6 ms·

Ha, against "them". All republicans. As a monolith. As if they are a sports team. This sums up the central problem in modern politics as a whole right here.

Fishysoup 6y ago
It does tend to be the case in the last years. Being affiliated with the party of Trump and McConnell is a choice, and means condoning their behavior to a certain extent. You can be a conservative and not a Republican, but if you call yourself a Republican you're effectively endorsing corruption and hatred.
- revscat 6y ago
  The downvotes are baffling if unsurprising. The Republican Party is based on racism and hatred, and opposes democracy. For some reason this rather obvious fact is a controversial statement to make here. It’s like HN is stuck in 1990’s-era equivocation or something.
  - ghomrassen 6y ago
    I would imagine the opposite side would say the same.
- zalkota 6y ago
  Supporting democrats is supporting the looting and burning of buildings. Pick your poisons champ!
- rayiner 6y ago
  That’s not really a realistic position in our two-party system. You either call yourself a Republican, or you align with the party that had to be brow-beaten into condemning riots.
  - esoterica 6y ago
    So you'd rather align yourself with the party that won't condemn white supremacists even after being brow-beaten into doing so?
    - retox 6y ago
      https://streamable.com/sr9o2s https://streamable.com/sr9o2s
      - esoterica 6y ago
        When you repeatedly go through the cycle of blaming "both sides" and telling white supremacists to "stand by", and then making your press office issue a correction after the fact when enough people complain about it, that doesn't count as condemning white supremacists.
        skinkestek 6y ago
        The left has been far worse this time. Also the "fine folks on both sides" seems to be about the people demonstrating for or against monuments, not the violent ones on either side.
      - ookblah 6y ago
        i always found this argument lacking, like what is that supposed to show me... that there were these 20 times he denounced them and then this VERY publicly one time he didn't? like imagine this was like child trafficking or something. you denounce that shit heavily each and every time, no ambiguity, no question. even if you're asked to do it 50 times it should be 50/50. the fact that people have to pull that as a "defense" is ridiculous lol.
        JamesBarney 6y ago
        > I always found this argument lacking, like what is that supposed to show me... that there were these 20 times he denounced them and then this VERY publicly one time he didn't? Yes. This tells you his public stance is that he's anti white supremacist and willing to denounce them. Do you honestly think he chose the debates as a the best time to secretly signal his base that he's a closet KKK member? > like imagine this was like child trafficking or something. you denounce that shit heavily each and every time, no ambiguity, no question. even if you're asked to do it 50 times it should be 50/50. the fact that people have to pull that as a "defense" is ridiculous lol. If my wife asks if I love her 50 times and I say yes 49 times, but once I get distracted. Which is more likely I secretly hate my wife or I just got distracted.
techdragon 6y ago
Modern? George Washington warned about this in his farewell address. 8 years after the United States of America began this was already becoming a problem! George Washington on “the spirit of party” in his farewell address: > It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection.

Fishysoup 6y ago

It does tend to be the case in the last years. Being affiliated with the party of Trump and McConnell is a choice, and means condoning their behavior to a certain extent. You can be a conservative and not a Republican, but if you call yourself a Republican you're effectively endorsing corruption and hatred.

revscat 6y ago
The downvotes are baffling if unsurprising. The Republican Party is based on racism and hatred, and opposes democracy. For some reason this rather obvious fact is a controversial statement to make here. It’s like HN is stuck in 1990’s-era equivocation or something.
- ghomrassen 6y ago
  I would imagine the opposite side would say the same.
zalkota 6y ago
Supporting democrats is supporting the looting and burning of buildings. Pick your poisons champ!
rayiner 6y ago
That’s not really a realistic position in our two-party system. You either call yourself a Republican, or you align with the party that had to be brow-beaten into condemning riots.
- esoterica 6y ago
  So you'd rather align yourself with the party that won't condemn white supremacists even after being brow-beaten into doing so?
  - retox 6y ago
    https://streamable.com/sr9o2s https://streamable.com/sr9o2s
    - esoterica 6y ago
      When you repeatedly go through the cycle of blaming "both sides" and telling white supremacists to "stand by", and then making your press office issue a correction after the fact when enough people complain about it, that doesn't count as condemning white supremacists.
      - skinkestek 6y ago
        The left has been far worse this time. Also the "fine folks on both sides" seems to be about the people demonstrating for or against monuments, not the violent ones on either side.
    - ookblah 6y ago
      i always found this argument lacking, like what is that supposed to show me... that there were these 20 times he denounced them and then this VERY publicly one time he didn't? like imagine this was like child trafficking or something. you denounce that shit heavily each and every time, no ambiguity, no question. even if you're asked to do it 50 times it should be 50/50. the fact that people have to pull that as a "defense" is ridiculous lol.
      - JamesBarney 6y ago
        > I always found this argument lacking, like what is that supposed to show me... that there were these 20 times he denounced them and then this VERY publicly one time he didn't? Yes. This tells you his public stance is that he's anti white supremacist and willing to denounce them. Do you honestly think he chose the debates as a the best time to secretly signal his base that he's a closet KKK member? > like imagine this was like child trafficking or something. you denounce that shit heavily each and every time, no ambiguity, no question. even if you're asked to do it 50 times it should be 50/50. the fact that people have to pull that as a "defense" is ridiculous lol. If my wife asks if I love her 50 times and I say yes 49 times, but once I get distracted. Which is more likely I secretly hate my wife or I just got distracted.

techdragon 6y ago

Modern? George Washington warned about this in his farewell address. 8 years after the United States of America began this was already becoming a problem! George Washington on “the spirit of party” in his farewell address: > It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection.