97
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
97 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2090 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
...and their base DGAF about helping anyone, even themselves, apparently. As long as they think they'll get to "own the libs" and be allowed to unleash all their fantasies on women, gays, POC, immigrants, etc...they'll vote for whoever they think will give them that...
I'm just as anti-Trump as any rational creature, but I think you'll find a lot of conservatives, even/especially the ones who don't like Trump, would not even see the above quote as objectionable, and it's less "hurr Republican bad" and more that they don't think that's the job of government.
I'm not saying I agree with either the principle or practicality of their position, but one doesn't have to subscribe to their school of thought to understand it, and insofar as the idea of the government helping people goes, staunch conservatives generally oppose it. Not (explicitly) because they want to bring hardship upon people, but rather because they see "government help" as an overreach of their responsibilities, essentially raising taxes to essentially give those same dollars back to people who would have presumably been better off had the government simply never intervened in the first place and not taken taxes.
This is, of course, a gross (and often maliciously intentional) oversimplification on their part, because it invites a rebuttal that points out how those with need require more dollars in aid than they contribute in taxes...which of course steers the discussion in the direction of redistribution of wealth, socialism, communism, etc. at which point the argument usually becomes more rhetorical than anything.
I didn't mean it in the narrow form of "handouts", however. Government can and does do very much to decide how things are run. I know the Galt's Gulch type of cons/libertarians think that should not even be a thing, but of course they are completely delusional about large systems. If they think government should have no role in something like international trade agreements or where defense money gets allocated, I don't even know where to begin with them.
The point is that ultimately every middle and low class person needs a job with dignity and that has safety measures, access to affordable health care, food and water that is not contaminated, etc...and nearly everything about the Republican platform is about making any of that harder and harder. Of course they are going to make paeans to the magic of voodoo economics and "small government" but all that is simply absurd. First of all, if anything, the Republicans aim to make government even bigger, but just far more ideological, and secondly, Galt Gulch fantasies are ridiculous pap that just won't work for anyone but the Musks of the world.
Ultimately, the draw is about racism and their culture wars. They'll be even worse off than they currently are, but apparently they just don't care.