It’s telling that there’s no Impeachment thread on VS...

[ides1056]

You have a point.

I stop and change tires with some regularity. Twice last year. One of them had an oxygen tank attached, and no tools. His political affiliation wasn't important.

We have more in common than not and have to find out what this is, not what we don't have in common.

[Dallas Tex]

My cycling club is predominantly center-right or centrist for the overwhelming beliefs of most riders.
The handful of far-right seems accept the far-left riders much better than the far-left accept the far-right riders.

While preaching tolerance, inclusion, and diversity these sentiments are not typically shared with riders who support President Trump.
How would y'all extend friendship and welcome to a rider unloading his/her bicycle out of a vehicle with a TRUMP 2020 bumpersticker?

Blue Jays, you may be barking up the wrong tree with this crowd. Most of these good folks have been trained to avoid opinions that differ from their own. These folks seek superficial diversity but avoid diverse opinions. Observe in this thread and in others how many posts are not challenging opposing viewpoints, but challenging your right to have an opposing viewpoint. Many comments are posted not to encourage debate, they’re designed to deny debate and discussion.

[mzilliox]

Hmm, well, i would probably not bring the topic up at all, as its a bike ride, and im not terribly social around folks i dont know well. but if it was brought up, im not one to stay quiet as can be seen here, so i guess i would ask that person why they think Trump is the right person for the job. then when they deflect with some implication that those of us who cannot understand why people support trump are thus uninclusive and intolerant, i would roll my eyes, laugh, and wonder why i cant get a simple answer to the question, so that maybe i could actually start to understand the midnset of an honorable human who supports an unhonorable man. then id try to drop him on the hill along with the rest of the group.

[mzilliox]

Blue Jays, you may be barking up the wrong tree with this crowd. Most of these good folks have been trained to avoid opinions that differ from their own. These folks seek superficial diversity but avoid diverse opinions. Observe in this thread and in others how many posts are not challenging opposing viewpoints, but challenging your right to have an opposing viewpoint. Many comments are posted not to encourage debate, they’re designed to deny debate and discussion.

the assumption that anyone here has been trained to avoid opposing viewpoints is insulting. and a post alluding to such seems a bit ironic to me as well. nobody here is in any position or has any power to deny any of us our viewpoints, dont play victim, its dishonest. if you have a viewpoint, or some piece of philosophy to share, please do. ill go reread the entire thread and attempt to pull out any time when you made an effort at actual debate, and respond accordingly if not already done. i love a good debate, i was trained in debate. (completely contrary to your assumption that we have been trained to avoid opinion different than our own)

[Matthew Strongin]

My cycling club is predominantly center-right or centrist for the overwhelming beliefs of most riders.
The handful of far-right seems accept the far-left riders much better than the far-left accept the far-right riders.

While preaching tolerance, inclusion, and diversity these sentiments are not typically shared with riders who support President Trump.
How would y'all extend friendship and welcome to a rider unloading his/her bicycle out of a vehicle with a TRUMP 2020 bumpersticker?

Well, I have teammates and friends and family members who are Trump supporters. They're all welcomed in my home and loved. Some I can discuss politics with in a comfortable exchange of ideas and others I can't. One of my teammates is a Trump voter and, while not exactly far-right, his beliefs are typically opposite of mine. We ride together often and never miss a chance to debate. We argue, agree to disagree, and then immediately resume arguing. My only issue with him is that he's a shitty lead out man because he always goes early. Like way too early.

Here's the deal...there are assholes all over the political spectrum. There are also good people with beliefs that run across the political spectrum. But that's not what people above are asking about. They're wondering why good honorable people are so willing to dismiss all of Trump's flaws, something they have generally been loathe to do for any other leader or politician. My buddy, the shitty lead out Trump voter, often expresses his frustration, displeasure and disappointment in Trump. He may agree with the goals, but he strongly disagrees with the methods, the serial lying and all the other con artist activity. That's how I know he's an honorable man, even if his lead out sucks (like who goes at 2,500 meters and fizzles out before the sprint train has even formed).

So now that we've gone anecdote to anecdote, maybe we can agree that there is no "typical" form of behavior from the left to right or right to left when it comes to comfort with an open dialog. Or I can share the horrible things some of the far-right people I know, but don't consider friends, have said about women's rights, minorities, LGBTQ, or immigrants. My point, in short, is that I call BS on your premise that the far-left is less accepting than the far-right.

[Matthew Strongin]

Blue Jays, you may be barking up the wrong tree with this crowd. Most of these good folks have been trained to avoid opinions that differ from their own. These folks seek superficial diversity but avoid diverse opinions. Observe in this thread and in others how many posts are not challenging opposing viewpoints, but challenging your right to have an opposing viewpoint. Many comments are posted not to encourage debate, they’re designed to deny debate and discussion.

This is disingenuous. Or it shows how little you are actually open to other perspectives.

[zetroc]

People sure are making a lot of generalizations about other people in this thread (including this one.)

[ZenNMotion]

Blue Jays, you may be barking up the wrong tree with this crowd. Most of these good folks have been trained to avoid opinions that differ from their own. These folks seek superficial diversity but avoid diverse opinions. Observe in this thread and in others how many posts are not challenging opposing viewpoints, but challenging your right to have an opposing viewpoint. Many comments are posted not to encourage debate, they’re designed to deny debate and discussion.

Wait, what? "Trained?" by whom? and how? What is superficial diversity- makes no sense. When "debate" means acceptance of "alternative facts", and viewpoints being debated are based on things like basic human rights, science, and democratic principles, civil debate has no utility. The article below hit the point home for me better than I could have articulated it myself. I have no more tolerance for civility when it means I need to ignore the core human values that my clergy father taught me, and so for the sake of not shitting in a beloved VS common space, I see no point in responding to trolling, although I so want to. It serves no purpose here, and really isn't my idea of fun- this shit really really matters to me.

The decade civility died: the 21s and Donald Trump.

[guido]

Most of these good folks have been trained to avoid opinions that differ from their own. These folks seek superficial diversity but avoid diverse opinions. Observe in this thread and in others how many posts are not challenging opposing viewpoints, but challenging your right to have an opposing viewpoint. Many comments are posted not to encourage debate, they’re designed to deny debate and discussion.

Nope. The tipping point is facts. Those who think they are the only valid basis for rational behavior and those who disregard them. If you can't agree on the basic facts there is no basis for debate or discussion.

[Dallas Tex]

Nope. The tipping point is facts. Those who think they are the only valid basis for rational behavior and those who disregard them. If you can't agree on the basic facts there is no basis for debate or discussion.

Agree on basic facts? That's a challenge due to the redefinition of the word 'fact'. Once the term 'facts' takes on the meaning of strongly-held-belief or 'everybody knows' we arrive at a place where many folks can't even agree on the definition of the word fact. Agreement of what you decide are basic facts should never be a pre-requirement before discussion or debate.

That Trump is (in no particular order):

A racist
A rapist
A misogynist
Evil (definition: “profoundly immoral and wicked”)
A malignant narcissist
A criminal
Corrupt to his core
Indifferent to the suffering of others
A liar
An ignoramus
A fraudulent huckster
Etc

Is not a matter of “differing viewpoints” but is instead objective fact.

In defending him one is defending the indefensible. I have friends, family members, colleagues who support him. I know some very smart people who support him. I do not have a framework for understanding or explaining it. Sorry to say, but at this point, defense of Trump says something about one’s personal character.

Facts? This post got 6 likes, including you guido. Your belief is that before a discussion or debate on the president can take place participants are required to acknowledge these 'basic facts' before discussion is warranted? Do you see how some might perceive that as a tad close minded to differing points of view?

[guido]

Agree on basic facts? That's a challenge due to the redefinition of the word 'fact'. Once the term 'facts' takes on the meaning of strongly-held-belief or 'everybody knows' we arrive at a place where many folks can't even agree on the definition of the word fact. Agreement of what you decide are basic facts should never be a pre-requirement before discussion or debate.




Facts? This post got 6 likes, including you guido. Your belief is that before a discussion or debate on the president can take place participants are required to acknowledge these 'basic facts' before discussion is warranted? Do you see how some might perceive that as a tad close minded to differing points of view?

Fact has not been re-defined. Check any number of dictionaries if you are unsure.

Feel free to provide documented evidence to the contrary to any of HorsCat's points.

[mzilliox]

Fact has not been re-defined. Check any number of dictionaries if you are unsure.

Feel free to provide documented evidence to the contrary to any of HorsCat's points.

furthermore, to suggest that hors cats opinions are the facts we need to agree on seems to be purposefully ignorant to what we all must find as common ground, so please allow me to adress you specifically to clarify what facts are and what opinion is
would you agree that trump has cheated americans before? trump college?
do you agree that trump lies often? i need not offer examples, just goole anything trump and read it and you will find him lying about something
are you aware that trump has stolen from charity? he has
fact: wont release taxes
fact: has abused women and was accusedof rape by his own wife
fact: is not a good enough human being to lead, how does one trust a guy who lies this much
fact: has announced he believes Putin over our intel forces
fact: continues to pread several disinformations like ukraine hacking and more, some would call this consipracy theory, some would call it outright dangerous to national security
fact: has rolled back more protections for our environemt than anyone, and continues to assult public lands, and clean environments
fact: cannot consistently make complete sentences or finish thoughts
fact: lied about Korean nuclear capabilities to your face
fact: lied about a deal with the chinese to influence the markets

im sure others can provide more facts

then we can start debating? then you will tell me why you support trump? i mean at what point to we have to get before you enter into good faith arguments, presenting points in defense of trump?
im curious?

[HorsCat]

Facts? This post got 6 likes, including you guido. Your belief is that before a discussion or debate on the president can take place participants are required to acknowledge these 'basic facts' before discussion is warranted? Do you see how some might perceive that as a tad close minded to differing points of view?

Glenn,

Setting aside the like envy, everything I attributed to Trump is demonstrably true, except for the unproven-in-a-court-of-law rape allegation. We can reasonably disagree about whether, say, tax cuts make good economic policy, or moving the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem is good for Jews, or that support for Trump in light of what we know about him is a window into someone's character. But there can be no reasonable disagreement that Trump is not any of the things he unequivocally is. Anyone suggesting otherwise - ie, that Trump is not a racist, etc. - is being deliberately obtuse or willfully blind.

[theflashunc]

It's a perfectly valid argument to make that one cares more about what Trump has delivered on judicial nominees, tax cuts, and a wholesale assault on the federal civil service that you can look past the racism, sexism, and general air of cruelty the entire administration projects.

But then that puts to the sword any claims about moral authority, superiority, or any sense of integrity about politics or our political system. It makes anyone making that argument an amoral jackal and those who support him for all the former but hate all the latter know this.

It's why you won't get any defenses to it. The cruelty, at the end of the day, is the point of the whole thing.

[Colinmclelland]

snip.... tax cuts...

Another thing I don’t understand. I know that funding day to day expenses from debt is not sustainable. Can’t see why that should be different for a country.

America is spending more than it earns.

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Why would you cut taxes? I know the argument that by cutting tax rates, in theory, the unleashed growth would actually increase tax takings. But yeah nah, that hasn’t happened. The US still spends more than it earns, so why cut earnings?

Also, if Trump is economically awesome but he can only serve one more term and America already can’t pay its bills, what’s the plan once the Trump awesomeness is absent from the economy? Super low interest rates and deficit doesn’t leave a lot to fight a downturn...maybe this time it’s different

[guido]

Another thing I don’t understand. I know that funding day to day expenses from debt is not sustainable. Can’t see why that should be different for a country.

America is spending more than it earns.

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Why would you cut taxes? I know the argument that by cutting tax rates, in theory, the unleashed growth would actually increase tax takings. But yeah nah, that hasn’t happened. The US still spends more than it earns, so why cut earnings?

Also, if Trump is economically awesome but he can only serve one more term and America already can’t pay its bills, what’s the plan once the Trump awesomeness is absent from the economy? Super low interest rates and deficit doesn’t leave a lot to fight a downturn...maybe this time it’s different

Remarkable isn't it? After eight years of screaming about the debt while blocking all social programs and stimulus it is suddenly fine to give huge tax cuts to the rich. Who'd have thunk it????

[Corso]

but if it was brought up, im not one to stay quiet as can be seen here, so i guess i would ask that person why they think Trump is the right person for the job.

I've stated why many times in the past: Because he wasn't Hillary. I dislike her as much as you dislike the President. Is that simple enough for you?

And if the Democrats or 3rd party can't put a candidate who I can get behind, I'll vote with my party.

So is supporting your party wrong? Before he was President, Obama never voted across the aisle once. Not once. Does it sound like some here have ever voted for a Republican? They are free to vote the way they wants and although I may not fully understand it, I'll respect it.

So as the Dems have banded together to "get" Trump from day one, Republicans have rallied in support. It's not a difficult concept to accept. Look at the impeachment vote.

Voting for any candidate is NOT a statement that you are in agreement with everything he or she may have done in their past. It's like saying voting for Bill Clinton is saying you also agree with being a serial cheater and (accused) rapist. It's saying folks who voted for Warren in my state, agree that lying about your minority status is "ok" to get ahead.

Sounds silly, correct?

[caleb]

Why would you cut taxes?

It's sort of an application of modern monetary theory in which goosing the wealth of the investor class is taken as the public good.

Make sense?

No?

I'll try again.

[guido]

It's saying folks who voted for Warren in my state, agree that lying about your minority status is "ok" to get ahead.

Trump has 15,000 lies that you are quite happy to ignore but get apoplectic over a single statement by Warren.

Hmmmm...

[King Of Dirk]

During the winter of 1914, German, British and French troops in Flanders stopped shooting for a little while around Christmas. Soliders exchanged chocolates, cognac, coffee, cigarettes, and even engaged in football games.

For Pete's sake, people, give it a rest for a few hours, huh?


May the god of your choice bless you. If your choice is "none," may fortune smile upon you.