferred candidate to win because it will make them the most money. Establishment media cares only about lining their coffers.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Upset isn't quite the word I would use to describe how I feel about it. Its more like... dumbfounded, that they would make such an incredulous claim. It doesn't surprise me that Trump would (allegedly) collude with members of the Russian government, because he strikes me as a person who would do whatever it takes to win. I don't think Trump can stand losing because he views losing as total defeat.
Though, at this point, what the hell do I know?
Stingray3906
1mo ago
I didn't watch it because I generally assumed that neither candidate would have been civil and that both are so deeply partisan that there wouldn't be anything to glean from it.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
I know you didn't ask for guidance but how you're feeling is clearly a function of how plugged in you are. Do you use social media? Watch news daily? How much and for how long? I ask because...
I've been cutting back significantly since the start of the year. I've dwindled down posting on Reddit to about once a month. I have a site blocker on all my devices that blocks it. When I do override it, it's so I can view non-politcial content, and even then its only for 30 minutes at a time. I'm not on any other social media service, either. No Facebook, X, Instagram, TikTok, you name it. I do watch a lot of YouTube, but like how I handle Reddit now, its mostly for non-political content. I don't watch the news, and I don't even have linear TV. Until recently, I would make the rounds on more neutral news sites, like the AP, Reuters, and NPR, but now I've just paired it down to a local news site that picks up national and international stories from the AP/Reuters wires. I'm trying to fight our society's incessant need to have the most late-breaking news at our fingertips.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
The majority won't seven stay friends with someone who the loudest have called out as a wrongthinker, and that's a necessary condition for any kind of gentle approach to politics.
And that's the key aspect that I feel needs to change. I think the more we shut people out who are "wrongthinkers", the more we group each other into group-think silos, the less compromise and progress we make as a society.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Have you considered the possibility that you are wrong about your perceptions of various politicians or political philosophies? Yes. It's hard to get an accurate perception of them when all you see of them is what is depicted in traditional media and social media. I'd like to see more of the personal side of politicians so I can understand them better.
Maybe Trump is not a threat to democracy, maybe conservatives aren’t being mean to people violating our federal border laws, maybe Trumps policies are absolutely in no way a threat to minority groups.
Maybe so, deep down, but when I see how incoherent he is at public speaking, or read the names he calls his adversaries, or spreading rumors about Haitians in Springfield, OH, eating dogs, I can't help but feel like he shouldn't be anywhere near the White House.
I think there is a mental tax to hearing these sorts of engineered slogans all the time, trying to internalize them as if they were true, and not being able to create a coherent understanding of the world which allows them to be.
I think that’s the burnout you’re feeling. You’re being completely bombarded by increasingly impossible to square lies, and keeping track is tiring you out. I could see this being especially tiring if you live in a place where accidentally saying the sky is blue will get you in trouble socially.
This an accurate summary, thank you.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
JDV: Margaret. The rules were that you guys weren't going to fact check, and since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand. That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for ten years.
How much does JDV know about the asylum-seeking process? There's only certain situations that one can be granted asylum for (and that was narrowed recently by the Biden administration), and asylum-seekers are expected to appear in court and have a place to stay and in some cases are given ankle monitors to track their location.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Well, see, there's something we can find agreement on. I would prefer a more limited government as well, maybe not as far as suggesting we abolish the FDA for example, but I would definitely agree with you that State and federal governments have become too big, especially as it pertains to interstate commerce. I would love to see Wickford v. Filburn get overturned. I tend to be pro-2A as well, with caveats for universal background checks, training, and safe storage. I'm happy that both Harris and Walz openly talk about how their firearms owners.
I see what you're saying about "pragmatic politics". Like, it could easily go down the slippery slope of "my issue is the only one that matters" and then nothing gets done. I agree with the notion that politics should involve compromise. But if no one is willing to compromise, what then? And that's where I'm getting hung up. In everything that I've learned in life, you don't get your needs met or your voice heard by throwing out snarky one-liners or calling someone Hitler or labeling a university president as the Devil or what have you. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Stingray3906
1mo ago
Yes, I would like to be challenged on the notion that all politicians have become completely self-serving and/or only serve the wealthy and elite and are incapable of nuanced thinking.
Context matters. It was a rally where racial insults and epiphets were thrown around and nauseum and Trump said there was "so much love in the room". If you want to make the case that it was purely comedy, that's fine, but I don't see it that way.
But by the same token, Biden's statement wasn't helpful either.
More options
Context Copy link