About a year ago, I was in a networking group, and the current group president used to bring his coffee mug to every meeting with the proud logo emblazoned on it: “Liberal Tears.”
Political affiliation used to be characterized by agreeing with the policies and beliefs of a specific party or platform. In the last few years, though, what has become stronger is negative affiliation, a hatred of the opposing party’s views. To put it another way, you could be a Republican because you believe in and agree with conservative views or because you despise Liberals. Or you could be a Democrat because you believe in and agree with liberal priorities or you could despise conservatives or their views. If your hatred of the other party is stronger than your affiliation to your own party, you have a negative party affiliation.
For the first time in surveys dating to 1992, majorities in both parties express not just unfavorable but very unfavorable views of the other party. And today, sizable shares of both Democrats and Republicans say the other party stirs feelings of not just frustration, but fear and anger.
More than half of Democrats (55%) say the Republican Party makes them “afraid,” while 49% of Republicans say the same about the Democratic Party. Among those highly engaged in politics – those who say they vote regularly and either volunteer for or donate to campaigns – fully 70% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans say they are afraid of the other party. Pew Research, 2016.
The data also showed that this anger or fear of the other party was stronger than agreement with one’s own party affiliation:
While partisans generally agree with their party’s policy positions at least most of the time, just 16% of Republicans and 20% of Democrats say they “almost always” agree with their party’s policy stances. By contrast, more than twice as many Republicans and Democrats (44% each) say they “almost never” agree with the other party’s positions. ibid
There is also personal animosity at play in these results. Members of either party rated members of the opposing party as lower than their rating of any other group. Democrats rated Republicans 31 on a scale of 100, and Republicans rated Democrats 29. This is personal hatred at play here. In fact, the only lower rating on this 2016 Pew survey was the Republicans’ rating of Hillary Clinton (12) or the Democrats’ rating of Donald Trump (11). It reminded me of something a family member said several years ago on a Facebook post, that it was unacceptable that Democrats were allowed to take the sacrament, and someone should do something about that. It’s not the first time I’ve heard a Church member make that claim.
Stupid, lazy and evil. These are the types of claims we tend to make about the opposing arguments, and this data shows the same. Republicans said they considered Democrats closed-minded (52%), immoral (47%), lazy (46%), dishonest (45%) and unintelligent (32%). Democrats said many of the same things about Republicans: closed-minded (70%), dishonest (42%), immoral (35%), unintelligent (33%) and lazy (18%).
Since 2016, the research shows that this party animosity has also spread to independents.
For independents who lean toward a party, the belief that the other party’s policies are harmful is the most frequently cited reason for their partisan leaning. Nearly six-in-ten Republican-leaning independents (58%) and Democratic leaners (57%) say a major reason for leaning to the Republican and Democratic parties, respectively, is a feeling that the other party’s policies are harmful for the country. Pew Research, 2018
Independents who lean one way or the other have more in common with the dislikes of the party they lean toward than they do with other independents.
I realized that, as an independent, I am skeptical of both parties, but usually more fearful of the bad ideas I see coming from the right, particularly social policies that I see as harmful to women or minorities. The left has some blind spots, but the right feels morally bankrupt to me in its blind support of tradition and patriarchy. When a friend observed that she didn’t think she could stay married to her husband if he left the Church, I disagreed, but admitted that I didn’t think I could stay married to someone who was a Trump supporter.
This animosity is precisely the kind of thinking that shuts down dialogue. The only way to change minds and hearts is to really listen, to open up a dialogue and find out what makes people fearful or angry on both sides. We might not always like what we hear, but it’s the only starting point. Recently, Stephen Marsh shared an article that helped me see the right from a more comprehensible view. I grew up in rural PA, and last year when I was back in my hometown I felt downright nervous as I passed the Trump 2020 signs and confederate flags. If they knew my real feelings, would I be in danger? Why don’t they care about the things I care about? A few things the article pointed out that I couldn’t help but agree with:
- Sometimes liberals are pretty pretentious and smug.
- Rural America is often presented as a punchline in movies & TV, not in a sympathetic way that they recognize.
- People of other races were rarely encountered in 1980s rural PA, so their marginalization often seems like a distant, foreign problem to those who live there. I was shocked to the core when my high school boyfriend revealed his racism to me after I ran into one of my close Church friends at the mall. I didn’t realize that someone I could have a relationship with could have such terrible feelings toward another person solely on the basis of race.
- The problems that exist in cities may impact more people, but there are also policies that hurt rural communities disproportionately, and the left generally doesn’t focus on rural problems.
Janet Jackson used to ask “What have you done for me lately?” and that’s what many of these rural voters (like all voters) have been asking.
As P.J. O’Rourke once noted: “The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work and then they get elected and prove it.”
And boy, have they been proving it! Reading the article didn’t make me lean to the right, but it did take a lot of the heat out of my animosity, giving me more patience to listen to what I often don’t want to hear.
To bring that partisan animosity into a more recent example, just consider the different perspectives of the “openers” and the “closers.” To hear them tell it, those who want the restrictions lifted are selfish fools who want to kill us all, and those who want to tighten restrictions are hysterical tyrants who mostly have the privilege of working from home. In a recent NextDoor post this week, a neighbor put up a poll asking who would be willing to do a 3 day total stay at home (no exceptions) and calling for those who would not do it to justify to their neighbors why not. It’s been almost a week since that post started, and the bloodbath continues.[1]
- Do you affiliate more with a party or more against the other party?
- Has your party affiliation changed over time? In what direction and why?
- How do you take the heat out of your animosity and get along with those whose views you oppose?
- Do you encounter this hatred of the “other party” at Church or do people try to keep it under wraps for courtesy sake?
Discuss.
[1] I go bike riding everyday, and I’m not seeing people congregating at all. All amenities at the park are shut down, and there are a scattering of people walking dogs, running, or riding their bikes. I’m not sure why the person is seeking a total doors barred shutdown that hasn’t been mandated since I’m not seeing a lot of flouting of the rules in our community, but apparently I’m not vigilant enough. I must be one of the flouters.
Wheat & Tares 
I’m disappointed that nearly every post is becoming partisan. I joined this group looking for spiritual discussions. If I’ve misunderstood the purpose of this group then I’d like to be removed from this list. If, in fact, this group is focused on Mormons, some experiencing a spiritual crisis, then please refocus this group. I really enjoy the posts about the gospel or religion, but I get enough politics OUTSIDE this spiritual group!
Thanks, Gail Capshaw
Jonathan Haidt has written a great book on the Subject called, “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided By Politics And Religion”.
When people are focused on opening up the economy, I think they are simply focused on what they have lost. So many of them are certain that if the stores and restaurants are re-opened, their lives will return to normal. I see that term used a lot. Normal. They have not figured out that there is no going back.
People have lost employment, income, opportunities and social connectivity. I expect to see them grieve. For many, they will first react with disbelief and anger. For many, this pandemic is their first real hardship and loss. They will need to figure out how to adjust. Learning new emotional skills is hard and it is messy. I expect to see more anger and some violence.
It’s worth remembering that there was a time not so long ago when members of Congress got along with members of the other party and would often work across the aisle to pass legislation on particular issues of common interest. There were conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans. It was the culture wars starting in the 1980s that amped up partisanship in Congress, which spread to the masses. Some Presidents try to stay somewhat above the fray, but when a sitting President embraces partisanship, as does Pres. Trump, that makes things even worse. He seems to throw gasoline on every partisan fire.
As for the Church, it’s too bad that LDS leadership embraced the culture war rhetoric and (largely unintentionally but rather foolishly) politicized the Church. This, too, has spread to the masses, the rank and file members of the Church. As a result, Mormons are now the most reliably Republican demographic, rather than the more balanced voting that was the case until the last generation or two. Bloc voting presents its own dangers for the Church, another unfortunate consequence of the leadership’s politicization of the Church. Now there are lots of people who hate the Church for purely political reasons.
Thank you for this informative article. It gives us pause to ponder what is troubling us today. I also followed the links and read Peter Kruger’s and David Wong’s articles. “Let us welcome the word that God gives us today. His words are for those of us who carry in our hearts desires, dreams, plans, but also worries, problems and fears. Of all the things, maybe what frightens us are these new times, the unprecedented situation, the waiting the length of which is unknown, but which asks us for a new heart, a new answer which God himself suggests in those words: humility, the wisdom to recognize that we need God. We need His forgiveness, His patience. We need to show our wounds to Him, because He is the only one who can heal them.”
I think the demonization of people who have different political views is one of the most troubling things that has happened with many Church members who I know and love. The hatred has become so strong that I almost don’t recognize them anymore.
I recently read a book that helped me understand what has happened a little better. Costly Grace by Rob Schenck is the memoir of an evangelical minister who got very involved in the extreme polarization that has occurred with the Republican Party over the last few decades. Then he had a change of heart, and his story of how that happened has given me hope that it can happen for other people as well. Long story short, he really got to know people and listened to their personal stories.
Thanks for the P. J. O’Rourke quote. I’d been wondering who said that. Personally, I used to be Republican, but then they went off the deep end with their tax cuts, trickle-down economics, climate-science denial, gun-lobby worship, blatant nationalism, and the rest. First I became unaffiliated, but after realizing that I was voting pretty much straight Democrat, I joined the Big Tent party. I don’t agree with everything they promote, but then again, they don’t agree with themselves on most things. They bicker and debate idea, then eventually come to some sort of truce before the election rolls around. But the point is this: they are debating serious policy ideas and issues we really need to tackle, like health care, global warming, income inequality, and such. The GOP has turned into a personality cult that tackles invented crises like immigration and trade wars. Their attempt at replacing the ACA was a fiasco, and their tax cuts have been brainless. If you look at the real issues facing America, the GOP has no real policy answers. They are proving O’Rourke right.
Rita: thanks for the recommendation. I hope more of us (including me) can learn that kind of listening and patience.
Gail: This site has never been exclusively non-political in our content. Our volunteer authors are free to post on topics of interest to them including current events, politics, Church news, spiritual discussions, poetry, polls, psychology, medical and science, etc. There are some Facebook groups out there that prohibit political content, and I recommend those if you are trying to avoid any political discussions. We also happily accept guest submissions, and would encourage you to submit whatever you would like.
For many of us, political differences do have an impact on how we experience Church (see Dave B.’s excellent comment). As Gloria Steinem said, “The personal is political.” I am dismayed when I see or hear some of the incredibly hate-filled rhetoric on both sides right now, from different Church members. I hear more of it from the right because there are more conservative members, but with the lockdowns I’m hearing quite a bit from the left as well, including some macabre gleefulness that families ignoring social distancing at the airport picking up their returning kids would probably get Covid 19 and die. (Twitter, natch). But on the right I’m hearing plenty of hysteria and anger as well, including a sister angrily shouting down another sister in RS a few months ago for saying she admired Mitt Romney’s courage in voting against party.
Though I grew up in a liberal West Coast town, the LDS community in that town was quite conservative by contrast. Among Mormons in my childhood ward, there was a sense of persecution (Satan/the “world” is constantly trying to attack us) combined with a sense of smug superiority as being the front-line soldiers in God’s Army (those Utah kids have it so easy, never had their values challenged like we do, etc). But back then (1980s)Mormons in that part of the world knew their place as a tiny minority sect, and stayed out of political issues, so we were generally respected and well regarded in the community for our politeness and generosity. I was pretty solidly Republican going into my mid-20s. But after Prop. 8, all that community goodwill was erased and the Church’s political hand was shown. I began a slow crossfade to adopting a liberal identity as I became increasingly disgusted with the GOP. I often find Democratic positions and approaches to be more charitable and more in line with my interpretation of Christ’s teachings and example. I also became increasingly suspect of the leadership of the Church as they started wading into political issues more often. My heart sank again when I saw the Tabernacle Choir singing at the inauguration.
I now live in a conservative pocket of a mostly blue state. I still go to church because I’m trying to be above the pettiness of identity politics, but it can be incredibly frustrating sometimes. When there is too much politically motivated commentary, such as in EQ meetings, I just quietly get up and leave. I’m worried that wards are becoming more conservative as the liberals are being pushed out and we are losing diverse points of view.
Separation of church and state or politics becomes fairly difficult in Utah, USA. A few elections ago in our RS before a Presidential election, our RS counselor reminded us , very fervently, at the end of the lesson to go out and vote for Mitt because our country was going to …you know where.
I use to lunch with a group of ward ladies who I know are of “the popular mormon party”. It was all fun til one Sean Hannity/Rush Limbaugh fan asked me….out of the blue, to say something nice about HER President…I, of course, was tongue tied and wanted to slither under the table and out the door after a very loud and condescending YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME! Because I could not come up with an answer… (hind sight says…nice hair!)
So, now I choose RS carefully…because, Gail, imho they do seem to go together…political affiliation and religion! It would be nice to keep them separate….I do not engage either topic….unless I am on sacred ground!
Great post and comments. For me, one of the biggest shames about all of this division is that because of all of the animosity that you rightly point out, nobody even entertains the idea of listening to other opinions. I get why some people might blame “the media” generally for this, but the fact is that our culture has lost the ability to have nuanced public conversations about complex issues. I mean, have you ever read comments on twitter? That’s not a small minority of vicious crackpots making accusations, throwing around insults, etc., that’s a fairly large section of America. When Trump won the election, my students (about 99% of whom are liberal) would say things like, “well, I can’t talk to half my family anymore”. And my response to that has always been that if you refuse to talk to people with a different perspective, you will learn absolutely nothing about why they voted the way they did. And that’s bad. Similar to the comment in your original post about liberals essentially ignoring rural America. The outright dismissal of large swaths of this country because supposedly those red or blue swaths are “stupid” is just insane. And because it’s been normalized, it’s become entrenched, which means it’s extremely difficult to change both the kinds of conversations we conduct and the way we want to conduct them.
And re the church, as some other folks have mentioned, it’s employed a deadly combination of black and white thinking and uninformed, knee-jerk conservatism. I don’t wish to offend folks and I believe the church does good things, too, but that combination has been absolutely ruinous and has, in my opinion, driven the spirit of Christ out of the church, for the most part. We now seem to care more about rules, obedience and embracing (often harmful) conservative ideas and less about empathy, understanding and communication. I mean, I know we say stuff like, “hey, both parties have good ideas, vote your conscience,” but that’s simply not the actual case. I’ve seen a lot more liberals (especially younger ones who’d like to see LGBTQ people treated like, you know, human beings) leave the church in my area than conservatives and I think that’s in large part due to the unfortunate embracing of conservatism that the church has practiced for several generations now. I think Dave B is right that some of that was unintentional, but the harm done to the church and its members is nonetheless tangible and real and, unfortunately, long-lasting.
You know in 2016 I was horrified by the election and other alt-right surges, but I also could find a way to empathize with conservatives I grew up with. I saw enough bizarre and stressful facebook memes and articles (which I now realize were targeted interference campaigns from e.g. Russia) that I felt some sympathy for how it could be hard to sift through deluges of emotionally manipulative sound bites that arrive faster than any one person can fact check. I saw troubled conversations online among UT conservatives about how to vote, including the whole McMullin situation, and believed conservative voters were still in touch with some core values. I put myself out there many times in ‘liberal’ settings bringing up kind actions I’d seen small town conservatives do, and how things were confusing and unprecedented. Backing Trump was unilaterally wrong then as now, but I could find a way to see it as a tragic mistake rather than personal evil. Here’s the thing. It’s 2020 now. Every single GOP voter is unquestionably aware that there is a lot of deeply felt pain and opposition, and has made more than 3 years of choices about whether to ever be curious about the basis for that. There are 3 years worth of unilaterally harmful and corrupt decisions by Trump administration and Senate GOP. There is pervasive suffering because of it. Today’s GOP has broken every original ‘conservative’ value and policy goal. The explanations about foreign interference, the high crimes and Russian assets, the timeline of blatant lies, it’s all transparently available. And yet I can plainly see in my own social media communities and polls that conservatives, including Mormons, have largely rallied to Trump more strongly the more he robs and betrays us. In short, the inescapable conclusion is that ‘conservatives’ consistently and knowingly choose to betray us, their neighbors and their country (and themselves). This literally endangers everything I have ever loved and everything I have ever hoped for. What other possible label is there, but ‘enemy’? “Conservatives” so-called have to accept the simple natural consequence that at some point, their community will accurately recognize that they are fine with suffering and destruction, and will act accordingly.
Upthread someone has made the common observation that urbanites / liberals don’t put in enough effort to understand rural / conservative values and needs, as a counterpoint to flagrant destructiveness among today’s conservatives. But another spin on that same observation is that we expect ‘liberals’ to practice empathy and don’t hold conservatives to the same **even during a conversation centered on both-sides-ism.** If an interpersonal relationship had this bad a failure of reciprocity, I would diagnose it as abusive and leave. But we live in the era of globalization with such dense human populations that I *can’t* agree to disagree and go my own way. The remaining option is to fight. I am done talking anything about “both sides.” The end.
I’ve always been a pretty solid Republican, but several years ago, our ward was given the assignment to haul all the building’s folding chairs to an ecumenical 4th of July event. The featured speaker was our representative, Randy “Duke” Cunningham. His speech was a partisan diatribe completely devoid of ideals, lofty notions, or even patriotism, and even as a die-hard Republican, I was disgusted. I decided I wasn’t hauling chairs to hear that guy ever again. But, when the election came, I voted party-line as usual, even though I knew something was off about that guy. A few years later it comes out the guy was literally selling defense contracts to the highest bidder and he was put in jail for six or seven years. As a die-hard Republican, I would have supported the death penalty for him. That degree of corruption in the government is a treasonous threat to liberty, and I might still support the death penalty for that. Anyway, the upshot was I was cured of the obligation to vote party-line.
Most recently I was a never-Trump’er, and I was pilloried as a RINO (Republican in Name Only) and watched the party attempt to purge Jeff Flake, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Dennis Kasinich, John McCain, etc.. When the GOP’ers pushed through Duncan Hunter’s election, even when they KNEW what a crook he was, it became clear to me that the GOP had completely given up on the moral high ground. Their ideals didn’t drive their quest for power, their quest for power drove their selection of ideals. They’d become like a charity that spent all its effort fundraising, and fundraising had become the cause. So now I identify more as an anti-Republican — not a Democrat. My impression of progressives is that they really do have way too strong an entitlement mentality. They seem to think that somebody else is responsible to solve other people’s problems and that they have a moral imperative to compel somebody else to do it. That attitude “scares” me, as described in the OP above.
Overall, I can usually argue both sides of an issue, which means people on both sides hate me. What really alarms me is how angry people are on both the right and the left, and with the election of Trump, civility is no longer considered a value. Anger is great for driving turnout to the polls, but when somebody expresses anger at me with they disagree, my reaction is to get angry in turn and not listen to anything they say. If there’s such thing as a national attitude, that would be ours.
“Their (GOP) ideals didn’t drive their quest for power, their quest for power drove their selection of ideals.” No disagreement here, but also true of many Democrats.
I spent most of my adult life leaning conservative. But just leaning. I was uncomfortable with extremes at both ends. As life unfolded, I found myself with special needs children, a gay son, and a black daughter. My eyes (and heart) were opened to things that were now very real to me. Liberal ideals started pulling me toward the center.
I’m old enough to remember when some legislators were described as “Statesmen”. I don’t know when I last heard that outside of an obituary. There were liberal and conservative ideals – but they were just that – ideals to frame a philosophy and discussion, not an ideology to live and die for. Whoever was in power had just a little more influence over the purse strings than the other.
For the last couple of decades, I think there has been unprecedented cooperation between the two parties. And by that, I mean that while they appear to be fighting it out, they are both giving each other massive spends. The partisan vitriol serves mainly as a smokescreen for both sides robbing us blind at the same time.
I am completely uncomfortable with the caricatures at both ends and the incessant nastiness. I became unaffiliated six or seven years ago. I know that is the political equivalent of neutering – but I can’t find a home anywhere else.
Here goes nothing. I hope what I say can help, but I am afraid I am a bit disjointed In my thinking.
I would recommend reading William Butler Yeats’ poem, “The Second Coming,” which dealt with the so-called Irish “Troubles” of the early 1900s. In my opinion, the best line in the poem is, “the best lack all conviction, while the worst suffer from passionate intensity.” Christ makes the same point slightly differently in Matthew 24 as he discusses signs of the end times. Verses 9-12: many shall be offended and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. How does one become so convinced of the rightness of one’s own position, that one can bring oneself to hate and despise whole groups of people? I dealt with this challenge when I joined the Church in 1974, and realized that my conventional conservatism of the time (Goldwater, Reagan) was at serious odds with the hate-filled alt-right views of Ezra Taft Benson and the JBS, that despised liberals and the civil rights movement. I also, more occasionally, deal with disdain from progressive Mormons, but that is less of a problem in the Church..
The recommendation to read Jonathon Haidt’s “The Righteous Mind” is spot on. Great book.
I acknowledge Angela’s point that Wheat and Tares does not exclude political content, but sympathize with Gail’s lament. I would recommend to Gail that she follow Times and Seasons, which has in recent months become much more interesting, and is less political.
I was once accused, in a lengthy Wheat and Tares back-and-forth volley of disagreeing comments on an issue that was being discussed, of finding fault with both sides. Well, both sides CAN be wrong, even though one side is usually more wrong than another. Trump is awful, but I have also have liberal friends at work who can not comprehend me when I tell them that their sneering attitudes of contempt toward the “deplorables,” made famous by Hillary Clinton, helped elect Trump.
I used to be a conservative, until Trump changed conservatism from a belief in limited government to an ethnic, nationalist concept.
Ambrose Bierce in his Devil’s Dictionary defined a conservative as one who believes in existing evils, and a liberal as one who wants to replace existing evils with new ones. Too true to be good.
I will vote against Trump. probably vote for Biden. But I am not hopeful; if Biden wins—and I hope he does—liberals have never been magnanimous in victory. They are too certain of their righteousness. The double standards are already emerging, as the news media outlets that reported about Christine Blasey Ford have been pretty silent about Biden’s accuser. Double standards are okay, because it is all about power.
I do not have any answers, as hate builds upon hate, and each side tries to discredit each other, except to try and follow Christ. I think we are heading toward a social crack-up and it is only Christ that can help us.
Party politics is the problem in my opinion. I’m a strong proponent of social and economic liberty. What this means is I agree half with Democrats, half with Republicans, and fully with Libertarians.
It’s a much less viscerally disturbing place to bre, and I can have prinicple-based stands with much common ground. It sure beats demonizing the political actors and actions from ‘both sides of the aisle’.
Reminds me of the time my stake president, a staunch Republican, and his 1st counselor, a die-hard Democrat, both looked at me and asked me what I was. Neither party, I said.
For Brian McConnell:
Thanks for the anecdote about your S.P. and his 1st counselor. At least it has some humor! I Will match you with one of my own, which unfortunately is not funny.
The worst Priesthood meeting (HP) I ever attended was in November 2008, shortly after Obama (whom I did not vote for) was elected. By evil coincidence, the lesson that day was, “How to interpret the signs of the times.” It was from one of the teachings of Church Presidents manuals, forget which one. Anyway, the lesson was hijacked by several brethren who emphatically declared that Obama’s election was one of those end-time signs. I feebly protested that priesthood was not the place to bring up partisan politics, and that there were people in the group who had voted for Obama, but it didn’t cut any ice. The SP 1st Counselor was present, and did not attempt to correct the atmosphere. After the meeting, I complained to him about the Republican Party (which I then belonged to) setting up a branch office in the Mormon Church, but he simply shrugged.
There is a certain part of a Ward’s population that simply disbelieves and ignores the letter that the FP issues every year about the Church not endorsing candidates of a particular party, and saying that church meetings are not appropriate Fora for discussing political issues. You see, they KNOW what “The Brethren” REALLY believe and mean. The JBS element is less of an issue than it was back in the day, But it still is there.
I have a question about the Church AND about political parties: are these organizations about the people that lead them, or are they about ideas and beliefs they represent?
I am very comfortable with the core Gospel (Christ / Atonement / repentance ) but not very comfortable with LDS Church leadership at the top.
I am very comfortable with core conservative values (low taxes / small government / freedom) but not very comfortable with Trump / Hillary / Sanders (Biden is irrelevant).
See how this works? There are ideas and beliefs worth fighting for but the leaders damage them.
I was raised in a Republican family but chose to be independent at voting age. I married into a family that was much more Republican than the one I was raised in and I became an official Republican shortly thereafter. As I’ve studied things out over the years, I’ve become more of a libertarian-leaning conservative, but libertarians somewhat lose me at the point of legalizing everything. I drifted that way because it made the most sense to me both in heart and mind. I do identify with Republicans more than against Democrats, but certain things from Democrats do visibly drive me up the wall often enough that I could see it giving the opposite impression. In truth, I’m not very pleased with either party right now. I think they’re more alike than many on both sides would care to notice or admit.
I generally take the heat out of my animosity in talking to another by reminding myself that they do want people to live fulfilling lives same as I do, even if I feel they have a misguided way to go about it. As far as Church goes, I’ve generally been pretty lucky to have most wards I’ve been in remain apolitical at Church. I find either extreme injected into Church somewhat of a turnoff. We have one socially liberal couple in our ward that more or less hijacked a Sunday School lesson and basically talked to the ward members as if they were only now being presented the opportunity to think about the issue for the first time. That condescension bothers me. Overall though, that usually doesn’t happen. If I’m being honest, however, I feel my religion and politics are so intertwined that I probably do miss a certain number of conservative interjections into Church that would be more offensive to my Democrat brothers and sisters. Peel back the layers and I think our religious views shape other parts of ourselves more than many people realize.
PJ O’rourke quote was hilarious
Strong Democrat since 2008. I’m not negatively affiliated with the party either. I’m a moderate Democrat. I’ve always been skeptical of Bernie and am somewhat pleased Biden is the presumptive nominee, but nervous. People mostly vote on overall image, not usually fine details, unless a detail somehow gets blown out of proportion (such as Hillary’s emails), and people (well non-Bernie Dems) generally see Biden as the second coming of Obama. But nothing is for sure.
I was a Republican before. Not strong, but generally thought they were better than Democrats and that Dems were overreacting to Bush. That changed with the rise of Obama. Tea Party obstructionism soured me towards the Republicans and the rise of Trump has killed any lingering taste in my mouth for the GOP and the conservative movement.
By interacting with people face to face, I find I get along. Online, I don’t. I live in Utah and have lots of Republican friends, even Trump supporters. However, I usually avoid talking politics. If we do talk politics, I try to steer the conversation away from the issue of the week to larger philosophical questions. People get entrenched in the issue of the week, but are more open-minded around larger philosophy. If someone is conservative, I prefer libertarians (sometimes, as long as they’re not radical conspiracy theorists and are sensible Tyler Cowen types) to traditional conservatives and especially Trumpist conservatives. They tend to be more outside-the-box thinkers, not beholden to partisanship and agree with me about half of the time.
I go to a Hispanic ward. The mood there is pretty antithetical to Trump. People are conservative in a social sense, but moderate on other political issues. However, no one talks politics too much.
Social media is poisoning political civility.
I read through a few comments and actually appreciated them (much to my surprise), even coming from people I politically disagree with. As expected, a number of libertarians on here. The puzzling thing is that I find myself running into libertarians all of the time, yet I barely see them present in politics. There’s Rand Paul and a couple of others, but I honestly can’t think of libertarian policies or ideas ever gaining much sway in politics (and Rand Paul is kind of an outsider without much influence in the GOP). I feel that the GOP is somewhat deceptively libertarian. It tries to woo libertarians with talks of less government and free market, but then governs often in very different ways. A couple of thoughts have occurred to me. Could it be that libertarian is not a united group of people but is just a sort of umbrella term to refer to people disillusioned with political partisanship? Could it be that libertarians have a vision that is so free of government that they can’t figure out how to be in the government but not of the government? Could it be that libertarians are more focused on ideas and less on tribalistic forces of party that help glue large groups together? I don’t know. Yet I could never be a libertarian for the express reason that I see the government as a significant source and protector of individual freedoms and the only answer moving forward (especially in these unprecedented times), and because at the end of the day, I’m a pragmatist. We can’t just wish partisanship away. It’s one party or another, or a third party (which has never effectively existed in US history in over 100 years). But I appreciate the culture of hard thinking that libertarians engage in. Never have I been forced to think harder than when talking with libertarians.
I had not been aware of this idea. Many members in Australia seem to believe to be a good member you have to be a republican.
In Australia our conservative party legalised gay marriage, supports universal healthcare, and does not oppose abortion, so to the left of the republicans.
So to be a republican you have to be pretty extreme.
We have members who tell us how great Trump is on facebook.
Many members follow right wing American sites, and we have some extreme right wing media here.
I have been surprised to be told I hate America, or hate people because I put a different point of view, on Church blogs. I do not hate.
PoliticallyI am a member of the Labor party which is closer to Bernie, so often feel very uncomfortable at church.
Very few of these people at church are people I would choose to associate with.
I am not yet aware of members here hating me, but they are suspicious that a non right winger can be an acceptable member.
We are a branch of the republican party even where there is no republican party.
I am not aware of libertarians in Australia, and I think that is good. I believe we have a greater sense of community, than America, and that I also believe is good.
Apostle Dale Renlund is a Democrat. I know Dieter Uchtdorf has made comments in PH
indicating he doesn’t agree with right wing politics being equated with the Church and Gospel.
I don’t understand the finger slapping over political discussions. For a number of reasons.
One is that both politics and religion are major institutions that inform and shape the way we live as a society. IF we’re doing them both right, they should be adjuncts to one another working separately to buttress the key values by which we live as individuals and as a society. Religion should be the metric by which individuals chart and measure their progress. Politics should perform the same function for us collectively as a society.
If we find ourselves off the mark on one metric or the other, shouldn’t we be analyzing where we’ve gone wrong so that we can correct things? Isn’t the collective wisdom a valuable asset to accomplishing both the analysis and determining the corrective measures?
Secondly, we have a major opportunity for making a correction coming up very shortly. IF this chance is missed I fear for our society. And I doubt there are many who will look into their hearts and minds and conclude that we’re on a good path. How better to prepare for this decision we will all make individually than to discuss how we see the current state, what we wish for the future, how we come to those conclusions and what we think our options and best choices are? What better place than a forum which keeps a focus on the primary and essential values religion provides for us?
I suspect the hand slappers are the folks who are committed to rigid, habitual actions or who choose to default on their personal obligation of citizenship by rubber stamping the policies of authoritarians in institutions or in partisan media. It’s my belief that these are people who don’t want to risk asking themselves if they’re perpetuating a terrible mistake. The folks who would rather declare themselves correct than to take a hard look at their motivations and the actual effects they have on others.
I think politics, like religion, is an important responsibility, that it’s nature is social, that we make individual choices but those choices have profound social and moral implications and that there’s no better place to discuss and form our views than in public and, most specifically, in a religious context.
alice, thanks for expressing your sentiments and another position that I often hear voiced, which is centrism. Like libertarianism, it is disillusioned with partisan politics and sees virtues and maladies in both liberalism and conservatism but is reluctant to fully embrace one or the other side. However, unlike libertarianism, it is does not appear to have a strong guiding philosophy undergirding it. Instead, it insists that both sides hear each other out more fully (I couldn’t agree more fully) and try to meet somewhere in the middle (which is where I have an issue with centrism). Why I can’t be a centrist. I believe that politics by its nature is a rough and tumble game. Standing up for truth can be a rough and tumble game as well, where we have to have conviction in what we believe, which may entail alienating someone who disagrees. There are times when leaders have to make difficult decisions, declare themselves to be right and bring the hammer down on blatantly false ideas. Consider Trump. This guy has told thousands and thousands of lies and is notorious for making stuff up and spreading fabrications, half-truths, and outright lies. The Democrats, media figures, and Republicans have a responsibility to call out these lies and stop them dead in their tracks.
I have been seeking a good set up like this OP to ask a burning question in my mind:
For those of you thinking about voting for Joe Biden, what are you voting for?
I can ask even mild Trump supporters and get lots of pro-Trump reasons, although in 2016 many of them were more in the anti-Clinton or anti-democrat camp. In the above comments, I have seen that some supporters of Biden and some who honestly state that they just dislike Trump/GOP more, but only one single pro-Biden sentiment. The perception that some think Biden is the second coming of the Obama administration.
My perception is that democrat party insiders decided that Biden was the best of the remaining candidates, and then after he won the South Carolina primary, they twisted arms to clear the field. He had one fairly good debate performance (and several mediocre ones), had won a single primary out of 4 early states, and then got the field cleared and tons of endorsements. Hearing and watching him be interviewed by friendly reporters over the past few weeks, he is not inspiring at all. Sanders and Warren are much further to the left, and I cannot believe the level of support some of their positions have, but I can at least see why they have passionate supporters among the like-minded. Is Biden just a generic democrat and that is the appeal?
Character, decency, experience, values and a good look at what Trump’s been hiding with his cabal of gangsters.
I grew up in a Republican family in UT. Of the 4 children, at least 2 are Republican. I registered as Independent until the rise of the Tea Party and now register as a Democrat.
Everywhere I’ve lived since growing up, (both coasts), I find the church (Ward/Stake) environment to be politically conservative.
Many years ago I listened to right-wing radio (Rush Limbaugh) as a result of a conversation with someone at church, curious as to the source of their information. I couldn’t understand how/why my fellow congregants could listen to someone who denigrated every demographic group except white Conservative men. I mostly stopped listening the day someone called into Rush’s show and said he wanted to “take matters into his own hands” against liberals.
I believe the high level of divisiveness we have today is in large part due to the evolution/birth right-winged commentators on radio and TV (and to a lesser extent liberal commentators). And the reign of Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House.
Years ago we were all operating on the same set of facts—delivered by Walter Cronkite and others. Sadly, those days are long gone. I don’t enjoy hyper-partisan programming on either side. I try to look for straight-up news.
Mostly I avoid talking about political topics.
I find I can sometimes have conversations with people on the other side by looking for common ground. We can often agree on a problem—but may have differing opinions as to why the problem exists and what to do about it. I try to listen and ask questions—including what sources they use.
I might causally suggest another idea (depending on how strident they are in their views—if very strident, I hold back).
I feel sorry for younger generations who have no history with a less divisive time in our country. It is especially sad that they see a POTUS today that has little to no respect for people, truth, or our institutions. He is a horrible example for our children as to how adults ought to act.
It is tragic that so few in his Party have the courage to call him out. There were much better choices running in the Republican Primaries than Trump!
God help us. We need 2 parties who uphold truth and the rule of law!
One more thing…
Years ago while living in PA, a ward member approached the 2nd counselor in our Bishopric at church and asked him what ought to be done about the car in the parking lot with the “Kerry for President” bumper sticker?
(Little did the ward member know the Bishopric counselor’s father was chairman of the local Democratic Party). Lol
I thought it might be usefull to know how other countries are handling the virus.
Our conservative federal government, organized a war government, where a couple of times a week the state premiers, and health minister had a virtual meeting with the federal counterparts, to have a united strategy, and to ensure enough resources. We are now at the point where we have 1620 active cases 150 in hospital and 45 in intensive care. Total deaths so far 75. Very high testing rate, over 10,000 yesterday 1.4% positive. No new deaths.
Our government and opposition leaders are now discussing what our country should look like after the virus.
Should there be a price on carbon to fight climate change?
How should we fight inequality? We already have a minimum wage of $21.75.
Should we replace our unemployment benifit with a living wage?
Can we become an exporter of clean emergy?
What else can be adjusted at this time so we return to a better Country?
Not everyone is united. We have business wanting to reduce conditions for workers. We have too many casual workers, and wage stagnation.
It is reassuring to see our leaders cooperating make our lives better.
How long will this last before politics return to normal?
Lois,
There are many LDS Trump supporters, but you should remember that the state of Utah had the biggest drop in votes for the republican nominee from 2012 to 2016 of any state and that Utah was one of the last states that Trump did not win the primary. I think that it is obvious that many LDS who voted in the general election for Trump did so grudgingly or just to oppose the well known history of Clinton’s corruption.
Also, many democrats will reluctantly admit that the Gingrich – Clinton era was far less partisan than anytime more recently. Gingrich used strong rhetoric against liberalism/Clinton/democrats, but he managed to work with President Clinton on some important issues. (Balanced budget anyone?) Many democrats I have spoken with will reluctantly admit that many of the things they liked about the Clinton administration were done in cooperation with Gingrich and other republicans. They also admit (along with Bill Clinton himself) that President Clinton did violate criminal codes and should be held accountable. By contrast, the articles of impeachment against President Trump cited no criminal activities. Which is more partisan, and where is it coming from?
el eso: Biden wasn’t my favorite. I like Warren, although even there I don’t agree with everything she does. I just loved her clear and direct takedown of Bloomberg, and her practical approach. But I like Biden. I do think he’s got some confusing moments when he’s tongue-tied, but I believe he has integrity and trusts experts. He will assemble a more impressive, stable administration around him than his opponent would. He is an advocate for women, people of color, and the working class.
The one thing I don’t like about any democrat is that the second they get elected, they start to believe that everyone agrees with their priorities, that “the people have spoken.” By contrast, most Republicans don’t care whether people agree with them or not. The reality is that the country is still divided, and a “landslide” here is a squeaker by any other nation’s standards.
Can someone please explain why any member would vote for Trump?
Been There (and everyone else): please listen to this podcast be Freakonomics. It posits that our current two-party system is actually a duopoly (essentially a monopoly but made up of two entities) not unlike Coke and Pepsi. Both entities exist to create a need for the other.
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/politics-industry/
I, for one, have stopped speaking to certain members of my family because they are tRumpists. I still was speaking to them after there activity on California proposition 8; now they’re dead to me.
A few of the many reasons:
1. Tea Party sign: “Take your government hands off my Medicare.”
2. Recent Liberate America sign: “Give me liberty/or give me COVID-19.”
3. When I ask tRumpists for the source of their stated beliefs: crickets.
4. One person who believes, with the exception of Talk Radio and Faux News all other news sources of news are fake, became very upset when he quoted the AP which had some favorable economic news and I said “fake news”. 😀
“ Also, many democrats will reluctantly admit that the Gingrich – Clinton era was far less partisan than anytime more recently.”
Newt was the beginning of what we have now.
He initiated the name-calling, hyper-partisan politics that we have now and was not above taking aim against moderate Republican legislators. He used govt shutdown as a tool—holding the record of the longest govt shutdown (3 weeks), until Trump.
And yes. Clinton lied under oath about an affair with an intern. I would not have voted for his re-election, nor did I vote for him the first time he ran for President, unlike today’s GOP that continue to support Trump no matter what he does.
30% higher deaths among people who get their news from fox. Consequences of fake news.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-24/how-fox-news-followed-trumps-coronavirus-narrative/12176748?section=analysis
“Can someone please explain why any member would vote for Trump?”
Probably the same reasons non-members would vote for Trump, don’t you think? I don’t think church membership drives any pro-Trump voting. It seems Church members vote similarly to their non-member neighbors.
I think the numbers show that Trump would still have won the presidency in the 2016 election even if every member in Utah had voted for his opponent.
Gracious and charitable persons of all religious persuasions allow their neighbors to vote freely and without recriminations. We claim the privilege of letting each citizen vote as he or she chooses, and allow all others the same privilege: let them vote how or for whom they may. However fashionable it may be these days, it seems unhealthy and unkind to hate neighbors for their alleged voting decisions, either individually or as a class. If your neighbor has offended you by his or her past voting, please try to forgive — but please also sustain his or her privilege of voting according to their conscience while you vote according to yours.
Angela,
Thank you for the reply. That is a somewhat positive reason, although I am not sure that a Biden cabinet would be better than the Trump cabinet. Several of the Obama officials were inept or highly partisan hacks (Holder). One of the worst elevations of partisanship I have noticed in the Trump administration is that his nominees, especially below the very top posts, have been confirmed much more slowly than usual. Are they especially underqualified or is this just one way to slow down an especially hated President? I would expect that many of Biden’s future nominees would get long confirmation hearings and he would not be able to get his preferred team in place easily.
The opposite is true for judges. Senator McConnell has made it his life’s work to confirm as many Trump judicial nominees as possible. An LDS predecessor (Sen. Reid) gave him the tools to do this.
Lois,
The first instance of hyper-partisan politics of personal destruction that I remember was practiced by Senator Ted Kennedy in the 80’s. He maliciously slandered a conservative judicial nominee. The republicans were totally unprepared for this, because it had never been done before in their memory! Gingrich was the counterpoint to the already established new politics.
This is also why Trump had so much support in the republican primaries (and why the #2 finisher was very outspoken, conservative Senator Cruz). Many republicans believe that their previous nominees, Senator McCain and Governor Romney, did not push back enough against false and misleading media and opposition attacks. The less partisan and very establishment Jeb Bush set the incredible record of spending $100 million to garner a few convention delegates and finish in 4th or 5th place in 2016 primaries. Bloomberg has since eclipsed that dubious mark.
Geoff-Aus,
Trump’s opponent in the 2016 election had made over $100 million using her previous political positions. That is massive corruption, even for a large country like the US. There were many obvious reasons to distrust the other candidate. Trump was the only alternative to massive, proven political graft. I am making Angela’s point in the OP, but I know many who voted for Trump to keep Hillary away from power.
Geoff-Aus,
Is your question about why would any member vote for Trump rhetorical, or is it a serious question? I regularly follow Wheat and Tares, and it is rare that your comments do not condemn Trump and Trump supporters in one way or other.
Speaking as a (former) conservative, a never-Trumper who voted for Evan McMullin in 2016 and plans to reluctantly vote for Biden, I think I understand why people voted for Trump. People who voted for Trump were horrified by Hillary Clinton and the sleaze of corruption that surrounded her and her husband. They were horrified by her using her private server to handle classified State Department communications. They were horrified by her use of the word “deplorables” to excommunicate from decent society a large segment of people. They were horrified by the Clintons’ always-self-serving relationship with the truth.
25 percent of white voters who voted for Obama in 2012 switched to Trump in 2016, hoping that that would improve their lives. They were from the white working-class part of America that felt that they had been left behind to rot, as the rest of the country prospered. Hillary Clinton won 48.1 percen of the popular vote, and Trump won 46.0 percent. 5.9 percent of Americans voted for minor party candidates.
Well, sadly, voting for Trump not only did not make things better, they made them much worse, because the man has so degraded our culture of political discourse and our society. Trump represents the raised middle finger extended by the deplorables to those whom they know look at them with contempt.
Contempt is a dangerous thing. It can be very fulfilling to have it and to express it to others, but it usually serves only to intensify the hatred of those who are the objects of that contempt.
This is what I try to tell people who hate Trump: their attitudes of sneering disdain contributed to bringing about the whole evil Trump phenomenon in the first place. But they are so convinced of their own self-righteousness that the point usually does not penetrate.
Let us hope that Biden can help restore some decency to the political process. I am not a fan of him, but the man has a personal decency that our country badly needs.
“For those of you thinking about voting for Joe Biden, what are you voting for?”
Biden wasn’t my first choice in the primary. I liked Andrew Yang for his knowledge of policy positions (he had a policy for everything), although I didn’t necessarily agree with them and thought his UBI was pie in the sky (although, in the wake of the coronavirus, I’m having second thoughts on this). The best communicator, I thought, was Pete Buttigieg. What a wunderkind. I voted for Bernie in the primary because at the time, I thought he was in first position and I thought that we should just rally behind him to avoid a long, contested primary. But Biden surprised us with a massive comeback and I am happy that he has achieved swift victory, and before all of the coronavirus lockdowns. Overall, Biden’s policies are in the general direction that I want to see. More government intervention into the healthcare system to bring costs down. A sensible foreign policy that favors strong relations with allies and diplomacy over war. Increased naturalization of immigrants, more humane treatment of those who are undocumented. Appointments of judges who aren’t beholden to conservative ideologies. Biden represents all that. As a plus, he has the most appeal among blacks, who are a vital demographic to secure in purple states to achieve victory (Buttigieg and Klobuchar were not favored among black voters at all). Additionally people see him as a sort of restorer of the Obama years, which I believe were the best presidential years in my lifetime. Obama was the best president since JFK who was unfortunately confronted with an obstructionist Republican Party beholden to the delusions of many crypto-racists who initially posed as libertarians but later revealed their true identity in the 2016 election. Biden makes gaffes, but they are minor. He is a personable guy. Did he sexually harass someone? The accusations sound made-up and it isn’t worse than what Trump has done. Biden didn’t do anything illegal in Ukraine. Perhaps unethical. Perhaps minorly corrupt, but in a legal way (not all corruption affects us negatively, the appointment of Hunter to Burisma had no larger effect on the American people, we shouldn’t overreact to it). What Trump did was unconstitutional and he should have been impeached. The only two choices are Biden and Trump. Biden is a no-brainer. Sling all the mud you want. No one is perfect. And Trump is a criminal who has had over 20 women accuse him of sexual misconduct, not just a woman who keeps changing her story. Why do want to keep him in office? He should be locked up along with his co-conspirator Michael Cohen after he loses the election. On coronavirus, he has been a conspiracy-pushing, dangerous failure. Biden appears to be much more sensible and trustworthy on this unprecedented issue. He has my full support.
John W,
Thank you for the reply. I notice that both you and Angela preferred others before Biden both of whom had a lot of specifics in their respective campaign platforms. While the specifics make a candidate easier to attack, I think they also engender more followers that are motivated for positive reasons, which is a key to winning.
You give 3 positive reasons for supporting Biden versus Trump.
On judges, I think that this is the biggest change that Trump has made that will be lasting. If you want to see different judicial philosophies espoused by judges, that is certainly a reason to vote for Biden. Although, note that no republican will have any qualms about trashing a Biden judicial nominee, he presided over the Bork hearings where Judge Bork was seriously slandered.
On foreign policy, Trump’s rhetoric is a vast change. His actions have led to less exposure in the hot spot in the middle east and in my mind have reduced the likelihood of war there. Some democrats agree with Trump, but most see things differently.
On healthcare, I have heard others voice similar hopes, but I think that you are seriously misguided or naive. Obamacare did not achieve its goal of reducing healthcare costs and it was passed with a supermajority of 60 senators to break the unanimous republican filibuster. Obama had over 7 years to implement this and it did not get the advertised results. Biden has not put forward a specific plan on healthcare, he is unlikely to get as big of an electoral landslide as Obama had in 2008, and he will be going up against Senator McConnell who is likely to still be the majority leader of the Senate. How is Biden going to make any significant changes? He would have to convince a number of republicans to go along with him, or just reform the medical system using executive action. Both are very unlikely. Joe Biden is not the man to do this. See below that even you probably agree.
The second half of your comment is more pro-Obama and anti-Trump, plus some defense of Biden from several recently raised issues. In between several anti-Trump diatribes, you hit on what I think is a major truth, unfortunately. If I read one sentence of yours out of context (yet I think that subconsciously many Biden supporters fear this is correct.) it says: Biden is a no-brainer. I would not go that far, but it is becoming clear that he has mentally deteriorated.
tRump and Moscow Mitch have made a generational stamp on the Federal Judiciary, reflecting their core beliefs: no matter how unprepared, incompetent, and ignorant you are, so long as you believe in authoritarian populism and say that you are concerned about life from conception to birth you can have a lifetime judicial appointment.
I asked why any member would vote for Trump, and those who answered described the question as hate and contempt. Which confirms the original post. I was actually thinking of this november, now that you have seen him in action. By the way I do not hate., and there was no contempt intended, but I can see how it could be ininterpreted if you have a mind to.
Perhaps others don’t have the motives that are attributed to them either?
Having been in America a number of times I have always been amazed by how differently the news is covered depending on the source. It used to be that news rooms prided themselves on being honest and impartial. Some still do, but if one company/TV chanel has no intention of being truthfull or impartial that can undermine democracy. Yes I am attributing motives to Fox News.
Fox is run by Murdoc(an ex Australian) who still has newspapers and TV here, and uses them to furthur his conservative political aims here too, though seen as off the edge of reasonable here by most I think. He seems to think he has more than 1 vote, and he does.
Until you all have an agreed on set of facts, I don’t see how there can be a “we the people”?
How can anyone unite a country to, for example, fight the virus, if half the country puts their news on and is told it is a hoax? Even more of a problem if the president gets his news from a source that doesn’t do truth, and then believes Fox over his scientific advisors.
With the virus the consequences are counted in unnecessary deaths.
I don’t know how you get your democracy back while you do not have agreed facts, and while you have Fox News? Perhaps the families of those Fox follers who died after following their advice might sue and bankrupt Fox. I assume Fox are involved in liberating the country, and if that results in another wave of deaths, perhaps they will loose credibility?
I am very concerned for America, and the free world as a consequence. Who you elect as president affects the rest of the world to varying degrees, so we are interested/concerned.
Hoping Biden chooses a good woman as vice pres. and that boosts his chances.
El oso, Trump ordered the highly risky move to kill Qasem Soleimani greatly increasing tensions with Iran. Additionally he ripped up the Iran agreement making it so Iran is closer to a nuclear bomb. He withdrew troops from the Kurdish area of Syria allowing Turkey to kill and subject more to oppression. Trump has greatly escalated tensions there. Obamacare has slowed growth in premiums and would have reduced costs even further had it included a public option. Biden has proposed a public option. He has a plan.
You asked me why I support Biden other than him not being Trump then tell me my reasons aren’t good enough, ignoring all along my key reason that he will move in the general direction that other democrats would. It doesn’t matter that Republicans will try to get in the way. It doesn’t mean he can’t accomplish anything or that we can’t support his policies. Besides, the coronavirus is likely to significantly change politics in the US, and to the Republicans’ detriment. So you’re points about Mitch McConnell could very well be moot.
Lastly, what have I said about Trump that is a exaggeration or untruth that would make my words a “diatribe” or ad hominem? Saying Trump is a pathological liar is well evidenced. It isn’t a smear. And you get to get offended because I say something negative about Trump and then take potshots on Biden’s mental stability (an unevidenced right-wing smear, and your quip about Biden having no brain reveals that your intentions in asking why Biden aren’t pure but are loaded and agenda-laden)? The burden isn’t squarely on Biden-supporters to explain Biden (he clearly has experience and has expounded ideas at length in debates and rallies). You also bear a burden to explain Trump and why we should have an unpredictable, conspiracy-theorizing criminal as president for four more years. Because at this point, if it’s not Biden, it’s Trump. “Well, I’m actually a libertarian,” and then lecture me about how my reasons for supporting Biden on policy are invalid because of likely Republican obstructionism? When’s the last time a libertarian vision ever became a well articulated policy that then became a bill and then a law? You have some nerve el oso.
Didn’t judges used to be valued for their impartiality?
el oso: “Gingrich used strong rhetoric against liberalism/Clinton/democrats, but he managed to work with President Clinton on some important issues. (Balanced budget anyone?) Many democrats I have spoken with will reluctantly admit that many of the things they liked about the Clinton administration were done in cooperation with Gingrich and other republicans. They also admit (along with Bill Clinton himself) that President Clinton did violate criminal codes and should be held accountable. By contrast, the articles of impeachment against President Trump cited no criminal activities. Which is more partisan, and where is it coming from?”
a). Not quite the rosy picture you paint between Gingrich and Clinton. Gingrich’s bag of tricks included shutting down the govt more than once—one time for 21 days.
B) Trump hasn’t been subjected to the same measuring stick as the Clintons. No Special Prosecutor to spend years investigating including the numerous sexual harassment investigations against Trump, zero tax returns released, (Clinton’s—20 yrs of tax returns) zero investigations into how Trump’s family businesses are benefitting from taxpayer money, what/why his family members are involved with running the country—foreign affairs etc.
Yes, Clinton lied under oath about a consensual—inappropriate affair. But are you saying that is worse than if Bill had withheld Congressionally approved aid to pressure another country to announce and launch an investigation into a political rival?
When it comes down to it, Trump supporters and enablers have no legs to stand on in calling out others for moral, ethical or criminal breeches. They’ve revealed themselves to put Party above everything.
In my early voting years I felt like I morally had to support pro-life candidates and candidates who would oppose gay marriage, or rather, oppose the “gay agenda”, whatever that was, as gay marriage at the time still seemed unlikely to come to fruition. Honestly, I didn’t really like this position, but I felt like I had to hold that position to be a good Mormon.
Boy have I changed. First, I decided that I could not be a single issue or even a dual issue voter. Then, after moving to Utah, I found the Republican party too extreme. I would have caucused with them, but Republicans require you to register for the party to vote in the caucus in Utah. The Dems here allow independents to join the caucus. I found a lot of commonality with the few Dems that showed up. In short, my move to the Democrat party started with a negative push from Republicans, but continued with a lot of positive forces from the Dems.
At this point my views largely align with the Dems more than with the Republicans. But it seems like the Republicans have shifted way far to the right. Obamacare was roughly the same as a proposal advanced by Republicans in the Clinton era, but it became the tea-party’s call to arms.
I’m really disappointed with the hyper-partisanship of this era. I wish our legislature would work together better. I wish our news organizations could agree on some level of Truth. And social media is very frustrating, with each side building straw man arguments to shoot down. Sigh.
But I doubt our partisanship is unique in history. I suspect historians could find some similar situations. Perhaps we can learn something about them.
John W,
I responded to your first 3 points fairly, I believe. I am not impressed with some judicial appointees by Trump, but as I stated in my reply, this is a clear distinction based upon Trump’s actions to date. It is a positive reason to prefer Biden. On foreign policy, he has changed direction somewhat from Obama, but Iran does not seem closer or further from a nuclear weapon now than if Trump had stayed with the status quo. As I said, some democrats agree with many of his foreign policies, less with his rhetoric. Preferring other foreign policies is a totally legit reason to support a presidential candidate.
I will respond to the healthcare issue below. Your other point, that Biden generally follows democrat party lines and policies is not very specific and applies to all democrat candidates.
I talk about the healthcare policies in a negative way because there is very little chance of getting republicans to vote for many of the preferred democrat health care policies. None have done so for the past 10 years. There are currently 53 republicans in the senate. Current political expectations are that there will be 50-54 republicans in the next senate. To get over 50, the democrats need to win in states like Iowa, Montana, Georgia and Texas. There are well established republican incumbents in all but one of the 2 Georgia seats. It only gets harder from there for the democrats. I see very little legislation going through congress unless there is some bi-partisan support. In long-term healthcare policy, there is little of that.
The anti-trump diatribe I was referring to starts with “What Trump did was unconstitutional and he should have been impeached.” It continues with “Trump is a criminal” and ends with “On coronavirus, he has been a conspiracy-pushing, dangerous failure.” On your first statement it is not clear what you are referring to, the most common refrain I have heard over the last 3 years is the Russia collusion story. Speaker Pelosi disagrees with you. She could have moved articles of impeachment after the Mueller report, but did not. On the second, I have heard lots of allegations of sexual misconduct by Trump during his long history. While sleazy, none seem to be criminal, plenty of DAs would have been glad to bring charges against a high profile guy like him, if they had a good case. I have heard a lot commentators ripping some of Trump’s statements and action on the coronavirus, but Governor Cuomo and many other elected democrats have not said much. I have heard several heartfelt thank yous from some of the democrats.
Two of the areas where Trump has been beat up for his statements are about using hydroxychloroquine and other drugs as treatment and pulling funding from the WHO. There is now peer reviewed literature supporting the hydroxychloroquine treatment. Also, I just checked the WHO website. They have 7000 employees and many doctors and PhDs working for them around the world. I am just an engineer who works in a food plant, who has never been close to China. Even so, I can tell you that the there have been way more deaths from corona virus in China than the few thousand they tally . The real number is probably 100K or more. That sort of ridiculous propaganda should not be funded by US taxpayers. When the extent of China’s criminal actions regarding corona virus comes more fully into the light, Trump will probably look much better than Joe Biden.
By the way, I did not vote for Trump in 2016 and could hardly stand to listen to more than 10 minutes of his rallies. His actions are mixed, but much better than I thought likely in 2016. I would love to see a real campaign in 2020 with two forceful advocates of their positions and policies. With Joe Biden, it is likely going to be Trump against a multitude of Biden spokesmen.
El oso,
The headline from the Guardian March 20, 2020: “Iran triples stockpile of enriched uranium in breach of nuclear deal.” They’re closer to a bomb because of Trump.
“Trump is a criminal” – The Mueller report laid out in detail, without having to do so, 10 cases of obstruction of justice. There’s also the thing with Michael Cohen and Ukraine. Pelosi couldn’t impeach on obstruction because the Republicans are beholden to a conspiratorial, denialist base living in a world of delusion about Trump. OJ was technically innocent of killing his ex-wife, too.
“On coronavirus, he has been a conspiracy-pushing, dangerous failure”
For one Trump has claimed that the coronavirus was from a Wuhan lab, which has been refuted by experts. He has routinely disregarded scientists on the issue. He was warned about coronavirus as early in November and acted dismissive of its threat until mid-March, which has only served to worsen the problem. Just a couple of days ago he told people to ingest disinfectant as a remedy. Consequently New York poison control have reported an upswing in cases of people ingesting disinfectant. I’m not throwing the terms criminal and conspiracy theorist loosely or hyperbolically with Trump.
You’re straining at gnats over Biden and swallowing camels over Trump. Absolutely irresponsible. The points you make in your comments are easily refutable with just cursory knowledge of the issues at hand. Inform yourself before responding. Knowing you probably won’t, I’m bowing out of discussion with you and won’t be reading any response from you. Judging by the downvotes it doesn’t appear you’re convincing anyone who is reading your comments anyways. So take some time to reflect and actually read before you write.
I don’t know if Trump was warned about the coronavirus in Nov but I know my daughter’s LA hospital has been preparing for it since January. Possibly earlier but that’s when she discussed it with us and made the preliminary plans to isolate from her family if and when the time came.
Hard to accept a hospital being better prepared than the President of the United States but there you are. He either failed to prepare or do so very VERY badly.
It appears that eloso gets his news/information from a different source than John W for example. They each think their set of facts is agreed, only to find it is not. There appears to be a Republican/Fox set of facts, and the others.
A big question for America (perhaps the next president) is to get an agreed set of facts, so you can overcome/reduce the disunity.
As you can see above this makes conversation frustrating.
I was watching a show of political journalists this morning, discussing politics and the world. They had just shown Trump suggesting disinfectant by ingestion or injection to kill the virus. One of the participants said Trump has as much credibility as a bar fly (a drunk fly) in the world, which he thought was a disaster for America and the free world. He is not particularly left in his other views. Just to give Americans an indication of how the rest of the world sees Trump.
Thank you for writing this. The statistics you referenced are striking. I hope you don’t mind, I linked this in a post I just published. If you have any issue with that I will remove it immediately. Thanks for the time you took to write this!
Forgot to link it, in case you’d rather it removed, please let me know if that’s the case:
https://nocoincidencesdotblog.wordpress.com/2020/06/08/ites-politics/