Hilarias_Glucose_Cup
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itvs88n wrote
Reply to comment by bostonbananarama in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
ok, sorry, didn't know i was dealing with a progressive QANON type. moving along.
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_ituq1pz wrote
Reply to comment by bostonbananarama in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
It is not really a matter of which side is to blame or who is right or wrong. If you feel like you hold some kind of moral righteousness over people due to the points above then fine, you are a truly good person and the people who disagree with you are really bad. Enjoy your reddit victory.
All I seek to point out is that maybe, framing it as moral superiority when you don't like the behavior and then dismissing the behavior when the "right side" engages in it might actually be part of the reason why these populist movements sometimes gain momentum. \
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itubl7b wrote
Reply to comment by bostonbananarama in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
It is an issue but the take away of polls like that should not be to use it as some false binary idea that anyone who questions election integrity is a conspiracy theorist. The reason you have polls like that is many citizens don't trust the election process. With the growth of mail in voting, the labeling of common sense voter ID laws as somehow bad and the overplayed hysteria over state election laws like Georgia you have had a lot of change and turmoil over the election process. There are always winner effects with elections - Dems used "Russian Hackers" in 2016 as their version of the republicans "Stolen Election" of 2020 and i am sure the will be other trends. The key takeaway to this by both parties should be - lets work to make sure we address what we can around the integrity of our elections. Instead, we do what most people in Reddit world and Twitter world like to do - use it as a chance to create a false binary.
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itre4bj wrote
Reply to comment by Sinman1982 in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
My point is not that you are wrong, I agree there are a lot of loons running around about the election of 2020. My point is that it doesn’t matter, won’t move the needle to help progressives and will likely just galvanize the people you don’t like. Focus on a positive message that brings people to your side instead of creating binary traps that force people into feeling like you are trying to be morally superior.
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itr9vu6 wrote
Reply to comment by medforddad in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
It seems like we only care about this stuff when it is politically beneficial to do so.
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itr6rby wrote
Reply to comment by medforddad in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
No one cares about this stuff except for terminally online Reddit and Twitter dweebs.
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itr58ap wrote
Reply to comment by revjoe918 in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
That’s different, you are allowed to deny those because it’s the right side.
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itr4c7u wrote
I’m starting to think that people obsessed with the tiny number of people who are actually election deniers are just as bad as the election deniers.
I get it, it’s always easier to boil your world view down to simple perspectives but you would think progressives would have learned about getting behind the idea that people who don’t agree with them are inherently bad. We’ve seen the backlash around bitter clingers, basket of deplorables etc. stop giving fuel to populist movements by being so dismissive
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itozz5w wrote
Reply to Massachusetts should have a Tax Sugary Drinks. This would discourage consumers from buying products that may lead to chronic illness, and high long term costs to the health system. by [deleted]
Agreed. Start with Starbucks sugary drinks.
Hilarias_Glucose_Cup t1_itzu0kl wrote
Reply to comment by techiemikey in There is no compromise with election deniers. And that’s the problem. by Sinman1982
Generally, anytime I am dealing with people from either side of the political aisle, I judge their commentary based on their level rigidity and their impression of the scale of the problem. I'm basically trying to determine whether they come at problems from the perspective of Religion/Moral Righteousness or Pragmatism.
In this case, I readily admit there is a population of people who can be bucketed as election deniers but the scale and impact these people have is such that they are best categorized as a small level concern. The poster above is elevating their scale to such that they are a large enough threat to equate to overthrowing the government and installing an authoritarian government. No serious person thinks this is reasonable, the same way that its not reasonable to think the Biden admin is going to force us into a communist government. When you realize you are dealing with people that give too much weight to nonsense ideas, it is just time to cut your losses. They exist on the extreme edges of conservative and progressive viewpoints and when you dig into their mindsets, they really are not very different.