7 ms·

Polarization in America: One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy, and the other side wants to make voting for whoever

Polarization in America: One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy, and the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible. Guess which pole I’m at and tell me how I should meet the other pole in the middle.

rmbyrro 5y ago
That's how bad the situation is... To be fair, though, the left also has been associated with violent and anti-democratic behaviors.
- idontwantthis 5y ago
  “To be fair” nothing approaching the same ballpark has been committed by the left and the any “violent and anti democratic behaviors” you can give examples of have not been championed by the left establishment. One side wants to seize power for all time, and the other side wants democracy. If anyone on the left isn’t polarized by that fact then they aren’t paying attention.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - h2odragon 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_Senate_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_Senate_bomb... > Six members of the radical far-left Resistance Conspiracy were arrested in May 1988 and charged with the bombing, as well as related bombings just one, commonly cited counterpoint.
    - idontwantthis 5y ago
      This game is fun, can I play? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair > In the internationally publicized legal proceedings that followed, eight anarchists were convicted of conspiracy
  - tlear 5y ago
    Let me help you expand your knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_baseball_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_baseball_shootin...
    - idontwantthis 5y ago
      Uh yeah let’s equate that to an armed insurrection that killed 3 people and would have overturned a presidential election if not successfully repelled, and that has been defended or denied by Republicans en masse. He was condemned by both parties, and was not part of the mainstream liberal movement.
      - Manuel_D 5y ago
        > Uh yeah let’s equate that to an armed insurrection that killed 3 people The only person that was killed during the capitol riot was one of the rioters shot by capitol security. Justified, to be clear, but it wasn't violence perpetrated by the rioters. Brian Sicknick died of natural causes [1][2][3]. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sicknick-death-strokes/2021/04/19/36d2d310-617e-11eb-afbe-9a11a127d146_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sic... 2. https://www.npr.org/2021/04/19/988876722/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-of-natural-causes-medical-examiner-ru https://www.npr.org/2021/04/19/988876722/capitol-police-offi... 3. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56810371 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56810371
  - snovv_crash 5y ago
    > and the other side wants democracy No they don't. They just happened to find a group of people who were likely to vote for them but couldn't. If they were likely to vote GOP (or Green, or Libertarian), they wouldn't be fighting this fight at all. If you really want to see what someone believes, look at what they do when it isn't in their best interests.
supreme_loquat 5y ago
> One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy Okay so lumping together half the country in with a few extremists would probably be the first step to answering your question. Yes there were probably plenty of people at home cheering them on but if you really believe it was half the country then you need to get outside your bubble. > the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible I have a tough time believing this at least from a party perspective. Sure, the democratic party loves to say this, and they even manage to back it up with their actions sometimes when it's convenient for them, but they still only want you voting for their party approved puppets. If that weren't the case then I simply don't see how it is defensible for democrats to not have enacted a better voting system yet in places where they have clear majorities (eg California would be near the top of that list, and yet here we are stuck with a democratic governor who vetoed the legislation which would have allowed general law cities to use alternative voting systems). Note that I find it entirely likely that plenty of democratic voters would like to fix our voting, I'm specifically talking about the party leadership here, although on that note there are also plenty of republicans who would like to fix our voting, so that's another step you could take to meet them in the middle. First past the post voting is probably the biggest thing preventing people from "voting for whoever they want", but democrats have done very little for that even though it is blindingly obvious how terrible of a system it is. Well, I can see why the democrats (and republicans) would like it, because that's a large part of how they stay in power, but from a "voting for whoever you want" perspective it's just about as bad as it gets and the democrats just don't seem to care about it. Now that it's becoming clear that more voters care about this reform, many places are turning to RCV/IRV as the solution when there are much better methods out there. It's hard to tell if it's just being ignorant about the problems with IRV (eg doesn't elect condorcet winner, ignores lots of ballot preferences, non-monotonic, etc) or if they are intentionally aiming for a method which appeases the voters while also being one that will help keep them in power. Approval and STAR are significantly better and are gaining momentum in the US and any condorcet method would also be reasonable, but so far support for these other options is pretty grassroots and I'm unaware of any big name republians or democrats actually talking about those other methods. Fixing the voting would also help people like you distinguish just how much support eg Trump has compared to others. There was a lot of vote splitting happening in the Republican primaries which Trump benefited from and with a proper method I believe it's entirely possible he wouldn't have even been nominated in the first place. There are plenty of Republicans who did not like him but didn't feel they had an alternative in the general election because of how distasteful they found Clinton/Biden to be.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
lordloki 5y ago
Yes, you seem to define the problem well.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
insickness 5y ago
You inadvertently provide an excellent example of what is causing polarization in America: Highlight the worst possible examples from the side you oppose while assigning the most charitable intentions to the side you support.
- idontwantthis 5y ago
  Where is a single Democratic politician fighting to close polling places and restrict Republican populations from voting? Where is a single Republican politician fighting to give greater access to the vote? Where was a single Democrat who stormed the Virginia capital when Republicans won the Governorship? 2 Republicans in Congress voted for an investigation of the insurrections, so there you go: charity.
  - cool_dude85 5y ago
    Take a look at primary elections in Democrat strongholds like NY to see the same kind of voting restrictions you're railing against, designed of course to ensure that current party power brokers are difficult to challenge.
    - theword_ 5y ago
      Totally dishonest to compare primaries to general elections.
  - Clubber 5y ago
    While you focus on the other party, you are probably ignoring the detrimental things the party you support does. This is by design. The GOP supporters do the same thing and can list all the horrible things the Democratic Party does with equal fervor. Did you know the GOP doesn't have superdelegates like the Democrats do? Superdelegates are certainly an example of manipulating the will of the people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate
    - idontwantthis 5y ago
ridiculous_leke 5y ago
Did all conservatives and right-wing people storm the capital?
- epakai 5y ago
  No, their defacto leader pushed false rhetoric that all but ensured such an event would happen and they didn't reject him or even condemn his actions. This is what condemns the group.
  - edmcnulty101 5y ago
    I don't think Arabic people need to dignify terrorism with any response or condemnation at all....it's not Arabic people commiting the crimes, it's fanatics. Just like republicans don't need to dignify this Jan 6th protest with any response at all, it's not republicans, it's fanatics. I believe you may be looking for reasons to condemn republicans.
    - epakai 5y ago
      Republicans in congress and in the executive were the ones pushing the conspiracy theories that our democracy was at stake and the election was stolen. Even after their lies had been disproven they continued the farce. It's disgusting that you try to excuse this by saying it's just fanatics. These fanatics continue to hold power within the party. Shame on you for the gaslighting. I reject your belief, and you would do well not to try to ascribe other's motivations for their actions.
      - edmcnulty101 5y ago
        To me, the demonization of one group by another group or person for a political agenda, is the worst form of gaslighting possible.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
Brendinooo 5y ago
Your characterization is comically uncharitable. That said, don't think of it as meeting the other pole in the middle. Realize that there are lots of other people between your pole and their pole, and the pole you despise is representative of a lot less people than you think.
edmcnulty101 5y ago
Just to make you aware, these views are extremist.
- idontwantthis 5y ago
  I was quite aware already.
mrkentutbabi 5y ago
I wasn't a Trump supporter, and cheered when Biden won presidency. Fast forward now, not so much anymore. Now I want Trump to be back in the office.

rmbyrro 5y ago

That's how bad the situation is... To be fair, though, the left also has been associated with violent and anti-democratic behaviors.

idontwantthis 5y ago
“To be fair” nothing approaching the same ballpark has been committed by the left and the any “violent and anti democratic behaviors” you can give examples of have not been championed by the left establishment. One side wants to seize power for all time, and the other side wants democracy. If anyone on the left isn’t polarized by that fact then they aren’t paying attention.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- h2odragon 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_Senate_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_Senate_bomb... > Six members of the radical far-left Resistance Conspiracy were arrested in May 1988 and charged with the bombing, as well as related bombings just one, commonly cited counterpoint.
  - idontwantthis 5y ago
    This game is fun, can I play? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair > In the internationally publicized legal proceedings that followed, eight anarchists were convicted of conspiracy
- tlear 5y ago
  Let me help you expand your knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_baseball_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_baseball_shootin...
  - idontwantthis 5y ago
    Uh yeah let’s equate that to an armed insurrection that killed 3 people and would have overturned a presidential election if not successfully repelled, and that has been defended or denied by Republicans en masse. He was condemned by both parties, and was not part of the mainstream liberal movement.
    - Manuel_D 5y ago
      > Uh yeah let’s equate that to an armed insurrection that killed 3 people The only person that was killed during the capitol riot was one of the rioters shot by capitol security. Justified, to be clear, but it wasn't violence perpetrated by the rioters. Brian Sicknick died of natural causes [1][2][3]. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sicknick-death-strokes/2021/04/19/36d2d310-617e-11eb-afbe-9a11a127d146_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sic... 2. https://www.npr.org/2021/04/19/988876722/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-of-natural-causes-medical-examiner-ru https://www.npr.org/2021/04/19/988876722/capitol-police-offi... 3. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56810371 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56810371
- snovv_crash 5y ago
  > and the other side wants democracy No they don't. They just happened to find a group of people who were likely to vote for them but couldn't. If they were likely to vote GOP (or Green, or Libertarian), they wouldn't be fighting this fight at all. If you really want to see what someone believes, look at what they do when it isn't in their best interests.

supreme_loquat 5y ago

> One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy Okay so lumping together half the country in with a few extremists would probably be the first step to answering your question. Yes there were probably plenty of people at home cheering them on but if you really believe it was half the country then you need to get outside your bubble. > the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible I have a tough time believing this at least from a party perspective. Sure, the democratic party loves to say this, and they even manage to back it up with their actions sometimes when it's convenient for them, but they still only want you voting for their party approved puppets. If that weren't the case then I simply don't see how it is defensible for democrats to not have enacted a better voting system yet in places where they have clear majorities (eg California would be near the top of that list, and yet here we are stuck with a democratic governor who vetoed the legislation which would have allowed general law cities to use alternative voting systems). Note that I find it entirely likely that plenty of democratic voters would like to fix our voting, I'm specifically talking about the party leadership here, although on that note there are also plenty of republicans who would like to fix our voting, so that's another step you could take to meet them in the middle. First past the post voting is probably the biggest thing preventing people from "voting for whoever they want", but democrats have done very little for that even though it is blindingly obvious how terrible of a system it is. Well, I can see why the democrats (and republicans) would like it, because that's a large part of how they stay in power, but from a "voting for whoever you want" perspective it's just about as bad as it gets and the democrats just don't seem to care about it. Now that it's becoming clear that more voters care about this reform, many places are turning to RCV/IRV as the solution when there are much better methods out there. It's hard to tell if it's just being ignorant about the problems with IRV (eg doesn't elect condorcet winner, ignores lots of ballot preferences, non-monotonic, etc) or if they are intentionally aiming for a method which appeases the voters while also being one that will help keep them in power. Approval and STAR are significantly better and are gaining momentum in the US and any condorcet method would also be reasonable, but so far support for these other options is pretty grassroots and I'm unaware of any big name republians or democrats actually talking about those other methods. Fixing the voting would also help people like you distinguish just how much support eg Trump has compared to others. There was a lot of vote splitting happening in the Republican primaries which Trump benefited from and with a proper method I believe it's entirely possible he wouldn't have even been nominated in the first place. There are plenty of Republicans who did not like him but didn't feel they had an alternative in the general election because of how distasteful they found Clinton/Biden to be.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

lordloki 5y ago

Yes, you seem to define the problem well.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

insickness 5y ago

You inadvertently provide an excellent example of what is causing polarization in America: Highlight the worst possible examples from the side you oppose while assigning the most charitable intentions to the side you support.

idontwantthis 5y ago
Where is a single Democratic politician fighting to close polling places and restrict Republican populations from voting? Where is a single Republican politician fighting to give greater access to the vote? Where was a single Democrat who stormed the Virginia capital when Republicans won the Governorship? 2 Republicans in Congress voted for an investigation of the insurrections, so there you go: charity.
- cool_dude85 5y ago
  Take a look at primary elections in Democrat strongholds like NY to see the same kind of voting restrictions you're railing against, designed of course to ensure that current party power brokers are difficult to challenge.
  - theword_ 5y ago
    Totally dishonest to compare primaries to general elections.
- Clubber 5y ago
  While you focus on the other party, you are probably ignoring the detrimental things the party you support does. This is by design. The GOP supporters do the same thing and can list all the horrible things the Democratic Party does with equal fervor. Did you know the GOP doesn't have superdelegates like the Democrats do? Superdelegates are certainly an example of manipulating the will of the people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate
  - idontwantthis 5y ago

ridiculous_leke 5y ago

Did all conservatives and right-wing people storm the capital?

epakai 5y ago
No, their defacto leader pushed false rhetoric that all but ensured such an event would happen and they didn't reject him or even condemn his actions. This is what condemns the group.
- edmcnulty101 5y ago
  I don't think Arabic people need to dignify terrorism with any response or condemnation at all....it's not Arabic people commiting the crimes, it's fanatics. Just like republicans don't need to dignify this Jan 6th protest with any response at all, it's not republicans, it's fanatics. I believe you may be looking for reasons to condemn republicans.
  - epakai 5y ago
    Republicans in congress and in the executive were the ones pushing the conspiracy theories that our democracy was at stake and the election was stolen. Even after their lies had been disproven they continued the farce. It's disgusting that you try to excuse this by saying it's just fanatics. These fanatics continue to hold power within the party. Shame on you for the gaslighting. I reject your belief, and you would do well not to try to ascribe other's motivations for their actions.
    - edmcnulty101 5y ago
      To me, the demonization of one group by another group or person for a political agenda, is the worst form of gaslighting possible.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Brendinooo 5y ago

Your characterization is comically uncharitable. That said, don't think of it as meeting the other pole in the middle. Realize that there are lots of other people between your pole and their pole, and the pole you despise is representative of a lot less people than you think.

edmcnulty101 5y ago

Just to make you aware, these views are extremist.

idontwantthis 5y ago
I was quite aware already.

mrkentutbabi 5y ago

I wasn't a Trump supporter, and cheered when Biden won presidency. Fast forward now, not so much anymore. Now I want Trump to be back in the office.