Can the Right and the left ever agree on anything? if so what do you think it will be?

[BadApple69]

I am only talking about the U. S. because that’s where my experience is. If you have experience from other countries I would love to hear it also.
Personally I think we are so divided it’ll be very difficult to find anything we can agree on anymore. What do you all think?

[A_Bell]

Too much volume and voice is given to cultish political extremists of all flavors. The internet, particularly X and the Tok are bad about empowering these lunatics.

There are people benefitting from this, but they aren't average people, they are foreign governments trying to destabilize us, national leaders using it to maintain power, wealthy people using it to make even more money, and just bad people who like to spread misery.

The problem is that half of the population is in the lower half of intelligence, half the population is in the lower half in anxiety, half the population is in the lower half in personality and psychological disorders and the same is true for any human trait.

With 320 million people, you're going to end up with tens of millions of dumb people, hate filled morons, crazy illogical buffoons, fraudsters and frightened conspiracy theorists.

Even though it's a small minority, their voice passes through the amplifier of social media and pollutes the universe of ideas like a virus.

[purplepoppy]

There were protests here last year in a town to keep migrants out of a hotel. The left and right were in agreement on that. They won.

The truth is once you make something a left v right issue you alienate half the population instead of getting everyone on your side. Americans just don't get that

[BadApple69]

Politicians make it a left vs right issue, the main stream media makes it a left vs right issue. You and say yes we like this or no we don’t all of a sudden puts us on a side whether we like it or not. The world is becoming polarized and that’s on purpose.

[purplepoppy]

Divide and conquer

[BadApple69]

@purplepoppy you know it.

[strateguy632]

agreement in general is bad in politics because then various voters can't find a representative.

for example if all congress agreed to send ukraine big money, who would represent citizens who oppose that.

politicians must disagree so various people can find a representative. then when more people support the one, that is the influential policy.

the agreement is not a goal. the disagreement is not the problem. but cancel culture and false accusations is the main political problem.

for example trump said "don't put your hand on the criminal head when they get in the car." he never said bang it on the door but news companies lie that he said. but trump never said that. the fact they use the method showed they failed to find any real flaw and showed hate.

who would want to be friends with democrats who falsely accuse "you know trump is a criminal". i would rather not be their friend.

[BadApple69]

I’m not sure who it was that said this about the main stream news…. They said “if Trump said he loved puppies the news would say Trump hates kittens”. And that is what I see with the news.

[normalice]

Yes and no. Left and right is no longer defined by ideals but by priorities. Indeed, much of the left and right agree with the things the left prioritizes but the right considers those things to be of extremely low priority, and instead is convinced the highest priorities shoild be culture war grievances.

For example, there are people on this site who have told me if the options were a democrat that would stop global corruption but ignore women's sports against a republican who vowed to keep trans people out of women's sports but admitted they would make global corruption worse, they would choose the republican despite agreeing global corruption is a problem. Which, of course, is why right wing media (owned by the corrupt) has made a whole industry out of creating culture war grievances..

[OlderAndWiser]

The MSM thrives on divisiveness and it wil continue until the public makes it clear that they don't want the MSM acting like cheerleaders at the Salem witch trials.

[NaultD]

The right finds pride shitting their pants just so leftist have to smell it.

The world has millions of problems and we have the resources to deal with it and it takes a level of nuance thinking, philosophical dilemma where we sacrifice one thing but gain another.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/XfJMsq7pz0I

Look you in the eye as you ask "how can we make your better?"

That is the embodiment of the right to me.

[strateguy632]

oh you will bridge the gap. with such replies. sarcasm.

[NaultD]

@strateguy632 at some point you guys want to have better lifes. Like a child having a tempur tantrum all the way to Disney land.

This is how all of history is created. From social rights. Where the national guard had to protect black students Going to school. To today where we juat argue do black lives matter? You guys have been and will aways be cunts from beginning to the end of time.

The problem is leftist don't treat you like children like you act.

[NaultD]

@strateguy632 https://youtu.be/YZoC3d6S3jI?si=UH1ER5XnVxAp8xdk

That that same logic to the beginning of humanity. Conservativitism is just a death sentence for humanity.

[JayBones]

It's already too late. The USA has already collapsed. It's just too stupid to lay down and die. Leftists have gone so left they call centrists Nazis. The left Demonize the two Senators that fight for liberty and limited government at all costs. A Government as bloated and all intrusive as our own can make a person's life miserable. When this happens people that are miserable being taxed too much to live in crime riddled Hellholes will vote for a Republican even though he wants to increase war spending and get in to wars (Except Trump who is the only President in my life to not start a war) If you are someone who hates work and wants to stay home and do drugs all day you are going to vote for a Democrat even if he also supports increased war spending and starting wars.

[dustybiker2]

They old school US politicians were good at leaving the fight on the floor. Would go out for drinks together in the evening and laugh about the day. They've all died out. Now people are too emotional to set aside differences temporarily.

[strateguy632]

who would want to hang out with people who talk like the squad, or drag kavanaugh and same to trump?

[goaded]

US voters can agree on a lot (reasonable firearm regulation, getting money out of politics, the need for affordable health care, social security, not having a convicted criminal for president, etc.), but there are a lot of people ensuring that they're distracted by other things or delaying the many trials that would allow voters to know if they might be voting for a criminal.

[BadApple69]

There are things you said I can agree with… getting money out of politics is one.
Reasonable gun control… we would never agree on what’s reasonable. Healthcare, I think all companies should supply health care. If you don’t work, you have to buy it. Let’s use that as an incentive for people to work (doubt you’ll agree with that). But I am always willing to debate it with you or anyone for that matter.

[goaded]

"Reasonable gun control… we would never agree on what’s reasonable."
How sure of that are you? The current, extreme, position on the right is that there shouldn't be any gun control. Do you agree with that? I not, we can come to a compromise that's more sensible than the status quo.

The trouble with your view of health care is that if you leave or lose your job you lose your coverage. That's a massive burden for workers to live under, especially if they have families to support. Shouldn't earning money be enough of an incentive for people to work?

[V_Injector]

Look into what Neo-Cons and Neo-Libs are... war hawks. Those of us that know, already know where they agree.

Us anti-war people are a voter block though, and they try to pander to us just like they try to pander to the trannies and fags... and then they try to get everyone behind a new war. It makes them money.

[JacobJordan]

Depends on the left/right. I can agree with most people on most things. I will however not agree or tolerate bs, lies, of unfactual statements. I also have no affiliation with left or right. I have disagreed with both and I have agreed with both.

[BadApple69]

Well maybe we can agree to disagree on this topic 😊

[ibodi]

That is what Lenin say imperialism.

Happened on Brits so looked for colony. Vietnamese is France's slaves. While vietnamese enter France doing what french did not want to do. Their attitude are like americans now but those jobs really french did not want to do. So vietnamese do the job for french with french's prejudice.

China may be scapegoat now.

[strateguy632]

vietnam was colonized by france but u. s. didn't colonize anywhere.

[OtterMan68]

They agree on a lot: better schools, safer streets, lower costs, etc, but thanks to the talking heads on TV, gerrymandered congressional districts that gives the far right and far left safe seats, etc, working across the aisle, especially for republicans, is seen as weakness and capitulation.

[BadApple69]

I agree that the news media are really political talk shows with very little to no unbiased actual news.
I also agree that both sides left and right want better schools, safer streets, and lower costs… the left and right can’t agree how to achieve these goals.
As an example: safer streets to the right is putting more cops on the streets and on the left it’s defunding the police.
These two things will have opposite effects on street safety.

[OtterMan68]

I'd argue the right is about punishing crime, and the left is about preventing crime

[Avicenna]

A greater police presence (or at least no "defunding" is about deterrence, i. e., prevention). Leftists want to reduce crime by redefining it to solely political/thought "crimes" and other crimes committed by groups of people they don't like.

[OtterMan68]

@Avicenna do you really believe that?

[BadApple69]

@OtterMan68 I would say defunding the police is a hard way to prevent crime.

[OtterMan68]

I'd say no one tried it, and I'd also say not one city, county, or state has redefined crime as " solely political/thought "crimes" and other crimes committed by groups of people they don't like."

[Avicenna]

That is indeed what's happened when leftist DAs simply don't prosecute a large number of crimes, when cash bail is abolished and when Trump, some of his co-defendants and some of the J6 defendants are subjected to malicious prosecution for made-up crimes.

[BadApple69]

OtterMan68 if you mean no one tried to defund the police you are incorrect. NYC for example had $1 billion stripped from their budget, and 600 undercover policemen removed from the streets. This IS defunding and it’s hurt NYC, and they are not the only. Many big cities have done it.

[OtterMan68]

In 2022, the violent crime rate fell for the second consecutive year, down to 380.7 per 100,000 people. The property crime rate increased for the first time since 2001, up 6.7% to 1,954.4 per 100,000 people.

[slatyb]

They used to agree on the facts. Today the right insists on "alternative facts" like election fraud in 2020.

[A_Bell]

Frankly, you have to be stupid to believe this is something the right does exclusively.

You, sir, are the problem.

[slatyb]

@A_Bell I gave an example of right-wing dogma with no basis in fact. Where's yours?

[A_Bell]

Switch the polarity of the parties and make the year 2016, 2004 or 2000.

[BadApple69]

This thread is exactly what I mean. The left and the right are so divided you can’t even express their thoughts with a fight.

[A_Bell]

Your thesis would make sense, but I am neither left nor right. I just showed this particular side of the two sided coin of ignorant partisan dumassery how he is oblivious to how his own argument is reversed when the names change.

[goaded]

@A_Bell 2000: the vote came down to a few hundred in one state, in 2020, it was tens of thousands in five. I don't even know what you mean by 2004, unless you mean pointing out that one state had massive queues to vote in Democratic areas. 2016, Clinton conceded in early November, because she respected the electoral process. There was hope that the electoral college would refuse to vote for a man who went on to give Iran a green light to develop nuclear weapons, green light a country to sieze land from an ally in the fight against ISIL, believe Putin over his own intelligence organisations, steal and illegally disclose classified documents, and violently try to hold on to power against the results of the 2020 election.

[slatyb]

@A_Bell what do youran by that? Clinton won the popular fire but lost the electoral college. There was a peaceful transition in 2016. In 2020 Trump lost the popular vote and the electoral college, then invited an insurrection in an attempt to retain power. The right keeps insisting there was electoral fraud in 2020 but have no evidence.

[Jersey2]

Yeah… just the Right… /s

And Biden, he is mentally competent… okaay.

[slatyb]

@Jersey2 I have an example of current right& wing insurance on alternative facts. It's not the entire Republican party but still the majority. I didn't even get into their alternative history. Where's your example on the left?

[Anonymous]

The truth is "the right" and "the left" comprise only a small portion of the electorate. Most people are somewhere in the middle. But our political system and media force everyone into these two buckets and assume they are believe the same way. That will never change until we have a viable thrid party.

[BadApple69]

Well there are the independents which my belief is they are more middle of the road.
I do heavily agree the main stream media is a dividing force in this country.
If there was a third party the left and right would just pander to get the vote of that third party. I think for the third party to be effective it’ll have to get a big enough following to actually compete against the left or the right. That could take decades.

[parlance]

Nope. The left wing has adopted socialism. It's an entirely different form of government that contradicts America's foundation the core principles of the majority of the nation. There is no way to agree on anything.

[parlance]

*and the

[Anonymous]

They used to work hard to compromise and find common ground on issues, now they work hard to make sure they don't find anything to agree on.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

Yes the right & left can agree to disagree.

[Avicenna]

In the US, a more accurate and significant division than pure ideology is establishment vs ordinary people.

[goaded]

OK, so, do ordinary people agree that they want more affordable health care and to live longer? For example.

[Avicenna]

Ordinary people aren''t monolithic, as you well know, and there are always disagreements on how to reach even common policy goals. But it's the establishment that has set these fault lines in politics, not ordinary people, although they're most affected.

[exitseven]

The country is hopelessly divided, We have normal and crazy. There will never be a peaceful discourse. A national divorce is the only logical course of action.

[Anonymous]

The Left can’t even decide on what a woman is... and you think we are going to find common ground on something?

🤣

[standardguy]

Un Germany there were several coalition governments together.

[goaded]

Thankfully, Germany isn't a two-party system.

[Dargil]

the sun rises in the East.

[BadApple69]

Even I, in my most argumentative state cannot disagree with that! Well done!

[Iron_Man]

to keep alcohol legal

[Kykiono1]

Not much

[BadApple69]

You say “not much” is there Anything?

[Kykiono1]

I don't think so

[msc545]

we all like cheeseburgers.

[BadApple69]

@msc545 there are a lot of vegans and vegetarians on the left (more so then on the right) they would disagree. Me, I agree with you… in fact I think you just made up my mind what’s for dinner. Thanks!