Almost 50% of Leftists refuse to be friends with a Trump supporter.

[GMDino]

(07-23-2017, 12:18 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That site can not be taken seriously.    It's quoting Tariq Nasheed and ice-t.

But the site that posted the false quotes from them *IS* to be trusted.

Makes total sense...

[Belsnickel]

(07-23-2017, 12:03 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Post the parts you feel are fabricated.

I already pointed out the title, we can start there. The title claims that the poll says that almost 50% of liberals refuse to be friends with a Trump supporter, but the poll question actually referred to a strain on friendship. Claiming that the poll is saying liberals refuse to be friends with Trump supporters is a misrepresentation of the actual polling data and is intended to further divide people along partisan lines. It is fake news.

[StLucieBengal]

(07-23-2017, 02:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I already pointed out the title, we can start there. The title claims that the poll says that almost 50% of liberals refuse to be friends with a Trump supporter, but the poll question actually referred to a strain on friendship. Claiming that the poll is saying liberals refuse to be friends with Trump supporters is a misrepresentation of the actual polling data and is intended to further divide people along partisan lines. It is fake news.

A strain is headed down the path of refuse. And it's a title.... titles are supposed to grab you so you will read the story.

[Belsnickel]

(07-23-2017, 03:14 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: A strain is headed down the path of refuse. And it's a title.... titles are supposed to grab you so you will read the story.

According to whom? And the author then reiterates in the article, so not just a title. It's a misrepresentation of the data.

Then there is this:

Quote:Only 28% of Democrats say they aren’t stressed by talking with those who differ on Trump, which means that the vast majority of Democrats won’t even deign to discuss the issues.

Again, we have a misrepresentation of the data, saying something that the data isn't saying.

Fake news.

[BmorePat87]

(07-23-2017, 11:20 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You do not personally know one person who voted for Trump?

No one who told me. I have a guess that my one grandmother did, but all the right leaning anti Hillary voters I know voted Gary Johnson. 

Like I said, we're a little more educated here. 

[Belsnickel]

(07-23-2017, 04:09 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No one who told me. I have a guess that my one grandmother did, but all the right leaning anti Hillary voters I know voted Gary Johnson. 

Like I said, we're a little more educated here. 

All of the conservatives I know for sure who they voted for, voted for Gary Johnson or Evan McMullin. I think I know of some people that voted Trump, but most of them don't pay much attention to politics and so we never discuss it.

[StLucieBengal]

(07-23-2017, 03:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: According to whom? And the author then reiterates in the article, so not just a title. It's a misrepresentation of the data.

Then there is this:

Again, we have a misrepresentation of the data, saying something that the data isn't saying.

Fake news.

So 72% are stressed when in a discussion with a Trump supporter.

[StLucieBengal]

(07-23-2017, 04:09 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No one who told me. I have a guess that my one grandmother did, but all the right leaning anti Hillary voters I know voted Gary Johnson. 

Like I said, we're a little more educated here. 

Gary Johnson might as well have been a democrat.

[GMDino]

(07-23-2017, 04:30 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So 72% are stressed when in a discussion with a Trump supporter.

Which, even if true, is a far cry from:

Quote:...the vast majority of Democrats won’t even deign to discuss the issues.

[*Nately120*]

(07-23-2017, 04:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Gary Johnson might as well have been a democrat.

In that case I hope the Democrat spin machine puts all their money and power behind him in 2020. 

[BmorePat87]

(07-23-2017, 04:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Gary Johnson might as well have been a democrat.

k

[StLucieBengal]

(07-23-2017, 04:56 PM)Nately120 Wrote: In that case I hope the Democrat spin machine puts all their money and power behind him in 2020. 

I do as well. He was a horrible candidate.

Austen Peterson was the better libertarian candidate imo.

[*Nately120*]

(07-23-2017, 10:51 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I do as well.   He was a horrible candidate.  

Austen Peterson was the better libertarian candidate imo.

Ida know.  A straight white male in a committed marriage who is actually a self-made rich man, successful governor, and also supports freedom, guns, and lower taxes might have a shot against a sitting president with record-low approval ratings.  Gary has also shown he can act pretty crazy too, so that might rope in the folks who like the idea of a president who is a nutcase.

Add the voter fraud the democrats give the candidate they wish to force upon the masses and Trump might be in trouble.


So back on topic, I had an acquaintance whom I unfriended after he posted this....though in all fairness this was years before Trump became president and the guy is an all-around d-bag hypocrite so it wasn't the only reason.  I will point out that this guy totally loves Trump and he pretty much lives his life thinking he terrifies and enrages liberals with how awesome he is.

[Dill]

(07-23-2017, 04:30 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So 72% are stressed when in a discussion with a Trump supporter.

I confess to feeling stress when talking with Trump supporters.  

[GMDino]

(07-23-2017, 11:03 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Ida know.  A straight white male in a committed marriage who is actually a self-made rich man, successful governor, and also supports freedom, guns, and lower taxes might have a shot against a sitting president with record-low approval ratings.  Gary has also shown he can act pretty crazy too, so that might rope in the folks who like the idea of a president who is a nutcase.

Add the voter fraud the democrats give the candidate they wish to force upon the masses and Trump might be in trouble.


So back on topic, I had an acquaintance whom I unfriended after he posted this....though in all fairness this was years before Trump became president and the guy is an all-around d-bag hypocrite so it wasn't the only reason.  I will point out that this guy totally loves Trump and he pretty much lives his life thinking he terrifies and enrages liberals with how awesome he is.

I haven't unfriended anyone over politics.  I have some very close friends that we have agreed to not talk it on line.  I have blocked various pages that post the most ridiculous things and truly fake news.  

I have BEEN BLOCKED because I didn't believe someone's religion as strongly as them and dared ask questions about it and defended my own religion.  Also I was unfriended by a life long friend AFTER she wrote a four paragraph post slamming me for DARING to look at a topic for an angle different than the one she saw.

That was disappointing.

Now my mother says she REFUSES to be friends with a Republican on FB...but she is and has conversations with them too.

[Belsnickel]

(07-24-2017, 12:14 AM)Dill Wrote: I confess to feeling stress when talking with Trump supporters.  

Me too, often because I get frustrated at their lack of understanding. But that doesn't mean we refuse to talk to them about issues/policies or refuse to be friends with them. That is what the author of the article in the OP tried to claim.

[CageTheBengal]

This is something that is a 2 way street and I've experienced it first hand.

I've mentioned where I live a few times but for those who don't know pretty much everybody that I live around voted for Trump. It's a small rural area and the type of people Trump should be fighting for because of all of the support they gave him. Being a registered Independent (and proud of it.) it is pretty disheartning to hear the tone change in the conversation when they notice that I'm an Independent with more liberal leanings. Anything I say about common decency gets spun into me being a sore lose and It goes from feeling like I'm talking to one of my peers to a tone that is more scrutinizing of everything I say to a riddiculous and illogical extent. The more I expand upon my opinion the more defensive they get. I was half tempted to warn my neighbor the other day that he might not want a libertard helping him get his mower stuck out of the mud.

Honestly I feel like the only point that the article had was to divide people because it's obvious this issue goes both ways and its never going to stop until both sides hold themselves in check and realize how they have treated the other. Alternative facts and news are what is dividing this country. Why do people think the extremes on either side are necessary to "save" the country? Because they have been forced fed it by whatever news source they choose to let into their life. It's a messed up world when we get to pick and choose what is a fact.

What it boils down to imo is are you party first or country first? That's the ultimate question.

[Dill]

(07-24-2017, 12:17 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Me too, often because I get frustrated at their lack of understanding. But that doesn't mean we refuse to talk to them about issues/policies or refuse to be friends with them. That is what the author of the article in the OP tried to claim.

Agreed. It is important to keep up dialogue and try to understand where other people are coming from.

I occasionally talk to some of my old high school buddies on Facebook, some of whom are Trump supporters. They are good people whom I have known for 5 decades now.  But when they demand to know why Obama "gave" the Iranians 150 Billion dollars instead of using that money to rebuild the US infrastructure, or they think Trump should be able to call the president of Taiwan directly anytime he wants to show China who's boss, or we should have "taken the oil" in Iraq and "work with Russia" in Syria, then I do feel anxious.

20 years ago that lack of knowledge would have little effect on policy. But in the Trump era it is empowered and driving policy. That is what creates the stress.

[StLucieBengal]

The problem is the parties are too similar on ton Many issues.

Hopefully the leftists pull the democrats to socialists and the conservatives pull the GOP to actual conservatism. Leaving the rest to either create a centrist party. This way we can at least have a distinct direction to vote.

[Benton]

(07-24-2017, 03:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The problem is the parties are too similar on ton Many issues.  

Hopefully the leftists pull the democrats to socialists and the conservatives pull the GOP to actual conservatism.    Leaving the rest to either create a centrist party.   This way we can at least have a distinct direction to vote.

Well, there's more than 200 million voters. About half are Democrats.

According to this thread, that's 50 million people that won't talk to the (about) 90 million Republicans (the other about 10 million are 3rd party). 

If the reverse is true — as it usually is — then 45 million Republicans won't talk to the 100 million Democrats because they aren't Trump supporters.

Which puts 50 extreme left, 45 extreme right and 95 million in the middle (leaving us 10 million 3rd partiers out). If each party keeps pulling and a central party was created, it would easily dwarf the Democrats and Republicans.