138
Biden shouldn't debate Trump in the general election
(lemmy.world)
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 10 Mar 2024
138 points (100.0% liked)
Unpopular Opinion
6297 readers
33 users here now
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You're right that is not a good compass on what to do. My personal opinion on why there should be a debate either way is because without conversation humanity is just lost in general. A conversation with Trump may not ever be something worth having content-wise but in the arena of politics I'd say it's sort of a baseline. When we dehumanize him and his base (as in they're not worth talking to) like he dehumanizes everyone that doesn't dream of sucking on his fascist tiddies then we're really no better in that regard.
Biden couple days before his SOTU said "let's get the border bill passed together" towards Trump and that's what this country needs badly. Literally turning the other cheek. No one except Trump is to blame for the collective mental disorder his sycophants are suffering. He is a cancer which unfortunately cannot (yet) be cut out of the system it leeches from so this needs to be accepted as reality and dealt with accordingly. There is no winning with cancer but when treated correctly it can be "beaten". His brain won't be in good shape come November. Something's got to give eventually. His body. His indictments. His fines. Man probably has less net money in the bank than your average Joe rn but he won't give up his grip on the (thanks to him) neofascist republican party so easily.
Bad faith conversation is worse than no conversation, though, and Trump has no faith but bad faith.
I can guarantee you that it will never be worth having. Nobody being told anything by anyone is literally better than anyone being told anything by Trump, an idiot savant of weaponized disinformation.
Some humans are not worth listening or talking to no matter what. Donald Trump and those of his supporters who uncritically accept anything he says as truth are all amongst those people.
There's literally nothing positive to gain from communicating in good faith with deranged cult leaders and cult members who only communicate in bad faith.
False equivalence. Not listening to a fascist cult that thrives on disinformation and is 100% closed off to any information that differs from their xenophobic groupthink isn't discourteous and anti-democratic. It's pro-democratic common sense self defense for your brain.
Which was a huge mistake. You don't achieve anything positive by negotiating with fascists or terrorists. Trump and his supporters are both.
Couldn't possibly disagree more! The more we pretend that Trump and his ilk are legitimate opposition arguing in good faith, the more we debase every relevant institution, including democracy itself.
Is a god-awful idea when dealing with fascists, pun intended. Try researching how that worked out for Neville Chamberlain and the liberals of 1920s Italy.
That's not true. The "grown-ups" keep letting the patients leave the ward, put on a suit and pretend to be hospital administrators. The point of unethically enabling them was passed many years ago.
No. He's a tumor but he's not the underlying cancer. The enshittification of the GOP has been underway for decades with nobody doing anything major about, making the ascension of someone like him inevitable.
Ignoring the cancer while letting the tumor occupy a space meant for a healthy organ like you're suggesting doesn’t heal the body politic. It kills it.
False. If not for supposedly well-meaning liberals like yourself, he would have been powerless already. You and the DNC leadership seemingly care more about trying to uphold the form of the status quo than protecting the society it's supposed to help.
Sure, but pretending that completely unhinged habitual fascist liars are legitimate opposition is not dealing with or even accepting reality. It's almost halfway as delusional as actually being part of the cult.
You deal with cancer, which by eliminating it from the system, not by acting as if it isn't killing all healthy tissue it's allowed to get to.
It hasn't been in good shape since the 80s at the latest. Hasn't stopped people from falling for his bullshit yet, won't in November.
You're part of the reason why he didn't become irrelevant at least 8 years ago.
It's quite the classic how it is so often assumed that one holding a discussion on the internet (not just about American politics) in English must be American. But I'm sure even knowing that I'm not it won't take you long to come up with a readymade label for me like you do and put on display somewhat overbearingly. Trust me I've been to the ol' Reddit rodeo before it bit the moral dust and I've been so to the tune of over a decade. Not trying to flex I'm just saying whatever it is you're trying to accomplish (and I'm not assuming bad faith at all here) it's not worth what you're willingly forfeiting in terms of potential connection with other people. I've been that guy you're currently choosing to be. I've lived inside that quote-by-quote-rebuttal brain.
You've arranged your space of neat little drawers and boxes of attributes and analytics so you can have the "correct" opinion on virtually anything at a moment's notice. Let me be the guy to tell you that all you're doing is playing yourself, cheating yourself out of god knows what it is that you truly seek. You think the reason no one is meeting you on par in your place is because next to none possess equivalent clarity when looking upon the world and its affairs. The reality is that most people - regardless of eloquence or level of reason - just aren't going to have that conversation because it's not worth what's given up in the process. As humans we strive for connection with our peers. But no one ever said that it's a contest of whoever has the least peers in verbal exchange gets a master debater placque on top.
If you want to see entire groups of people as beneath you or label them domestic terrorists or what have you, of course no one's gonna be able to stop you. But maybe also apply at least some amount of self-reflection here and there along the way. Through countless points made you don't have but one solution in store. All you have are subjective conclusions to say that X is bad and Y + Z are to blame. And if Y or Z try to have a conversation about it then they are surely just as bad as X, which they caused of course. I unsarcastically hope that people of your intelligence find the right channels to focus their energies on.
Yeah, I started to read your novel of a reply to a 4 day old post, but then realized it's not worth my time and effort. Find someone else to lecture at after the fact.
Sorry that my usage habits don't conform to your recency standards of holding a bilateral conversation. Wondering at what point after the latest (greater than zero effort) comment in the chain criticism becomes a one-way street for you.