Chit-Chat: The Feels

[Lantern7]

*sigh* It looks like empathy is going to be a deterrent to have for the foreseeable future. Also, it turns out I was right about January feeling like a year by itself . . . and we haven’t reached the midway point yet.

I really wish I can get out of Eeyore Mode. 

[peacheslatour]

3 minutes ago, Lantern7 said:

*sigh* It looks like empathy is going to be a deterrent to have for the foreseeable future. Also, it turns out I was right about January feeling like a year by itself . . . and we haven’t reached the midway point yet.

I really wish I can get out of Eeyore Mode. 

And he's not even in office yet. I feel like the world is falling apart.

[Spartan Girl]

Anything can happen in a week. I’m just saying…

[Anela]

5 minutes ago, tres bien said:

Today I read that Governor Abbott (R TX) is sending 135 firefighters to CA he released a heartfelt statement praising the firefighters and sending condolences and prayers to the fire victims. I was touched because he’s usually someone that I believe is awful 

 

That is a surprise. A nice one.

And then we have a douchebag GOP member from my State, saying we should withhold aid, until the state ravaged by wildfires reforms forestry management. 

[EtheltoTillie]

On 1/10/2025 at 9:22 AM, fastiller said:

Well now: Idaho Republicans file resolution to repeal marriage equality

They're gonna come for Loving and Griswold too.

Also birthright citizenship.  They will look to have SCOTUS interpret the constitutional provision to disallow it.  The way they interpreted the Second Amendment. 

Edited Yest. at 12:13 AM by EtheltoTillie

[bluegirl147]

2 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

Anything can happen in a week. I’m just saying…

Yeah but then we would get Vance.  Pick your poison I guess.

1 minute ago, Anela said:

That is a surprise. A nice one.

And then we have a douchebag GOP member from my State, saying we should withhold aid, until the state ravaged by wildfires reforms forestry management. 

Yeah that's what caused this and not climate change that has and will continue to cause extreme weather events.

1 minute ago, Lantern7 said:

As a nation, we aren’t that lucky. All of us would win a nine-figure jackpot than the ship steering away from the iceberg.

The man is offensive to all senses. In addition to his face and voice, I’m guessing he has an off-putting aroma about him, and you’d feel a need to wipe your hand on your pants if you engage him. I don’t see how the “small hands” bit became a thing.

People who have worked for him say he does have a smell.  They think it might have something to do with the orangeness.

[isalicat]

5 hours ago, partofme said:

Is anyone as disgusted as I am by the Laken Riley immigration bill that is likely to pass that allows immigrants who haven’t been charged with a crime to be detained?  Only 9 Democratic senators had the balls to vote against it.  I’ve lived in NJ for about a year now, usually I really miss NY, but I am so proud of both my NJ senators for voting against it, unlike the two useless ones from NY.  

This is NOT true, from what I have read. The point is to detain illegal immigrants that *have* been charged with a crime, which is why most of the Democratic Senators voted for it and a Democratic Senator is a co-sponsor. Whatever you may think of the bill, it is important to get this part correct.

[PRgal]

21 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

My definition of slumming is someone doing something they consider beneath them but is getting something out of it.  A lot of times in relation to dating/sleeping with someone not in their social circle.

I am and always have been working class.  I currently live in a mobile home but I do own the land it sits on.  I am not college educated but have had people assume that I am.  I take pride in that. I have a job now that pays me more than I have ever made but I am still what would be considered low income.  I rely on the ACA for my insurance and fear that next year it will either be made unaffordable or canceled.  I am not someone Republican politicians would ever be interested in talking to.   I don't have any money or inclination to vote for them so I don't even exist in their minds.

That is DEFINITELY not what that person meant when she said what she said!  A lot of people won't understand until they're in that situation.  I have talked about where I went to school here, but I would often feel judged in an IRL situation unless the "vibe" feels right.  What's weird is that I'm neurodivergent, so I usually don't "feel" vibes.  But somehow I can in CERTAIN situations.

Edited Sunday at 11:30 PM by PRgal

[Dimity]

28 minutes ago, tres bien said:

Not one word of thanks to firefighters risking their lives or concern for the families and victims that have lost their lives or homes and everything they owned

This is Trump.  He was the same the first time around, no reason to think he has changed.  Why would he?  He trades on appealing to the worst in people and has no respect for those who serve the public in any capacity and no use for anyone who has lost, well anything - well except him, he has truly suffered.  He'll tell you.

 

Edited Sunday at 11:40 PM by Dimity

[Lantern7]

If we succeed as a nation, it will be in spite of him, not because of him.

[Dimity]

1 hour ago, PRgal said:

I last heard the term 20 years ago.  By "slumming," they mean they don't want to look like they're better off and an easy target.  This usually pertains to road trips.  They'll rent a beat up car, for example.

Calling that slumming is pretty arrogant.  Trying not to look like an easy target is just common sense not slumming.

[Anela]

3 minutes ago, tearknee said:

Regular people are not activists. political discourse in the anglosphere is not usually conducted by those who aren't A) politically active or interested in such and B) tertiary educated.

The Western intelligentsia desperately failing about to convince themselves that they are "of the people" is rather sad

I'm a regular person, and I am an activist. I'm not paid to be one. I've seen college-educated, and some rich (on top of that) people, helping out others who are victims of the fires, that they are also victims of. They haven't lost work, but could have lost their homes, and they consider themselves to all be one massive community. One political streamer was out there with another that I watch, interviewing the firefighters who are usually in jail, but are out there fighting those fires. Right around Christmas, the one guy went with another, to hand out supplies to homeless people, with an organization who does that all the time. 

I think it's "funny" that we were told not to brand all MAGA as being the same, but all leftists are apparently just out-of-touch, awful people who pretend to want to make things better? 

[bluegirl147]

4 minutes ago, tearknee said:

Regular people are not activists. political discourse in the anglosphere is not usually conducted by those who aren't A) politically active or interested in such and B) tertiary educated.

The Western intelligentsia desperately failing about to convince themselves that they are "of the people" is rather sad

So all the people who marched in the Women's marches and all the BLM protests weren't activists?  What about all the anti war protesters from the 60s and 70s? Anyone who takes time to show their displeasure in a public and peaceful way for something that is harmful or offensive I consider an activist.  

[Dimity]

1 minute ago, bluegirl147 said:

What about all the anti war protesters from the 60s and 70s?

Or the March on Washington in 1963.  All a bunch of smug rich intelligentsia?

[Annber03]

32 minutes ago, tearknee said:

The Western intelligentsia desperately failing about to convince themselves that they are "of the people" is rather sad

No more so than Trump trying to act like he totally gets what us average working class people are going through every day. His publicity stunt at a McDonald's recently was pretty fucking ridiculous (and a prime example of phoniness - you know, that thing that's supposedly what turned people off Kamala and which she apparently needs to be raked over the coals for) and an absolute mockery of what people who work jobs like that deal with every day.

And let's not even get into the people on right wing media outlets like Fox News railing about the "coastal elite" and acting like they're totally like us everyday "real Americans" here in middle America...all while they're living their fancy lives and living on...the coasts. 

But sure. It's the leftist intelligensia that's the problem. I'm not denying that there are those on the left who are incredibly condescending and out of touch - there absolutely are. But I really don't think they're the main reason our country is a shithole right now. 

Edited Yest. at 12:23 AM by Annber03

[bluegirl147]

I remember back in tne 80s People magazine did a spread about Donald and Ivana and their Trump Tower apartment.   Pretty much everything was covered in gold.   Knowing he is never as rich as he claims it was probably gold plating.  How anyone can think he is a man of the people is beyond me.

[tres bien]

This evening President Zelensky announced that 150 Ukrainian firefighters are being sent to CA. This is an enormous gesture from a war torn country 

In MAGA sucks news. Oregon sent 370 firefighters to CA but this evidently pissed off MAGA because they started spreading rumors on X that the firefighters were stopped at the CA broader and forced to have their vehicles pass emission and smog tests delaying them or turning them away. The Oregon State Fire Marshall had to put out a lengthy statement debunking these rumors 

These people can’t stop. They attacked FEMA after Hurricane Helene and now find some kind of pleasure from other people’s horror 

[PRgal]

What I like about Primetimer is how we all come from different walks of life.  And we somehow get along. Pretty cool, if you ask me! 

[Annber03]

4 minutes ago, tres bien said:

This evening President Zelensky announced that 150 Ukrainian firefighters are being sent to CA. This is an enormous gesture from a war torn country 

Wow. That's really cool. Good on them. 

7 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

I remember back in tne 80s People magazine did a spread about Donald and Ivana and their Trump Tower apartment.   Pretty much everything was covered in gold.   Knowing he is never as rich as he claims it was probably gold plating.  How anyone can think he is a man of the people is beyond me.

I'm just so sick and tired of people dumping on the left and acting like we're the problem here and the reason our country or the world at large is falling apart. We're not the ones with the power right now, it's right wingers running rampant across the wordl. When is anyone going to start critiquing their style of doing things, and start questioning the sincerity of their connections to voters, and how sincere they are about the policies they're putting forth, and how they're using people's valid frustrations and stresses about various issues to their own benefit and taking advantage of said frustrations and playing culture war politics while simultaneously screwing people over and taking away their human and civil rights in the process?

That's the conversation I want to be having .

[kittykat]

It's not for lack of trying.  We've tried oh lordy we have tried.  We come at them with stats and consequences of the GOPs actions.  And while...some of them will listen most of them do not.  They don't care or they'll mentally double twist themselves into their echo chamber's buzz arguments.  

Try to talk to them about Jan 6 and suddenly it wasn't as bad as people made it out to be.  Or the usual deflect, wHaT aBoUt BLM rioters!!!  One group is protesting a systemically racist problem that has truckloads of proof behind it.  The other was a group of proud boys who cried when they didn't get their way.

[bluegirl147]

Much like an addict has to want to get clean Trump supporters have to want to believe the truth.  I've read stories about people who have family members who for whatever reason managed to stop watching/listening to right wing media and once that happened their devotion to Trump began to wane.  That endless supply of drugs right wing lies has a lot to do with the cult of Trump lasting as long as it has.

[PRgal]

Speaking of BLM, an I GLAD the whole diversity committee meetings thing isn't as active anymore.  You won't BELIEVE how much gaslighting I faced.  I suppose it felt worse because it was all done virtually (gee, THANKS A LOT pandemic!!), but it's one reason why I had to leave that group.  It was taking a toll on my mental health.  

[Blergh]

Call it looking on the bright/spiritual side or just something I think needs to be put out (and I'm NOT trying to proselytize or convert anyone):

However, for those upset that #45 is having no legal consequences for his actions, (IF one  believes in the next world): remember that if #45 goes to his grave completely unrepentant and unremorseful over his heinous villainous actions (especially those that have caused harm to others), he WILL have eternal consequences that would make whatever worldly punishments might have been meted a comparative walk in the park.

Just something to keep in mind. ..

[Kemper]

7 hours ago, PRgal said:

My husband thinks Warren looks like the librarian who is always trying to shush kids, even those who are using their "library voices."

My husband used to say that I got paid to "hush" people. 🥰

[anony.miss]

7 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

I love Elizabeth Warren. 

Me, too. She's smart as a whip and there's no fronting with her - and she has a sense of humor   - love this backstage SNL moment:

Edited Yest. at 02:10 AM by anony.miss

[Kemper]

2 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

So all the people who marched in the Women's marches and all the BLM protests weren't activists?  What about all the anti war protesters from the 60s and 70s? Anyone who takes time to show their displeasure in a public and peaceful way for something that is harmful or offensive I consider an activist.  

Thank you!  I have done/experienced most all of those things; and until now, never considered myself or friends as activists. Now maybe I can impress The Grands. (truthfully ... at times it was a good time. Won't tell that to The Grands)

[annzeepark914]

12 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

The media is calling it US expansion.  Can they ever accurately describe what Trump is doing?

Are they calling what Putin is doing to Ukraine, "Russian expansion"? This is truly getting to be surreal, here in the USA .

[Lantern7]

Going to bed, checking my calendar, just confirmed that the inauguration will be held on MLK Day.

The universe hates us. I don’t think we’re truly in the darkest possible timeline, but we moved past grey ages ago.

Idea for a counterrevolution: SAFI. Save America From Itself.

[Yeah No]

13 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

Bernie always came across as an angry old man.  The type who would yell at you to get off his lawn.  But Warren is like a kind caring teacher who wants us all to learn what she is teaching so not only do we pass her class but we take what we have learned and go out and make the world a better place.

Bernie always reminded me of Eddie Murphy's imitation of an old Jewish man. I never cared for him or Elizabeth Warren as presidential candidates but I like them both as people. I actually preferred either Hillary or Kamala as presidential candidates.

 

 

[Yeah No]

12 hours ago, PRgal said:

If you tax the very wealthy, what would your definition be?  Top 1% in the US is under $1M/year income, according to this chart from the Chicago Booth Review (further investigation tells me it's around $750K/year if you're talking about income.  Top 1% for net worth is something entirely different.  Research online says it's in the low eight figures).  That, to me, is a notch or two above "the millionaire next door."  These people will still have budgets to deal with, especially if they have young children.  I get that dealing with expensive camps (for example) is a "nice to have" and a "privilege" but to these families, it's a matter of enrichment.  And then there are the usual childcare, mortgages, groceries that a lot of other people have to deal with.  Especially you're talking about the top 1% INCOME.  It's really not as much as you think.  

Top 1% income in Canada is much lower, at $579,100 (2021) Canadian, according to Statistics Canada for anyone who wants to know.  And stuff up here can be more expensive.  Oh well, at least our healthcare is (mostly) taken care of by the government.

As has pretty much been said, I think the income level that people are talking about taxing more is really more the top .5% as in the top half of one percent, especially the billionaires. These are the people that not only are filthy rich but find every way to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

I think my husband's boss is one of those "secret" billionaires. I think he has hidden money in offshore accounts and split up in ways not traceable to him alone. I know there is an amount of guilt there, which is why he pays my husband well for what he does and gives us generous gifts. I also know he donates a lot of money to charities. But even so I still don't think people in that category pay enough in taxes. I read something once to the effect that if all the billionaires in the US split up even a fraction of their money to give an equal amount to every American citizen, we would all be rich and they would not effectively feel any pain.

12 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

Why is it poor people are always told to live within their means but you never hear rich people told that. 

I don't have a problem with rich people.   I have a problem with super rich people continuing to get richer at the expense of everyone else.  Bezos and the Walton family got super rich because so many other businesses went under. Back in the day they would have been called robber barons.

YES, and I even think the income disparity is worse today than in the time of the robber barons and billionaires now wield more power overall. If you look at some of this stuff closely, by comparison the robber barons weren't as bad. Maybe they exploited workers more but even that's arguable in some cases.

[Yeah No]

10 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

Red Lobster filing for bankruptcy wasn't because of unlimited shrimp although that didn't help.  A private equity firm bought Red Lobster and with that the real estate the restaurants sat on.   They started charging them outrageous rents.  The greed is becoming unstainable for all the rest of us.

Don't get me started on how the private equity firms have ruined retail America and chain restaurants too. We need government to step in and stop this from happening but I am told that even though we supposedly have laws against it, somehow no one is enforcing them. The big question is WHY??

Meanwhile the general public is uninformed about what's happening and why. Everyone thinks the internet is putting brick and mortar out of business. That's not true in most cases. Businesses that are looking for ways to become more healthy fall prey to these firms that promise to bring them into better financial shape, then run up debt, then declare bankruptcy and pocket the profits. And GET AWAY WITH IT. Red Lobster fell for it and that's the only reason they went bankrupt. It wasn't "endless shrimp" like people said. Elizabeth Warren told it like it is on social media. Here is her quote:

https://www.facebook.com/ElizabethWarren/posts/dont-blame-it-on-the-endless-shrimprecently-red-lobster-declared-bankruptcy-and-/1012675263560305/

Thankfully, Red Lobster is now being run by a young CEO that is promising to turn it around and bring it out of bankruptcy. And I wish him the best. But that won't save the many other retail stores that weren't saved. There are many of them that have gone under in just this way as Warren discusses. Some of my favorites and mostly stores that catered to middle and lower classes.

[tearknee]

8 hours ago, Anela said:

I'm a regular person, and I am an activist. I'm not paid to be one. I've seen college-educated, and some rich (on top of that) people, helping out others who are victims of the fires, that they are also victims of. They haven't lost work, but could have lost their homes, and they consider themselves to all be one massive community. One political streamer was out there with another that I watch, interviewing the firefighters who are usually in jail, but are out there fighting those fires. Right around Christmas, the one guy went with another, to hand out supplies to homeless people, with an organization who does that all the time. 

I think it's "funny" that we were told not to brand all MAGA as being the same, but all leftists are apparently just out-of-touch, awful people who pretend to want to make things better? 

Again, most people aren't activists, and thus regular people are not like you (or indeed, Ann Coulter et al over on the far right).

I dislike both those who say "Free, free, Palestine!" (like their parents' generation with regard to the reality of the DRV ("North Vietnam"), they don't seem to give a shit what happens to the Palestinian people in an actual Palestinian state as long as there is no war) and their direct counterparts on the far right who are looking to "drill baby, drill" and "let's bomb something -- just lemme launch one!".

[Soapy Goddess]

19 hours ago, Annber03 said:

But Trump can be phony as hell and that's perfectly okay? 

Also, I mean, she lost an election and gets to join the rest of us in watching our country march straight towards authoriatiran rule. Prior to that she was more likely to laugh because, y'know, she was all hopeful and excited about the potential fturure in which our country elected our first woman as president and where we might be able to push back on all the insane shit the right keeps trying to make policy. 

Also, she needed to put on the happy face on the campaign trail because if she went around looking all dour all the time, she'd get criticized for that. 

Like, really, of all the things one could critique about her, her laugh shouldn't even be on the list. And the fact that people are more bothered by her laugh than they are about all the insane shit Trump's said and done, and all the obvious phoniness he's exhibited- again, it just proves how dumb this country is and how fucked up its priorities are. It's a laugh.  Get over it. 

Her laugh wasn't just a chuckle, it was an out and out cackle. And per your description about the possibility of being first female president, then IMO that would be "cocky"...and nobody likes a cocky cackle.

She didn't have to look dour or never laugh either. The problem was that she laughed every single time no matter what the subject! Life, in general, isn't THAT funny every single minute of the day.

You all wonder what people didn't like about her. I give you all an example, and once again, it's unacceptable. So then how about we just say we didn't like the color of her hair. Better?

[annzeepark914]

KH may not have been popular, she has a laugh that irritates some folks...but she sure as hell wouldn't be threatening to take over countries and she wouldn't be threatening to cut off aid to a state (as punishment) for its apocalyptic fire recovery.

[tres bien]

In all seriousness how long are we gonna hammer on about this 

[Anela]

4 hours ago, tearknee said:

Again, most people aren't activists, and thus regular people are not like you (or indeed, Ann Coulter et al over on the far right).

I dislike both those who say "Free, free, Palestine!" (like their parents' generation with regard to the reality of the DRV ("North Vietnam"), they don't seem to give a shit what happens to the Palestinian people in an actual Palestinian state as long as there is no war) and their direct counterparts on the far right who are looking to "drill baby, drill" and "let's bomb something -- just lemme launch one!".

I said that as someone who thinks we’re all activists, if we’ve attended marches, signed petitions, called our representatives about bills, etc.  we are all activists.  Please don’t compare me to Ann Coulter, in any capacity.  I am a regular person.  
 

Why are we all feeling broken? Raw power meets raw milk, the rise of masculine energy, the costs of millenial pink and the coming of the second Trump era

Edited Yest. at 01:12 PM by Anela

[Annber03]

4 hours ago, Soapy Goddess said:

Her laugh wasn't just a chuckle, it was an out and out cackle. And per your description about the possibility of being first female president, then IMO that would be "cocky"...and nobody likes a cocky cackle.

She didn't have to look dour or never laugh either. The problem was that she laughed every single time no matter what the subject! Life, in general, isn't THAT funny every single minute of the day.

You all wonder what people didn't like about her. I give you all an example, and once again, it's unacceptable. So then how about we just say we didn't like the color of her hair. Better?

It's unacceptable because it's a ridiculous reason not to vote for or like someone. Especially not when the alternative is a guy who literally tried to violently overthrow a democratic election and who is literally THE definition of phoniness. 

It's a freaking laugh. It should not have been that big a deal, and anyone who was more bothered by that than they were anything Trump said and did needs to wise the hell up and get over themselves. People's rights are at stake and someone's all bent out of shape over a candidate's laugh? Please. 

Edited Yest. at 01:27 PM by Annber03

[tearknee]

19 minutes ago, Anela said:

I said that as someone who thinks we’re all activists, if we’ve attended marches, signed petitions, called our representatives about bills, etc.

[..]

I am a regular person.
 

An average person doesn't do any of those things because most people are not interested in politics, political discourse or poli-social issues.

every two years, they get into a booth and that's all.

 

Edited Yest. at 01:31 PM by tearknee

[Dimity]

12 hours ago, Kemper said:

Thank you!  I have done/experienced most all of those things; and until now, never considered myself or friends as activists. Now maybe I can impress The Grands. (truthfully ... at times it was a good time. Won't tell that to The Grands)

Same.  My first foray into activism was grade 7 when several friends and I formed a "Girls Lib" club.  Our first order of business was convincing Mother Superior to let girls wear jeans to school.  That may sound trivial but this was the days when there were a ton of rules revolving around what girls could and could not wear and none for the boys.  Hmm, wait, isn't this sounding a lot familiar to what is starting to happen again?

We fought for rights some now took for granted and are now seeing slowing (and not so slowly) taken away from them. 

So if fighting for my rights and the rights of others in any way I can makes me a wildeyed entitled activist I'll take it.  I don't want my granddaughters to have to fight for the same damn things I fought for when I was their age!

Edited Yest. at 02:59 PM by Dimity

[bluegirl147]

1 hour ago, tearknee said:

An average person doesn't do any of those things because most people are not interested in politics, political discourse or poli-social issues.

Not all "average" people are the same.  I am what would most likely be considered an average person and I absolutely am interested in politics. I always have been but now politics affects everything.  Grocery prices, the weather, whether I'm going to have health insurance, whether I'm going to have SS when I retire. IMO people who aren't informed about political things aren't average. They are sadly uninformed. Whether purposely or not they aren't paying attention to important things.  And it's that reason extremists keep getting voted into office. 

5 hours ago, Soapy Goddess said:

You all wonder what people didn't like about her. I give you all an example, and once again, it's unacceptable. So then how about we just say we didn't like the color of her hair. Better?

Or you could explain why you don't like her with regards to her policy positions. I didn't vote for Trump not because he is orange with a ridiculous comb over. I didn't vote for him because I don't trust him to not sign a national abortion ban. And he is going to give tax cuts to corporations and the top 1%.  And he wants to "expand" our country into sovereign countries. And he will most likely tank the economy.  And he wants a mass deportation which will most definitely tank the economy. And I judged him on his first term.  And IMO he failed.

[Yeah No]

21 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

I got the same results and was a little surprised.   I would have thought Establishment Liberal but you say potatoe I say potahto.  And I will always consider myself a liberal.

Regarding the distinction between "liberal" and "leftist", I like this definition from this website:

https://www.lawrentian.com/archives/1022577

"The simplest distinction between liberals and leftists is that liberals support capitalism and want to make changes within it, while leftists vouch for an alternative economic system entirely. For example: where a liberal would theoretically support the inclusion of gay people into the U.S. military, a leftist might oppose the military in general, believing the U.S. military to be a harbinger of death and therefore deplorable no matter which marginalized groups are represented in its ranks. Where a liberal would support laws heavily limiting civilian gun ownership, a leftist might support the arming of the masses, and particularly of the marginalized groups of society, because the disarming of those groups has historically allowed for violent government suppression."

So when Republicans carp on about "the left" they may not even be talking about liberals but people even further left of that. But note that the percentage of Democrats that actually fall into that category is miniscule compared to all Democrats, but you'd never know that from the way Republicans act. They act like most Democrats are radical left and they're trying to take over America and turn it into a socialist republic. They even spread the fear that most Democratic politicians are radical left so anyone who isn't left of Lenin should be afraid of them! And it's just so untrue!

As a "Democratic Mainstay", one of the bigger groups to the left of the divide, I consider myself pretty liberal, but definitely not a "radical leftist".

And note that I only support the military for purposes of defending our country or other countries that need help and I definitely support capitalism that is regulated and controlled by the gov't.

20 hours ago, annzeepark914 said:

I took the survey and was stunned that it said I am establishment liberal. That's odd as MrP914 refers to me as a Republican (he's a *mega* Progressive so of course I must seem conservative to him 😁). Surveys like this are really only meant for people who see things in black or white, no in-betweens. I consider myself a moderate Democrat, flexible, liberal in some areas, conservative in others.  

Same here in that I consider myself a moderate Democrat, but my results did confirm that. I do think that if the questions were different I'd have scored more liberal than I did. I thought most of my answers were moderately liberal but not radically liberal.

20 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

Don't you know they want us to suffer by having Social Security and Medicare waiting for us when we retire.  They have the gall to want people to be able to vote more easily.  Oh and the kicker is they want us to stay a democracy.

I would say that the only category on the left that doesn't want us to stay a democracy is the one furthest to the left. I am not sure that the "progressive left" as defined by Pew is in that category, but I do know that radical leftists as commonly conceived generally prefer socialism to democracy, and not a hybrid of the two like you find in Europe - we're talking full-on socialism. I think most progressives in the U.S. want some kind of hybrid of the two, not classic socialism.

[bluegirl147]

2 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

They act like most Democrats are radical left and they're trying to take over America and turn it into a socialist republic.

Another example of the way they  deflect.  Most Republicans are radical right and are trying to take over America and turn into a fascist country. Or dictatorship. Or oligarchy.  

[Anela]

4 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

Regarding the distinction between "liberal" and "leftist", I like this definition from this website:

https://www.lawrentian.com/archives/1022577

"The simplest distinction between liberals and leftists is that liberals support capitalism and want to make changes within it, while leftists vouch for an alternative economic system entirely. For example: where a liberal would theoretically support the inclusion of gay people into the U.S. military, a leftist might oppose the military in general, believing the U.S. military to be a harbinger of death and therefore deplorable no matter which marginalized groups are represented in its ranks. Where a liberal would support laws heavily limiting civilian gun ownership, a leftist might support the arming of the masses, and particularly of the marginalized groups of society, because the disarming of those groups has historically allowed for violent government suppression."

So when Republicans carp on about "the left" they may not even be talking about liberals but people even further left of that. But note that the percentage of Democrats that actually fall into that category is miniscule compared to all Democrats, but you'd never know that from the way Republicans act. They act like most Democrats are radical left and they're trying to take over America and turn it into a socialist republic. They even spread the fear that most Democratic politicians are radical left so anyone who isn't left of Lenin should be afraid of them! And it's just so untrue!

As a "Democratic Mainstay", one of the bigger groups to the left of the divide, I consider myself pretty liberal, but definitely not a "radical leftist".

And note that I only support the military for purposes of defending our country or other countries that need help and I definitely support capitalism that is regulated and controlled by the gov't.

Same here in that I consider myself a moderate Democrat, but my results did confirm that. I do think that if the questions were different I'd have scored more liberal than I did. I thought most of my answers were moderately liberal but not radically liberal.

I would say that the only category on the left that doesn't want us to stay a democracy is the one furthest to the left. I am not sure that the "progressive left" as defined by Pew is in that category, but I do know that radical leftists as commonly conceived generally prefer socialism to democracy, and not a hybrid of the two like you find in Europe - we're talking full-on socialism. I think most progressives in the U.S. want some kind of hybrid of the two, not classic socialism.

We’ve also seen republicans who continuously call us all radicals and communists, state that they’d rather be Russian, than a democrat.  They never make any sense.  

[PRgal]

I don't know if anyone listens to Dr. Aliza's Raising Good Humans podcast, but her recent conversation with Dr. Kurt Gray (episode name: Navigating Moral Differences: How to Help Guide Your Child’s Moral Compass without Moral Righteousness) with Professor Kurt Gray included a discussion on how it's better to have a conversation and LISTEN to other people to better understand WHY they feel the way they do (without spewing out stats because that's a big turn-off and why we're always heated.  Not great for one's mental health).  It's the STATS that turned me off from DE&I committees.  The gaslighting of personal experiences was so dismissive and offensive that i just HAD it and needed to leave the group.  It was for my own mental health and wellbeing.  And to be honest, it's WHY I think so many companies have gotten rid of DE&I.  

[Anela]

1 minute ago, bluegirl147 said:

Another example of the way they  deflect.  Most Republicans are radical right and are trying to take over America and turn into a fascist country. Or dictatorship. Or oligarchy.  

Yep. There are MAGA who will respond by insulting me, or imply something horrible about me, that they know isn’t true, rather than acknowledging what I’ve posted. Rather than answering a question. 

There are also a lot of of college-educated people who voted for Trump, amd other members of the GOP who want the worst for us all. That still isn’t being acknowledged.  It’s only the left who are seen as out of touch.  

There’s the wellness to alt-right pipeline that is the trad wives, and wellness influencers who either try to convince women not to vote at all, or act as though they  aren’t political, when they are.  

and then the privileged people who choose not to vote at all, and don’t pay attention to politics, because they think or know that nothing will really affect them. I don’t understand the assumption that it’s poor people who don’t pay attention. Who don’t care about what’s going on.  

[bluegirl147]

12 minutes ago, Anela said:

I don’t understand the assumption that it’s poor people who don’t pay attention.

What they mean is poor people aren't important enough for them to pay attention to. 

12 minutes ago, Anela said:

It’s only the left who are seen as out of touch.  

Yep. It's never the right who's policies are always supremely unpopular even with their own base. Cutting SS. Wanting a national abortion ban.  Wanting more religion in schools and our government.  But someone who wants a livable wage and affordable housing and be able to go to the doctor before their diabetes turns into a diabetic coma is out of touch. 

16 minutes ago, PRgal said:

And to be honest, it's WHY I think so many companies have gotten rid of DE&

A lot of companies have gotten rid of DEI because they have bowed to the pressure from the right. They think supporting diversity and equality and inclusion is being biased against white straight people.

 

[Yeah No]

12 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

Another example of the way they  deflect.  Most Republicans are radical right and are trying to take over America and turn into a fascist country. Or dictatorship. Or oligarchy.  

I honestly don't know if most Republicans are in that radical right category. Obviously most of them right now are supporting someone in that category in Trump and his MAGA BS, but I think many of them were conned into it by Trump and his cronies. Somehow he got them to overlook that stuff, misinterpret it or rationalize it into something far less offensive than it really is. I think Trump has conned even moderate Republicans into supporting him in spite of what he'd really do if he could have his way. They're picking and choosing what they want out of him and supporting him because of that. Like the fiscal Republicans that don't really care about social justice or what he might do to our democracy. They put fingers in their ears and went "lalalalala" when Trump got the abortion amendment overturned because they think they're going to strike it rich in the stock market and save money with Trump's economic policies, and that's all they care about. But they're not even right about what they might get out of him. I think it all comes back to the cult of personality thing driving most of their support of him, not even his positions.

[tearknee]

I refer you to Kinnock in the UK - even exit polls showed Labour winning but once in the privacy of the booth they could vote for the Tory tax cuts they wanted and against Kinnock's Welsh accent. 

Edited Yest. at 03:37 PM by tearknee

[bluegirl147]

2 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

I honestly don't know if most Republicans are in that radical right category. Obviously most of them right now are supporting someone in that category in Trump and his MAGA BS

And that is today's Republican party.  Whether the rank and file want to be known for that is irrelevant.  Trump and MAGA are the definition of the current GOP. And it's the radical right politicians who have the power.  They can say the Democrats are run by the far left but that simply isn't true.  AOC who I don't consider far left doesn't have any real power.  Same with Bernie.  They each have people who support them and their policies but they aren't in any position to radically change things.

Edited Yest. at 03:42 PM by bluegirl147

[PRgal]

33 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

 

A lot of companies have gotten rid of DEI because they have bowed to the pressure from the right. They think supporting diversity and equality and inclusion is being biased against white straight people.

 

I don't think that's the ONLY reason.  In addition, there were groups who did not feel they were being validated (White and male or OTHERWISE) during the big DE&I push.  You know what I got when I tried to talk about a "lived experience?"  Shut up, lady!  We don't need you to talk.  Whoa...you're not telling the other person that!  If the OTHER person talks about THEIR lived experience and why they feel a certain way, then it's perfectly fine because it "fit the narrative" of, say, an immigrant's child.  Me?  Nope, you're not allowed.  That's what I mean.  I'm GLAD they're not doing this anymore.  At least it gives people space.  Maybe it can be explored again when they find a better way to discuss.  And yes, I'm allowed to be angry.