Okay let’s remove the “are we better than her” part, do you think that her stance here is entirely null and void because of the person she is? Would you change your mind if Bernie said it?
I’m not saying you have to start a relationship with her or start pioneering her cause, but if you’re going to discount a point you might agree with because of the person, what’s the point of making policies in the first place? We might as well hit full send and send politics to where I see it going, just put the candidates on a tinder like app with no more than a tweet of what they’re about, have them put on a red or blue tie and be done with it. No need for nuance, just vote based on looks, hell, we don’t even need the blurbs at the bottom.
You do not, under any circumstance, gotta hand it to Hitler. The nuance here is that MTG is a piece of shit. We must be intolerant of the intolerant because welcoming them and accepting them society provides an opening for them to spread their anti social beliefs. Before they are welcomed into polite society, they must show that they have changed and are compatible with polite society.
It is ok to have disagreements with others, so long as the disagreements aren’t something like, “we disagree if gay people should be allowed to get married”. People who hold such anti social beliefs must not be allowed a foothold. People like MTG use the more sane policies as cover to infiltrate and spread their actual beliefs, like Jewish Space Lasers.
You are too focused on the trees to notice that the forest is garbage. The nuance here is not that MTG has some good takes. The nuance here is that MTG will say and do anything to advance her anti social agenda.
My man, if I’m focused on the trees you’re sitting there staring at a leaf. I feel like I’ve been pretty on point about what I’m trying to say here. You can agree with something someone you hate said. If you can’t, you’re letting emotions take over logic
I appreciate it but Im also highly aware that nobody is going to be changing their mind in this discussion. I just hate to see a smart place like Lemmy devolve into what I would call “dumb politics”
No, actually, I didn’t. I think it says a lot more about you than me that your go-to tactic in debates is to accuse the other person of being emotional, based off nothing, as if it were disqualifying.
Okay let’s remove the “are we better than her” part, do you think that her stance here is entirely null and void because of the person she is? Would you change your mind if Bernie said it?
I’m not saying you have to start a relationship with her or start pioneering her cause, but if you’re going to discount a point you might agree with because of the person, what’s the point of making policies in the first place? We might as well hit full send and send politics to where I see it going, just put the candidates on a tinder like app with no more than a tweet of what they’re about, have them put on a red or blue tie and be done with it. No need for nuance, just vote based on looks, hell, we don’t even need the blurbs at the bottom.
You do not, under any circumstance, gotta hand it to Hitler. The nuance here is that MTG is a piece of shit. We must be intolerant of the intolerant because welcoming them and accepting them society provides an opening for them to spread their anti social beliefs. Before they are welcomed into polite society, they must show that they have changed and are compatible with polite society.
It is ok to have disagreements with others, so long as the disagreements aren’t something like, “we disagree if gay people should be allowed to get married”. People who hold such anti social beliefs must not be allowed a foothold. People like MTG use the more sane policies as cover to infiltrate and spread their actual beliefs, like Jewish Space Lasers.
You are too focused on the trees to notice that the forest is garbage. The nuance here is not that MTG has some good takes. The nuance here is that MTG will say and do anything to advance her anti social agenda.
My man, if I’m focused on the trees you’re sitting there staring at a leaf. I feel like I’ve been pretty on point about what I’m trying to say here. You can agree with something someone you hate said. If you can’t, you’re letting emotions take over logic
I am with you
I appreciate it but Im also highly aware that nobody is going to be changing their mind in this discussion. I just hate to see a smart place like Lemmy devolve into what I would call “dumb politics”
Too late, I just got here admittedly but it has been not what I would call intelligent. Better than Reddit. Like hepatitis is better than aids
We are not led, we are disunited, the enemy is organized. Until that changes we lose.
Well said brother
MTG is a politician, not a logician, and people’s responses to her bigoted ass don’t have to be restrained to pure logic.
All you control in this life is your own response to stimuli, MTG isn’t making you be illogical, you are.
Well, Hitler wanted every German to do sports and be fit and was against smoking. He was a monster but in those things he was on the right side.
Yes, actually. 100% I think that.
Do you not understand the fact that a grifter or opportunist saying something makes it completely meaningless?
Like, hell, do you look at stuff like JD Vance saying “If you want your kid to go and fight in some stupid globalist war, vote for Joe Biden” and not understand that he’s completely full of shit?
I understand that you think that, but I have a feeling I’m less emotionally invested in this than you
Lmao what? 😂
Secret cheat code to win any argument: just say the other person is being emotional.
Who’s trying to win? I assumed we were just debating
And you think calling people emotional contributes to debate?
I said you seemed emotionally invested compared to me, you took it personally
No, actually, I didn’t. I think it says a lot more about you than me that your go-to tactic in debates is to accuse the other person of being emotional, based off nothing, as if it were disqualifying.
If you say so
Who’s doing that?