This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
Mildly AdultAsking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

liptards, repubtards, trumptards and disparate monologues

Poll - Total Votes: 4
Yes I want to own the other group they are so stupid!
I do want a dialog on these important topics but it hard to have one
I don't actually understand that economic supply/deman mumbo jumbo but I have opinions on economics
I just need them to read the Bible. If they read the Bible they will understand my point of view.
Shut the hell up with your disparate monologue garbage this post is a desperate disparate monologue
Other, you are so bad at making polls I have to keep adding my own choices
Show Results
You can only vote on one answer.
I see the political banter back and forth between yall on here and other sites and it is just useless disparate monologues. Most of you are not interacting at all with one another but venting on each others threads. Is the end goal though? For you to "own" the other group using this or some other forum as a megaphone to vent your opinion ?
Top | New | Old
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
Politics has basically become a spectator sport like out-of-shape beer belly benchwarmers feeling a personal sense of accomplishment when "their team" wins. That isn't necessarily different from the past, but what has changed is that the politicians have largely and actually joined in on the game. In the past, there seemed to have been a focus on issues. Now, it's about rallying around "player" personalities, the colour of the team's brand, and "owning" the "other side."

It's not about issues, policies, or even beliefs. Today, being angry and loud seems to gain you entry in conservative circles no matter how fiscally irresponsible your policies are. Likewise, passing a stringent "purity test" that makes no allowances for prior heroes and past generations and the cultural times they lived in is the only valid ticket to the liberal centre. And, moderation is the enemy of both.
This message was deleted by its author.
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@BackyardShaman I understand. Being you are pansexual aggressive may be the proposition that you should not exists (which implies being dead). I am afraid I am ignorant of bots and social media,
True, the two parties offer no hope, and the "users" here absolutely refuse to talk like us, people, out here. We're hoping to vote for Cornell West. Change can happen.
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@Roundandroundwego tell us about Cornell West --why did you highlight him as a potential champion?
Click bait. Yawn
Budwick · 70-79, M
There are many undecided and with media not doing their job, maybe we can help.
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@Budwick what is the media's job ? Who determines that job and when you say "the media" does that imply that you feel there are no media outlets that do said job?
Budwick · 70-79, M
@robertsnj Historically journalists would keep the people informed of relevant events.
Getting the 'scoop' first, with supporting evidence, reporting the story accurately - was it's own reward.

Today, journalists are often nothing like that at all.
Stories often include strong bias - should be editorials - not news.
Stories often omit important facts that do not support the reporters bias,
Some stories are completely fabricated.

The media has killed honest journalism. Truth is the sole arbiter.
People interested in news must find a source they find most credible.
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@Budwick that is a well thought out reply
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
I think how people engage leaves a lot to be desired. I think a lot of it is blowing off steam.

If you want to persuade anyone, you have to talk like an adult to an adult. Not like WWE
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@Burnley123
I think a lot of it is blowing off steam
I think that idea is valid--venting
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout i could see validity in that idea.
Renaci · 36-40
No the goal is to get each side to off themselves through sheer bullying and harassment. It's not about learning. It's not about debate. It's not even about "owning" anyone. It's to drive each other to death so only one side remains.
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@Renaci I find validity in that to that thought maybe minus the killing part.
I put it down to terriorialism. I don't think even they are dumb enough to think they're winning people over. They're just sending a message
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP as a thought experiment if you replaced territorialism with tribalism how much of the meaning of your idea would have changed? also do you really think most people who engage in political --bantering, i could not find the word, banting, are dumb?
@robertsnj If I said "tribalism" I wouldn't have answered your post quite as directly as I did w/"territorialism". There is a lot of overlap between the two, but tribalism involves instincts that support the tribe. You don't need a tribe to be territorial. You can be a lone wolf. In social media, it's about running your mouth w/out fear of being kept honest, or keeping the other guy honest.
Musicman · 61-69, M
Each side hope's to convert the other side. It isn't going to happen, but they try.
@Musicman vote Cornell West if you even want change.
Confusing times
robertsnj · 56-60, M
@jackjjackson which parts are confusing? why are you confused now but not in the past (implied by the word times)
@jackjjackson we're not confused, just against both parties.
Personally I’d like to see our next president in 2024 be between 45-55 not be Myor Pete lol. I’d be ok with Vivek Ramaswamy. @robertsnj @Roundandroundwego

 
Post Comment