So…what have conservatives done?

[OddBeMe]

[msc545]

Basically what they do is try to make sure the people that haven't done well don't get to eat or have shelter or decent clothing while ensuring that clever criminals make all the money. Conservatives are really into misery and punishment for others that they think deserve it and that's mostly anybody without enough money to satisfy them.

[YAsQuen]

conservative are realistic and state that some problems can't be solved by throwing money at them.

Liberal policies Largely reduce living quality not conserfvative ones. Both partys are pretty much eually corrupt and in bed with corporations. Im leaning more towards the dems being more corrupt but realistically thats probably just cope.

Conservatives really like when humans accept the concept of consequences for ones actions yes.

In Summary give it 3 years and ull have universal basic income anyway. (YES it will suck)

[goaded]

@YAsQuen Republican policies reduce lives.

[jamesgoldman]

Republicans reduces overpopulation, that would win many a vote

[YAsQuen]

@jamesgoldman old people move to red states? what a dimb witted way to look at the worlf. Refusing any other reasonable explanations and feeding ur own biased opinion.

[jamesgoldman]

Nah, thinking more rip the warning labels off and let the TikTokers go for Darwin awards

[YAsQuen]

@jamesgoldman We will NOT consent

[jamesgoldman]

No consent needed packed tight and filled with lead

[slatyb]

@jamesgoldman That's going to take care of itself. Birth rates are falling everywhere.

[slatyb]

Opposed every bit of progress ever made.

[Agagagagaga]

Another person who doesn’t know a goddamn thing about history. And a Liberal! The two go so well together!

[slatyb]

@Agagagagaga it's highly likely I know more than you do. What have conversatives opposed?

- The abolituon of slavery.
- Women's suffrage
- Desegregation of schools and other public services
- Mixed race marriage
- Civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination by hotels, restaurants, retailers, and other businesses.
- Social security
- Medicare
- Women's equality before the law
- Access to contraception
- Marriage equality
- Environmental protection
-

[OddBeMe]

All true. I will say the only real environmental legislation that has come out was under Nixon. Who was pretty conservative in some parts. Other areas he opened up trade with China and set our economy on a good path, despite the negatives for auto workers.

[Joshydavid25]

Republicans voted higher on those than Democrats did.. In fact Republicans started as an anti-Slavery party.. But you're probably one of those who believe that Conservatives were more Democratic back in the day..

[OddBeMe]

@Joshydavid25 sigh…political party names don’t matter. Unless you also agreed with the Democratic-Republicans against the Whigs…?

[slatyb]

@Joshydavid25 Things changed radically with the Civil Rights act of 1964 and with Reagan the Republican party moved far to the right. The question said "Conservative", not "Republican".!

[Joshydavid25]

I knew it, the old.. "The original Republicans weren't Conservative" argument..

[goaded]

@Joshydavid25 They wanted to abolish slavery in the United States, what's conservative about doing away with centuries of tradition?

[Joshydavid25]

@goaded Many Conservatives are also Christians.. They want the good traditions to be preserved.. The Quakers were the first people in the U. S to Abolish slavery.. Also many Americans thought slavery was evil..

[slatyb]

@Joshydavid25 the Quakers are not Christian., at least not today. Like the Unitarian Universalists, they have no creed. The UUs were also active in the abolitionist movement and in the civil rights movement of the 20th century.

[slatyb]

@Joshydavid25 yes, even at the time of the drafting of the Constitution the majority were against slavery. The northern depends made serious compromise to get the Southern Satan to join the union, compromise that are causing serious problems today as they give a minority of the population disproportionate power.

[Joshydavid25]

The Quakers are Christian.. Their whole thing is basically that they are specifically Spirit filled.. Led by the Holy Spirit.. A lot of people actually didn't like abolitionist, even people vehemently against slavery..

And well that's understandable.. America just started and they didn't want to weaken a new, experimental country by already dividing..

[slatyb]

@Joshydavid25 There are many beliefs among modern Quakers. Some are Christian, some are explicitly not.

[Still-alive]

The only real thing they believe in are lower taxes and deregulation. Thats it. They’ll do just about anything else for power. Im convinced They’d bring slavery back if they could get away with it.

[OddBeMe]

And that’s fine if they just kept it there. Honestly Keynesian economics calls for that sometimes.

[msmissydc]

Trying to halt progress on every level (which isn't really a surprise its literally in their name). Spawning hate, against new things. Most of the time being hypocritically and being a pure power hungry bunch of people.

[msmissydc]

The biggest problem is, that they can IDENTIFY as whatever they want to, as you can literally choose what you want to conserve. If you ask a moderate conservative he might tell you he wants less coorperate power, as thats how it was during his time while supporting the same party that wants back a kind of segregation while just not calling it that way.
Everyone wants to preserve something and that's not a problem. If you identify as a conservative though you definitely are ok with bringing back problematic things and are definitely anti freedom.

[YAsQuen]

wow ur assuming that every step away from the status quo is beneficial to society.

Is it possible that the government implemented bad laws? Is it possible that certain social stigmas were actually beneficial to society? Just asking if possible not if its actually that way.

[msmissydc]

If you would have actually read what I wrote you wouldn't have the need to write that. Yes not any law is good. (Obviously). Halting progress is bad though. Not only conservatives want to stop new laws. Conservative parties also often want to stop good ones though.

[YAsQuen]

How do you define Progress? Anything that sounds good on paper? Please define ur idea of progress.
What if stuff that sounds good on paper slowly corrodes society? ... San Fran...

[msmissydc]

New ideas that can change society. Yes of course it's not all good. Change affects both but progressiveness often tries to work with it while conservatives try to work against it.
Political speaking, new ideas are more often better than old ones. Progressive and conservatives define each other by being opposites. Progress is not any change, It's the willingly done change.

[YAsQuen]

may i ask how old you are?

[msmissydc]

28. You?

[msmissydc]

Well your profile says one year younger. If its not fake.

[YAsQuen]

23. Just read through ur profile. Do you mind me sharing why i think feminism is bullshit?

[msmissydc]

Only if you actually know stuff. I am not in the mood to defend against single opinions that I dont Even support myself, or those that are fake arguments created by the manosphere. If you can do it without just purely being hatefull, but instead argue with real things please do that.

[YAsQuen]

Noone has ever demonstrated that women are currently opressed in our society (america). Ull be able to list bad thing that have happened to women but u won't be able to demonstrate opression. You can throw em at me and i can show u why they are bunk one by one.

Just from the get go: But most politicans are men. Women are 52 of the population and they are free to vote for anyone they like. But most nicely paid jobs are men. There are many reasons but the simplest is that they WANT it more than the women they compete against.

Women and Men are different. Physically and Mentally. This is a biological directive given to us by evolution god or whatever. Since the genders are different any and all differing outcomes are not only easily explanable but also to be expected. Not that differing outcomes given the same genes constitute opression in the first place. Cuz going by by that logic whites would be opressed by jews and Asians in this country.

Ill even throw out there that women pretty much always had it easier than men. I get it 17-1900 bad times i get it. But I gurantee you that the average man had it worse.

I personally think its one of the many tools of the elite to divide the population. So is modern (not censored) red pill content by the way. There is a reason they let the most vile form of red pill keep existing throughout and after the censor train raped the internet

[YAsQuen]

Do you believe that men and women think and act the same in the absence of social conditioning? ↗

[msmissydc]

So I am not in america. Staying with your country the biggest example of a kind of oppression is literally taking away reproductive rights in the form of taking abortions right away.
First: we dont specifically need more women in goverment positions. If you look at what party men vs. Women vote its pretty clear who they support. If the right people would get voted into office thats fine
In what way have it women easier? I think thats one of the biggest generalization lies ever told. Any gender has problems not saying men have none. Claiming women have it much easier to me just sounds not even understanding the problems. If you use the example women can get sex much more easiliy just know that the men wanting only sex are mostly the same people that are the problematic ones. E. G. 'Nice guys'.

Yes genders are different, I specifically think, that not the genes are the deciding factor but the society bringing up role expectations.
So you think the misterious elite are the problem? What kind of control do you think they have? I think that utter BS and its mainly a society that works in the ways it does, On an aggregated individual base.
For jobs: that is kinda the problem. Most men want it more than most women. Which makes it hard for those women that want it too because the expectations of the are the same as for any other women.

[YAsQuen]

abortions aren't illegal nor are there any plans to make it illegal. Even if they were made illegal it wouldn't constiute legal favouring of men since they didn't have any reproductive rights in the first place.

Women have it easier because they have the ability to offload basic survival to their father/brother and later husband. An ability women are slowly losing in modern society ( which is one of many reasons womens suicide rates are on the rise)

For this one pls check my link

They can slowly acccumulate power. Create Monopolys. Invest in the Market while enacting laws that favour their stocks. Literally get a get out of jail free card. They can kill people. They can imprison people. Most of the elite comes from 5 colleges. Its not that big of a circle if u think about it. I would recommend thinking about the elites like the aristocracy in rome during ceasars time.

Getting top jobs isn't easy. And it shouldn't be easy. Your argument is what exactly? Is hard make easy pls :c

[strateguy632]

lincoln freed slaves he was rnc while dnc wanted slaves so badly the ceceded

[NaultD]

Lincoln was a moderate republican while others in his political party was called radical leftist.

The wigs was the conservative party (like powder wigs during the revolution time.) They wanted slavery. To continue conservative policy and values.

[OddBeMe]

Lincoln was a hippie liberal and you know it.

What was the political position of the Democratic-Republicans against the Whigs, moron?

[gorydetails]

What has the authoritarian left done other than bring misery to the world?

[goaded]

Same as the authoritarian right. That problem is "authoritarian", not "left".

Funny you should mention that in the same week Trump talked about rooting out all his political opponents "like vermin".

[gorydetails]

@goaded Wow, you almost got it. So tell me about mask mandates and shot mandates. Authoritarian or no?

[goaded]

No. Public health measures. Tell me about rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies. Authoritarian or no?

[gorydetails]

@goaded are you dizzy from that spin?

[goaded]

No. Public health measures save lives. Are seatbelt laws authoritarian? Answer the question: rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies. Authoritarian or no?

[gorydetails]

@goaded closing beaches? For health or no?

[goaded]

So, you're going to just keep saying random shit rather than answer the question of whether promising to "root out" all your political oponents and calling them "vermin" is authoritarian or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded Outlawing gas stoves... authoritarian or not?

[goaded]

More random shit to avoid answering the question of whether promising to "root out" all your political oponents and calling them "vermin" is authoritarian or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded Oh, and lightbulbs? Authoritarian or not?

[goaded]

rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies. Authoritarian or not? Republicans: deadly or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded Awesome! Now do the murder rate

[gorydetails]

@goaded Awesome! All we have to do is control every aspect of everyone's lives and no one will die.

[goaded]

There you are again with the "if it doesn't prevent 100%, it's pointless" bullshit. Protip: murders are deaths.

[gorydetails]

@goaded Right, which is why we need to ban guns, cars, fast food, gas stoves, force vaccinations, shut down beaches, parks

[goaded]

Yeah, none of those things have been done, and more people still die in Republican counties.

[gorydetails]

@goaded We need to start banning gas cars to save the environment! Electric only!

[goaded]

Oh, look, you're still ignoring the simple question whether rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not?

Simultaneously, never say you're not a multi-tasker, ignoring the fact that electing Republicans kills people. (This is all before the pandemic, in case you hadn't noticed.)

[gorydetails]

@goaded wait is this more of your observational science? Bahahhahahaha

[goaded]

Yes. It clearly shows that people who live in Republican counties die more often than people who live in Democratic counties. Even before the covid misinformation. I really wonder what that graph would look like today.

[gorydetails]

@goaded Really? Democrats never die! This is AMAZING!

[goaded]

What's amazing is your propensity to lie and avoid simple questions.

Is rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not?

How does this show that "Democrats never die!"?

[gorydetails]

@goaded These were your words "It clearly shows that people who live in Republican counties die more often than people who live in Democratic counties"

[goaded]

How can you not understand the meaning of the words "more often"? Or are you just pretending to be a moron to avoid answering this question: Is rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded You can't have a group die more often than another group when both groups have 100% fatality rate.

[goaded]

You must be just pretending to be a moron to avoid answering this question: Is rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded So how do these blue counties manage to die less? I'm fascinated to learn this magic trick they've figured out.

[goaded]

No you're not, you're just pretending to be a moron to avoid answering this question: Is rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded This was your chart and your words. Not mine.

[goaded]

It clearly doesn't say what you're claiming, and you're clearly avoiding answering this question: Is rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies authoritarian or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded It's what you're claiming. You claimed people in red counties die more.

[goaded]

Yes, it's obvious from the graph that dates from before the pandemic and probably increased from there because of liars like you. You're clearly avoiding answering this question: Is rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies authoritarian or not?

[gorydetails]

@goaded And I'm asking how democrats have figured out how not to die. Since you're stating that people in republican counties are dying more than their counterparts.

[goaded]

They've figured out that following the science keeps them alive, and you're still avoiding the question of how rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not. Because you're a pathetic troll.

[gorydetails]

@goaded So they never die? Amazing!

[goaded]

Every time you post nonsense, I get to post reality and remind you that you're still avoiding the question of how rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not. Because you're a pathetic troll.

[gorydetails]

@goaded I'm trying to find the secret to not dying. Is it just being a democrat? Is it that easy?

[goaded]

Another chance to post reality and remind you that you're still avoiding the question of how rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian or not. Because you're a pathetic troll.

[gorydetails]

@goaded Let's not forget it's your dumb ass that keeps posting this chart and claims that democrats don't die.

[goaded]

I keep posting the chart, and you keep lying that it means "democrats don't die". All the while refusing to admit that rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian.

[goaded]

I keep posting the chart, and you keep lying that it means "democrats don't die". All the while refusing to admit that rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian.

[OddBeMe]

Joel, we’ve had this discussion about red states vs blue states on crime. And then we went to Dem mayors in Red States, which is a paradox. You seem to think crime follows Dems. No. It follows people. Mass people on one area tend to be Democratic.

[gorydetails]

@OddBeMe we have. Dem run states and cities are rampant with crime and despair.

[gorydetails]

@goaded Those were your words. Not mine.

[OddBeMe]

And we never settled it.. how do you define Dem run stats and Dem run cities? If Dem run cities are in Red States what kind of power over their cities do you think they have?

[gorydetails]

@OddBeMe if a mayor doesn't have the authority or ability to run the police force in his/her city, they're kind of useless and should be fired. Save that taxpayer money.

[goaded]

" @goaded Those were your words. Not mine. " You really are utterly shameless, aren't you? But I won't let you avoid the fact that you refuse to admit that rooting out everyone you don't like based on a pack of lies is authoritarian.

[OddBeMe]

You realize governors have more power and Congress passes statewide laws? Like no liscenses needed for guns, cut welfare for poor…both would skyrocket crime.

[goaded]

And deaths.

[OddBeMe]

@goaded yes, death for many reasons. Google how may Americans are starving in Red States?

[gorydetails]

@OddBeMe how are the kids doing in Baltimore schools?

[OddBeMe]

We should all join a bowling league. I think Joel, Goad and I could be the bestest of friends.

[gorydetails]

I know you want to finger goaded’s holes.

[Anonymous]

If you ever cracked open a history book you wouldn’t need to ask this question.

🙄

[OddBeMe]

Well I have…and I see progressives making the changes and old racist fogies holding them back.

Like watch US and the Holocaust. Liberals wanted to save every Jew in Europe yet Samuel Breckinridge Long was an anti-Semite ahole who put a stop to that.

Not sure why. We’d have thousands of more prosperous shops and kosher stands in NY.

[Opinion Owner]

@oddbeme I find it strange that you’re talking about Jews and antisemites and kosher delis. It seems irrelevant. Then again, you probably have your knickers in a twist over the Jews. 🙄

I can tell you lots of good things Conservatives have done.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1957

Every Republican Senator voted in favor of that Bill. It was signed into law by a Republican President, Eisenhower.

Oh and over a dozen Democrats voted against it.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1960

Again. Democrats voted against this bill. Republicans voted for it. It was signed into law by a Republican President. Eisenhower.

Oh and there was also this:
en.m.wikipedia.org/.../Brown_v._Board_of_Education

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of racially integrating schools. In Arkansas, a Democrat governor tried to bar Black students rim going to school and called out the National Giard.

Eisenhower, a REPUBLICAN, reasserted control as President and Commander in Chief, taking control of the National Guard, AND he sent in federal troops to ensure that the Democrats couldn’t keep schools racially segregated.

[Opinion Owner]

@slatyb See above. Since you know sooooo much. 🙄🤣

[OddBeMe]

@agagagagaga I expected more of a challenge. You’re confusing political parties with political stances like a five yr old.

What were the politics of the Democratic-Republicans vs the Whigs?

[slatyb]

The question said "Conservatives", not "Republicans".

[Opinion Owner]

@oddbeme The Whigs? The WHIGS? Can you at least join the 20th century? What’s next? A scathing indictment of the election of 1828?

I’d tell you to stop moving the goal posts. But you’re a Liberal. And an activist. And a propagandist. This is just what you people do.

I find it remarkable that securing voting rights for African Americans and integrating schools isn’t good enough for you.

Or @slatyb

But you’re Liberals. You’re never satisfied with anything. And I realize it’s pointless arguing with people who think that a man can become a woman, but I do this for everyone else. To show them that your arguments are crap. At East I cited groundbreaking civil rights legislation and a Surpreme Court decision. What did you do? Put up a phot of some old field hand who had his back stripped in 1860?

Stop living in the past.

[Opinion Owner]

@slatyb “The question said "Conservatives", not "Republicans".

So Eisenhower wasn’t a Conservarice?

🤣
😂

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[Opinion Owner]

So Eisenhower wasn’t a CONSERVATIVE?

@oddbeme @slatyb

[slatyb]

The top income tax rate when Eisenhower was president was 90%. He certainly wouldn't have been sympathetic with to today's Republicans. Neither would Barry Goldwater, who observed that if the fundamentalist Christians managed to get control of the Republican Party or would be a trap problem. He was right. They did, and it is.

[OddBeMe]

@slatyb I love when we strike a nerve in some crusty Republican.

[slatyb]

You are the one living in the past, pretending the Republican party hasn't changed since 1960. It changed completely after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. LBJ knew he would losing the southern states but he still did the right thing. Then we had Reagan and Falwell the Republicans went all-in on Christo-fascism and they've only gone farther and farther right since then.

[OddBeMe]

@slatyb that’s what I said you bastard piece of sh- oh you meant agagagog. You think that’s the sound he makes suckin Trump dick?

[Anonymous]

not stamp out free speech like liberals have

[OddBeMe]

I’ve always agreed college campuses have some issues there. Everywhere else, no.

Violence and free speech? Unite the Right, Jan 6…

[Al_Musafir]

Made women, women and men, men.

[OddBeMe]

Confusing but I’m guessing you mean trans people?

[Al_Musafir]

No, the opposite.

[OddBeMe]

Not trans people?

[Al_Musafir]

Yep, it made women who they should be (that is women) and men who they should be (that is men). Didn't delude the genders to behave and act or try to transform into other gender.

[OddBeMe]

Oh so you were talking transgender.

[Al_Musafir]

Again, no. Shouldn't be this hard to understand.

[OddBeMe]

Well you’re saying conservs are anti trans. Which I agree.

[Al_Musafir]

Not only that but I also meant it in ways of behaviour and personality (gender roles)

[Juxtapose]

They freed the slaves lol.

[OddBeMe]

Liberals or conservatives…?

[Juxtapose]

I found somebody else to sum it up for me:

"I would describe Lincoln as a philosophical blend of John Locke and Edmund Burke. Like Burke, he revered the past (a conservative trait), especially America’s Founding Fathers. He wanted to preserve and expand their legacy. This led him to Locke, whose classical liberalism and belief in the right to life, liberty, and property greatly influenced the American Revolution. This blend of Locke and Burke led to Lincoln wanting to preserve the Union and expand freedom by ending slavery, which he saw (correctly) as the long-term intention of the Founders.

I would also describe Lincoln as blending Thomas Jefferson’s rhetoric with Alexander Hamilton’s political platform. Lincoln’s words, such as his Gettysburg Address, built on Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence and the creed that “all men are created equal.” But most of Lincoln’s platform, such as using tariffs to promote corporate and banking interests, building “internal improvements” (infrastructure) and ending slavery, was taken right out of Hamilton’s playbook (Lincoln actually inherited the platform from Henry Clay and the Whigs).

Lincoln was described in his own time as a pawn of the banks. He used the government to stimulate the rise of large corporations and the industrialization of the late 19th century. He also sought to expand equality and end slavery. Therefore, I would put Lincoln a little to the right on economic issues, and a little to the left on social issues."

[OddBeMe]

Yawn…any arguments NOT an appeal to authority? I could care less about Locke and Burke.

[Juxtapose]

Uhh it's a description of his politics dude lol.

[Juxtapose]

Did you even read it?

[OddBeMe]

It’s their description of his politics. Anyone who remotely studied civil war history - my last deep dive before the Holocaust- anyone would say Lincoln as a giant LIBERAL in a land of conservative slave owners.

[Juxtapose]

No, there's lots of conservatives who were utterly appalled at the idea of slavery. Even the founding fathers knew it was fucked up but they couldn't completely get rid of it when founding the nation.

Slavery is a radical idea that is not normal to anyone with any sort of compassion. You might as well try and say that slitting the throats of babies and drinking their blood is conservative.

[OddBeMe]

Then those conservatives were having liberal thoughts. Sorry dude.