snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Soapbox Derby

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 01 June 2018, 06:15 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Credence View Post
Can you direct me to an article where conservatives are being told to listen more to liberals, or that the attitudes of conservatives lead to more liberals?
Ann Coulter has a book titled How to Talk to a Liberal: (If You Must).
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01 June 2018, 06:32 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 8,958
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crocoduck_hunter View Post
I think we've been in the equivalency zone the whole time.



Then who on the right is actually standing up and opposing Trump? Where's the major pushback against him? Who's actually willing to speak truth to power when he attacks the FBI or talks about the millions of illegal votes for Hillary or Obama's birth certificate?
From what I read there are many intelligent people on the right opposing Trump. Certainly I read many articles written by people who claim they are on the right of the political spectrum and they are very critical of Trump and the decisions coming out of the WH.

That aside whenever I hear someone say "who on the right is opposing Trump" it always reminds me of what happens whenever there is a terrorist attack and people say "why aren't Muslims standing up and denouncing terrorism" and immediately the response comes "why should they have to?" In other words people may not always be denouncing everything Trump does but that shouldn't be taken to mean they agree with him.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01 June 2018, 06:48 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 12,235
Default

Except that Trump is the person that conservatives picked as their leader.

And as I said before, the only prominent Republican lawmakers willing to speak out against him only did so after announcing they weren't going to run for reelection. Even John McCain and Lindsey Graham, two of his most outspoken critics among Republicans, still voted yes after saying no.

And that's not even touching on his personal behavior toward women.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01 June 2018, 07:07 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 8,958
Default

I'm a little confused. Sometimes you seem to be talking generally about conservatives other times you are specifically talking about Republicans in positions of political power. The one is not the other.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01 June 2018, 07:59 PM
St. Alia St. Alia is offline
 
Join Date: 06 October 2010
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 848
Default

I'm not Crocoduck, but here is how I would parse it.
All conservatives aren't all Republicans, but the majority of them voted for Trump even if they were Libertarian/libertarian or any other conservative party they might call themselves.

And the Republicans in power are the ones who have the ability and platform to take on the abhorrent acts coming from the administration and they aren't doing so. And I believe the support for them by their constituents are still high even without them acting. Their constituents would be conservatives, even if they aren't necessarily Republicans.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01 June 2018, 08:06 PM
Mouse's Avatar
Mouse Mouse is offline
 
Join Date: 10 July 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,205
Icon02

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Winston O'Boogie View Post
As much as I loathe the current occupant, I must take issue with this part of your statement. His platform did not center around the idea that certain people aren't fully human, it centered around the idea that certain people aren't fully American, and thus aren't deserving of basic rights.
Your wording is probably more accurate, even if part of me still quibbles about it a little. Don’t forget his views regarding Syrian refugees and Puerto Ricans, along with his “shithole countries” remarks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachlife! View Post
As an example, I rarely see anyone on these boards make broad negative statements about all the liberals like those made about conservatives in this thread. That does not mean that such things are predominantly said by liberals.
The “Not All Conservatives!” argument that keeps coming up in this thread, feels like specious reasoning. I am reminded of the #NotAllMen dodge that rose up in response to #YesAllWomen tag.

Thing is, the women who started the original tag, weren’t saying that each and every guy is a perpetrator of violence or harassment towards women. They were merely pointing out that all women had been victimized either directly or indirectly by sexism. Those who felt a need to leap into the fray with #NotAllMen should really ask themselves that if the shoe doesn’t fit, why are they so offended by this tag? If they, personally, have never wronged women and they don’t have any sexist attitudes towards them, then they should be saddened by the stories they’re hearing, angered by what some of their fellow men have done, but not personally offended.

The plain and simple truth is that enough women have been the victims of sexism and the vast majority of the perpetrators are, like it or not, are men.

My response is something similar: Maybe not each and every individual Conservative supports Trump’s rancid bigotry and his fascist attitudes, but the problem is that enough of them do. Enough of them support these toxic beliefs and right now, they are dictating the GOP platform as well as national policy and said policy is harming vast swaths of people and will harm many more if they are not stopped. If Conservatives are as horrified by the actions of Trump and of those in their party, if they know that none of the accusations of bigotry do not apply to them, then they would recognize that these accusations do not apply to them and focus on stopping the bigots who are hijacking their party and using it to enact such horrible offenses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
I do think there is a certain point, perhaps related mostly to difference of opinion or logical reasoning and argument, where dialog is not productive. I don't accept the idea that talking about any problem is a productive way to resolve differences or accomplish progress.
That’s about how I feel about talking with a lot of Trump’s supporters or Conservatives. I used to believe that if I used the right facts and presented them in the right manner, then by golly, maybe they’d be willing to listen and might even consider my ideas.

It took me awhile to realize some very painful truths: maybe they already know my facts and don’t care or it’s entirely possible that they don’t know and don’t care. Too many of them have shut themselves in a nice, protective ignorance dome. Maybe I’ll get lucky and be the rock that shatters said dome, but in all likelihood, I won’t. Either way, debating them is a waste of time and energy that can better be deployed elsewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crocoduck_hunter View Post
This is not an argument about opinions. What's the middle ground that I'm supposed to aim for? That they'll only torture me until I'm halfway ready to confess? That they'll agree to only take some of the children? Why is it that so many "you've got to talk with them" statements are aimed at liberals and not conservatives?
.
I will freely admit that as a White cisgender woman, I am not facing the dangers that you and other people are. But that certainly doesn’t mean that I do not know or care about what Trump’s toxic beliefs are doing to others, because as a general view, if you only care about bad things when they directly affect you as a person, you’re kind of an asshole. In any case, even if it initially just indirectly affects me, it will in time, come to directly affect me.

Lest we forget, regarding this whole “We should talk to Conservatives/Trump supporters” meme is that currently doing so, would basically mean debating the pros and cons of stripping various peoples of the rights due to them as citizens and human beings. Maybe there are issues that we can and should debate about, but human rights aren’t one of them. In fact, debating said issue would almost lend credence and justification to the idea, suggesting that human rights are expendable, something that should be up for debate. Sometimes there’s no shades of grey on an issue, just right and wrong, and debating the issue, acting as though these are merely alternative points of view, which we may agree or disagree on, is a monstrous, horrible crime, which I won’t have any part of.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01 June 2018, 08:16 PM
E. Q. Taft's Avatar
E. Q. Taft E. Q. Taft is offline
 
Join Date: 30 July 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 13,958
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachlife! View Post
Back when my opinions changed there were so many people, Silas Sparkhammer comes readily to mind, who would reply to even the most venomous post with kindness and an attempt to understand where the other person was coming from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicgeek View Post
I miss Silas... he was definitely a moderating voice of reason in many debates.
I've tried to noodge him back here a few times, but towards the end of his run here, he had some confrontations he remembers as being very unpleasant (I think primarily involving one or two individuals who I don't think are posting here any longer) and he's just not able to get past the emotions they caused him. (This, despite the fact that when he describes some of the debates in forums that he does post in, they sound much worse than anything I've seen here in quite some time...) Anyway, I've passed along your compliments; I hope they bring him some cheer.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01 June 2018, 08:20 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 12,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by St. Alia View Post
I'm not Crocoduck, but here is how I would parse it.
All conservatives aren't all Republicans, but the majority of them voted for Trump even if they were Libertarian/libertarian or any other conservative party they might call themselves.

And the Republicans in power are the ones who have the ability and platform to take on the abhorrent acts coming from the administration and they aren't doing so. And I believe the support for them by their constituents are still high even without them acting. Their constituents would be conservatives, even if they aren't necessarily Republicans.
Thank you, that sums up what I was trying to say quite well.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01 June 2018, 08:27 PM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 28,372
Jolly Roger

Quote:
Originally Posted by E. Q. Taft View Post
I've tried to noodge him back here a few times, but towards the end of his run here, he had some confrontations he remembers as being very unpleasant (I think primarily involving one or two individuals who I don't think are posting here any longer) and he's just not able to get past the emotions they caused him. (This, despite the fact that when he describes some of the debates in forums that he does post in, they sound much worse than anything I've seen here in quite some time...) Anyway, I've passed along your compliments; I hope they bring him some cheer.
Thank you, I hope so too. I understand and respect his decision to stay away, but he is missed. He made the boards a better, more friendly place.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01 June 2018, 08:34 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 11,905
Default

Why does "listen to" mean "debate" or become about convincing or changing your position, or seeking middle ground?

Can you imagine starting out a conversation by saying, "I know my position and I think I know your position on this issue. We aren't going to change each other's minds. But I want to know more about how you got there, and how you feel about it, and what your perspective is."

What risk does that conversation pose?

Also, crocoduck hunter, why do you think this thread has been about equivalency all along? I don't understand -- can you clarify why, or what that is based on?
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 01 June 2018, 09:03 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by St. Alia View Post
All conservatives aren't all Republicans, but the majority of them voted for Trump even if they were Libertarian/libertarian or any other conservative party they might call themselves.
Not necessarily. By pure numbers, the votes for Trump equal 51.8% of all people in the US that self-identified as conservative. But that assumes that every single vote for Trump was from someone who self identified as conservative, which was probably not the case. And even if that is the case, making assumptions about 48.2% of a group based on the actions of the rest is sketchy at best.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01 June 2018, 09:03 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 12,235
Default

That was mostly me being overly snarky, but I feel like whenever this subject comes up, there's too much made of attempting to be "fair" by treating both sides as if their positions were completely equivalent and symmetrical.

Media coverage of white supremacist rallies act like they're no different than Black Lives Matter protests. Samantha Bee uses a word she shouldn't have to call attention to something Ivanka Trump was doing and it gets more media attention than the original act.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01 June 2018, 09:05 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 12,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
Not necessarily. By pure numbers, the votes for Trump equal 51.8% of all people in the US that self-identified as conservative. But that assumes that every single vote for Trump was from someone who self identified as conservative, which was probably not the case. And even if that is the case, making assumptions about 48.2% of a group based on the actions of the rest is sketchy at best.
I was basing that off current Gallop polls of Trump's approval ratings rather than the vote from 1 1/2 years ago.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01 June 2018, 09:19 PM
E. Q. Taft's Avatar
E. Q. Taft E. Q. Taft is offline
 
Join Date: 30 July 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 13,958
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erwins View Post
Can you imagine starting out a conversation by saying, "I know my position and I think I know your position on this issue. We aren't going to change each other's minds. But I want to know more about how you got there, and how you feel about it, and what your perspective is."

What risk does that conversation pose?
I think some people could do that -- bur for a lot of people, it might be a prelude to trying to debate after all. "Once I know how you got there, I might be able to come up with a way to change your mind." Certainly one of my main motivations in wanting to understand Trump voters is to try to figure out how to persuade them that voting for him is not actually in their best interest.

It is, in any case, hard for many of us to hear people saying something that you know, or strongly feel, is wrong, without wanting to at least try to correct them. It takes practice to become a good interviewer.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01 June 2018, 09:33 PM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 28,372
Default

I find in those situations, it helps to probe their 'wrong' beliefs. Often people express absolutes without thinking them through or as shorthand for less extreme beliefs.

Someone might say 'we should ban all straws', but when you ask them 'what about reusable straws or for people on the hospital who can't drink any other way', they will likely demure and come around to a more refined point. One, that you might find common ground on.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01 June 2018, 09:46 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,535
Default

But doesn't that turn it into a debate (or similar)? The idea was to just listen if I understand erwins correctly.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01 June 2018, 10:02 PM
Steve Steve is offline
 
Join Date: 19 October 2002
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,784
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crocoduck_hunter View Post
Then who on the right is actually standing up and opposing Trump?
Have you read conservatives like Max Boot, William Kristol, Charles Murray or (to a lesser extent) Jonah Goldberg? Those are just the ones off the top of my head who've written pieces denouncing Trump.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01 June 2018, 10:03 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 8,958
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
But doesn't that turn it into a debate (or similar)? The idea was to just listen if I understand erwins correctly.
What I have found happens for me in real life (as opposed to fake life on the Internet ) is you end up in a conversation. I wouldn't call it a debate. Of course both participants have to have some willingness to have a conversation - or to have an argument turn into a conversation but it can happen. I still remember getting into an argument with a Separatist back when I lived in Montreal and what began as a somewhat heated exchange did turn into a reasonable conversation where we found some common ground and even had a few laughs.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01 June 2018, 10:09 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 11,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crocoduck_hunter View Post
That was mostly me being overly snarky, but I feel like whenever this subject comes up, there's too much made of attempting to be "fair" by treating both sides as if their positions were completely equivalent and symmetrical.

Media coverage of white supremacist rallies act like they're no different than Black Lives Matter protests. Samantha Bee uses a word she shouldn't have to call attention to something Ivanka Trump was doing and it gets more media attention than the original act.
I can tell you that that is not my intent at all. I started off talking about trying to talk to people whose beliefs I find repugnant. I actually don't think it is at all symmetrical. It's true that the other side isn't talking about listening, and won't do it as much. But I still think we have more to gain by doing it. Again, not to compromise or settle on middle ground. I think hearing and understanding will benefit us, directly and indirectly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachlife! View Post
I find in those situations, it helps to probe their 'wrong' beliefs. Often people express absolutes without thinking them through or as shorthand for less extreme beliefs.

Someone might say 'we should ban all straws', but when you ask them 'what about reusable straws or for people on the hospital who can't drink any other way', they will likely demure and come around to a more refined point. One, that you might find common ground on.
I definitely think it can wind up moving a person toward your position, because exploring their beliefs can sometimes (not always by any stretch) lead a person to see their own inconsistencies or weak points. But having that as a goal can probably undermine the process.

Even when it doesn't cause a person to reevaluate their beliefs, though, I think I've gained something. Even if I walk away knowing that that person is exactly as much as, or even more of an asshat than they sounded like. Maybe I walk away knowing I never want to talk to them again, or that they sound dangerous, and I can warn others about them.

And if the conversation is public, sometimes getting someone to elaborate on their beliefs and where they might come from, or where they might lead, can make other people realize they don't agree with that person after all, or don't want to be associated with them.

I might also walk away knowing what motivates that person, which is really useful information for lots of reasons that don't involve giving ground on my own positions.

And yes, sometimes I might walk away thinking about something from a different perspective, or with a different understanding. But I'm not afraid of that happening, and it would be a bad reason to avoid listening.

And if I've done a good job of listening, maybe the other person goes away feeling heard and understood, which can also benefit me and my side. And maybe on that occasion or another they reciprocate and ask me about what I think -- but that is not my goal going in.

Last edited by erwins; 01 June 2018 at 10:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 01 June 2018, 10:54 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 12,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Have you read conservatives like Max Boot, William Kristol, Charles Murray or (to a lesser extent) Jonah Goldberg? Those are just the ones off the top of my head who've written pieces denouncing Trump.
Max Boot is a significant outlier who disagrees with the Republican Party's primary platforms on most things except taxes.

It's nice that there are a few op-ed writers who oppose Trump but none of them are serious movers and shakers in the Republican Party. There still aren't any serious attempts to reign him in or censure him in any meaningful way.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Evacuation orders issued for low levels of Oroville WildaBeast Crash and Burn 18 21 March 2017 03:13 AM
Do you call people by name when you talk to them? quink SLC 23 21 September 2014 07:19 PM
How low can my thyroid levels go? DawnStorm The Doctor Is In 9 11 July 2014 01:48 PM
Reading is fundamental snopes We've Got Mail 6 15 August 2013 03:39 PM
Banned TED Talk: "Rich people don't create jobs" Saint James Soapbox Derby 16 03 April 2013 04:10 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.