"Would you like soup or salad?"It's more like
It's more likeMore like a) a solid turd log sandwich, or b) a soup of diarrhea, vomit and blood.
Waiter: "Welcome to our fine dining establishment. We have two options on the menu today: A) basic ham sandwich and B) roast pig shit garnished with arsenic and ground glass. Which do you want?"
Centrist customer: "sweats in indecision".
It's more likeWhat about the people who don't eat pigs for religious, health, or ethical reasons? Are they just supposed to shut up and enjoy it or...?
Waiter: "Welcome to our fine dining establishment. We have two options on the menu today: A) basic ham sandwich and B) roast pig shit garnished with arsenic and ground glass. Which do you want?"
Centrist customer: "sweats in indecision".
It doesnt make sense to me. Ive always been of the belief that true intelligence is the ability to step out of ones box and being able to understand another persons perspective you dont have to agree with it, but you can at least make an attempt to understand it by placing yourself in their shoes.
It's not difficult to understand where Republicans are coming from. The issue is that what they want is simply unacceptable, scapegoating of minorities for political gain and the subordination of women being just two items on a very long list, all so that the filthy rich can get marginally richer at everyone else's expense.
Not all of them. You gotta talk to them about the nuance if you want that slightly right leaning person to eventually switch over to slightly left and vote accordingly.Yes, all of them, because everyone that votes for Republicans is voting for subordination of women etc.
Refusing to have the dialogue or pigeonholing them into a box with the worst of the worst only widens the divide. It doesnt lead to any meaningful change.
Being radical in anything isnt very beneficial and that goes for everything including politics. Everything is better with nuance for moderation.Imagine this argument for historical certain issues.
Yes, all of them, because everyone that votes for Republicans is voting for subordination of women etc.
More like a) a solid turd log sandwich, or b) a soup of diarrhea, vomit and blood.Is it understandable when that person doesn't go to the restaurant, has never been to the restaurant, and demonstrated repeatedly that they don't actually know what's on the restaurant's menu?
While yes, one is considerably worse than the other, and some people might even feel desperate enough to take A as the less bad option, both options are still shit, one just goes beyond merely shit. And it's very understandable why a lot of people wouldn't want to eat either, even in a desperate situation.
Imagine this argument for historical certain issues.
Civil rights for Black people? Or total segregation?
Women's voting rights?
Gay marriage?
Stero: Everything in moderation.
More like a) a solid turd log sandwich, or b) a soup of diarrhea, vomit and blood.No, it is not understandable to want to endanger millions of lives because you're throwing a tantrum about how the not perfect food isn't that much better than the poison that will be force fed to an entire country if you make the sociopathic choice.
While yes, one is considerably worse than the other, and some people might even feel desperate enough to take A as the less bad option, both options are still shit, one just goes beyond merely shit. And it's very understandable why a lot of people wouldn't want to eat either, even in a desperate situation.
You really need to open a fucking history book.he needs to quit combat sports.
The wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron"dril, the god
No, it is not understandable to want to endanger millions of lives because you're throwing a tantrum about how the not perfect food isn't that much better than the poison that will be force fed to an entire country if you make the sociopathic choice.
More like a) a solid turd log sandwich, or b) a soup of diarrhea, vomit and blood.Yes, weve all seen South Park.
While yes, one is considerably worse than the other, and some people might even feel desperate enough to take A as the less bad option, both options are still shit, one just goes beyond merely shit. And it's very understandable why a lot of people wouldn't want to eat either, even in a desperate situation.
Once you get extreme enough it is "both sides". There are people here who want to take away the right for republicans to vote.
If one side just completely insulted and harassed the other without making any real attempt to legitimately show them the error of their ways, then change wouldnt have happened, or at least not at rate that it did.
Republicans have been all in on total partisan warfare at least since Gingrich made it official in 1994. That's 30 fucking years ago. How much longer is everyone else supposed to put up with their crap?
You dont. You continue the dialogue and slowly bring people over the line, like by little, but by bit.Is that what happened?
It was working. Thats how Obama beat Bush, but then we just got complacent and started screaming at the other side again. That caused people to hop back over the line. Then Trump got elected.
It was working. Thats how Obama beat Bush, but then we just got complacent and started screaming at the other side again. That caused people to hop back over the line. Then Trump got elected.
We were able to conquer those issues by having that dialogue. In all if those cases, being able to communicate with the entirety of the human race allowed us to gain enough support to fix those issues, or at least get in the right path to fixing those atrocities.This is woefully ignorant as to what actually happened. Slavery didn't end because of dialogue and neither was it the reason black people gained civil rights.
If one side just completely insulted and harassed the other without making any real attempt to legitimately show them the error of their ways, then change wouldnt have happened, or at least not at rate that it did.
You dont want to motivate the opposition to just dig in their heels.
"Why can't you just compromise with the people who don't want you to be alive?"well yeah going both sides sounds ridiculous when you think one side is Saturday Morning Cartoon Evil
well yeah going both sides sounds ridiculous when you think one side is Saturday Morning Cartoon EvilThen why do I see a whole bunch of Disney villains (R) in real life? Today gave us another perfect example of this, with Republicans on the supreme court falling all over themselves to find a way for Trump to have magic dictator powers, and Trump's lawyers being even worse shitbags.
life isn't a Disney movie
This is woefully ignorant as to what actually happened. Slavery didn't end because of dialogue and neither was it the reason black people gained civil rights.Shhhh, no, it was all dialogue, please ignore the huge war in the 1860s
Is that what happened?
"Would you like soup or salad?"I get Both Sides!
This is woefully ignorant as to what actually happened. Slavery didn't end because of dialogue and neither was it the reason black people gained civil rights.
One side wants free health care and the other side wants to take healthcare away. They are the same.
They arent the same, and thats the point. You need to convince the anti-healthcare people to change their minds and become pro-healthcare people
They arent the same, and thats the point. You need to convince the anti-healthcare people to change their minds and become pro-healthcare peopleI know.
The war was started via a dialogue, and the end of the war was resolved via a dialogue and how the country moved forward from that point on required a lot of dialogue.Bro, the only reason the South was willing to talk was due to losing the war. Had the North simply continued to talk without any escalation then nothing would've changed. Same with the Civil Rights movement. So you don't know what you're talking about.
Besides in this day and age do we really prefer war over diplomacy?
Bro, the only reason the South was willing to talk was due to losing the war. Had the North simply continued to talk without any escalation then nothing would've changed. Same with the Civil Rights movement. So you don't know what you're talking about.
or you force them to have healthcare because they don't get to prevent progress
You still need to talk even after the war is over, or else stuff isnt going to take.Regarding the US civil war in particular, the main problem is that after the war, there was way too much meaningless talk, and way too little actual reconstruction. In fact, the Union won the war and lost the peace.
You dont just have a war, win, and then everything changes at the drop of a dime.
You still need to talk even after the war is over, or else stuff isnt going to take.Well of course and body claimed otherwise. But you saying you just need to talk it out is complete bs. And since we're talking about the war, that dialogue didn't even actually solve the issue. Black Americans were still terrorized for decades afterwards. Hell, we have people flying the Confederate flag today.
You dont just have a war, win, and then everything changes at the drop of a dime.
Regarding the US civil war in particular, the main problem is that after the war, there was way too much meaningless talk, and way too little actual reconstruction. In fact, the Union won the war and lost the peace.Exactly! There's no middle ground between those that want true equality/equity and those that don't. Thinking there is comes off as incredibly stupid.
That loss was because too few in the rest of the country had the stomach to do what would have been necessary to prevent resentful ex-Confederates from instituting Jim Crow after the end of military occupation.