Where did our "division" as a country start? Spinoff (why is everything woke vs non-woke)

[tubby_mcgee 700]

I'm basically referring to liberal vs conservative, left/right as far as division goes.   

1.) Internet is the root.  Without it, our country isn't nearly as divided.

2.) When Trump became president.

And this is just my opinion. Some will agree and  some won't.  Yes, it was Trump...buuuuuut..... it wasn't him while he was president.  It was the outrage AGAINST him while he was president.  He actually spoke his mind (and in my opinion, the truth) about which groups in the US were "filthy", etc and lots of other things.   And to me the hatred became so great....that anything he was for, the other side was AGAINST. Example:   He called MS-13 a group of filthy thugs.  The other side then, began defending MS-13 citing something like "that's fair to call them that, they are people too, etc"  Whereas if anyone else would have called them filthy thugs, they would nod and agree.  Trump was very PRO stand for the flag, stand for the Anthem, etc.  So...the liberals, because their mindset is "it's our job to be anti- whatever Trump is for" began being anti-Anthem and anti-Flag.  Some liberal was probably pro-US, pro Flag, pro-Anthem for their entire life, then Trump criticizes folks that are anti-flag, anti-Anthem etc, and voila, Trump single handedly made that guy completely flip. I am NOT just saying this to piss off libs.  I HONESTLY think outrage vs Trump (then in turn conservatives defending those things) began to create a big divide. 

What else ya got? 

(Lets see how long before this turns into name calling)

Go.

[BuckSwope 654]

It's always been there.   That's why there is the old saying - don't talk about religion or politics.   Nothing will divide people faster.   

The only thing that has changed is our technology, so I go with your #1 above.   We wouldn't be nearly as divided if not for 24/7 news cycle + Social media + access to this 100% time with our tech.  

[Wade Garrett 155]

4 minutes ago, tubby_mcgee said:

I'm basically referring to liberal vs conservative, left/right as far as division goes.   

1.) Internet is the root.  Without it, our country isn't nearly as divided.

2.) When Trump became president.

And no... it wasn't him while he was president.  It was the outrage AGAINST him while he was president.  He actually spoke his mind (and in my opinion, the truth) about which groups in the US were "filthy". And to me the hatred became so great....that anything he was for, the other side was AGAINST.   He called MS-13 a group of filthy thugs.  The other side then, began defending MS-13 citing something like "that's fair to call them that, they are people too, etc"  Whereas if anyone else would have called them filthy thugs, they would nod and agree.  Trump was very PRO stand for the flag, stand for the Anthem, etc.  So...the liberals, because their mindset is "it's our job to be anti- whatever Trump is for" began being anti-Anthem and anti-Flag.  Some liberal was probably pro-US, pro Flag, pro-Anthem for their entire life, then Trump criticizes folks that are anti-flag, anti-Anthem etc, and voila, Trump single handedly made that guy completely flip. I am NOT just saying this to piss off libs.  I HONESTLY think outrage vs Trump (then in turn conservatives defending those things) began to create a big divide. 

What else ya got? 

(Lets see how long before this turns into name calling)

Go.

So you liked that Trump spoke his mind huh?  If I said that trailer park meth heads were filthy animals the entirety of Trump's base would be outrages and thinking I was talking about them.  Name calling is the lowest form of dialogue and a sure sign of someone who's very low intelligence.  It's why it's Trump's go to.

 

[tubby_mcgee 700]

2 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

So you liked that Trump spoke his mind huh?  If I said that trailer park meth heads were filthy animals the entirety of Trump's base would be outrages and thinking I was talking about them.  Name calling is the lowest form of dialogue and a sure sign of someone who's very low intelligence.  It's why it's Trump's go to. 

 

Nah. I think you're correct.  Trailer park meth heads should be put down like rabid dogs.   The world would be a better place. Trailer park meth heads live off the government.  Trump doesn't want them around either. 

[Wade Garrett 155]

Just now, tubby_mcgee said:

Nah. I think you're correct.  Trailer park meth heads should be put down like rabid dogs.   The world would be a better place.

So if I said something disparaging about a group you relate to, you'd be ok with that?'

Of course you wouldn't.  Name calling is one of the surest sign of low IQ there is. 

[Bier Meister 1,681]

McCarthyism?

rush?

 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,118]

I believe the standards were lowered during the Clinton / Bush years.  One guy is a deviate and the other is a moron. That’s how we went Trump/ Biden back to back. Fock Obama, but he hid his horns. 

[tubby_mcgee 700]

8 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

So if I said something disparaging about a group you relate to, you'd be ok with that?'

Of course you wouldn't.  Name calling is one of the surest sign of low IQ there is. 

No. Not if its true.  Not at all.   I'd be COMPLETELY fine with it. Just because a group does something, doesn't mean I have to. 

MOST pedophiles are white.  I'm white. I think all pedophiles should be put to death.    You see---that's what you don't get.  Conservatives think with their heads.  Not by feelings. They don't "toe the line".   They realize this stuff and are okay to have it said. 

Every ethnic group has a higher percentage of the whole of certain crimes.    Some more glaring and obvious than others.

I posted something on Facebook about Natives on reservations having higher alcohol use, lower life expectancy and higher crime rates. Folks were OUTRAGED beyond belief.  OUTFOCKINGRAGED.  Why?  Why?  Can anyone tell me WHY those comments would make people mad?  I truly want an explanation. 

Some folks get MAD AS HELL at the truth when the truth shines a negative light on a group.

 

[Bier Meister 1,681]

Tubby, do you have your actual quote?

[Wade Garrett 155]

7 minutes ago, tubby_mcgee said:

No. Not if its true.  Not at all.   I'd be COMPLETELY fine with it. Just because a group does something, doesn't mean I have to. 

MOST pedophiles are white.  I'm white. I think all pedophiles should be put to death.    You see---that's what you don't get.  Conservatives think with their heads.  Not by feelings. They don't "toe the line".   They realize this stuff and are okay to have it said. 

Every ethnic group has a higher percentage of the whole of certain crimes.    Some more glaring and obvious than others.

I posted something on Facebook about Natives on reservations having higher alcohol use, lower life expectancy and higher crime rates. Folks were OUTRAGED beyond belief.  OUTFOCKINGRAGED.  Why?  Why?  Can anyone tell me WHY those comments would make people mad?  I truly want an explanation. 

Some folks get MAD AS HELL at the truth when the truth shines a negative light on a group.

 

I don't disagree with any of this.  Facts are fine.  Facts use to bludgeon without context not so much.  But facts are facts. 

[The Real timschochet 6,543]

It began with Rush Limbaugh. He told conservatives to stop trusting the mainstream media and they did. Distrust of the MSM is the root of our division. Now as a result each side has their own set of facts. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

its been there from the start.  after the nation was founded, the nation split on states rights vs federal power.  it morphed only slightly into big government vs limited government.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,118]

Gary Hart had to drop out because some floozy sat on his lap. 4 years later Clinton and all his more egregious issues were explained away or overlooked. Gerald Ford was criticized for being a dim bulb and lost to a complete lightweight. A few years later George Bush the dumber was elected and they touted his Ivy League educations. Under no circumstances would Biden or Trump be elected until Clinton and Bush lowered the standards. Hell, Biden couldn’t get out of the first round in 1988.  

[JustinCharge 2,397]

if you want to go back to the dawn of history, there has always been a general struggle between a legislature and a king.  in todays politics, the democrats seek to crown a king and the republicans seek to have a legislature.

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

Southern Democrats began drifting to the Republican party as early as the 1940s as they found themselves disgusted with growing civil rights and unionization, and changes that have taken place since the 1960s have fanned those flames, driving them farther right.

That fat blob of hot air known as Rush Limbaugh galvanized and pushed them even further right, with his fear mongering and catastrophizing, and then you had the Grassroots moving of the 2010s, inching even farther right. 

Trump not only carried the torch for all that and gave rural white people even more to stew about, but he smartly appealed to the evangelical Christians, which played a huge role in winning the 2016 elections, plus the disgust for Hillary and the Russian interference in that election. 

The basic law of physics is that for every action, you have an equal and opposite reaction, which means Democrats getting pushed farther left and more extreme liberalism and thirst for socialism.

Both extremes suck, but MAGAturds represent this country's most divisive issue today.

This opinion piece does a good job of explaining it.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/01/opinions/james-comey-donald-trump-zelizer/index.html

 

[seafoam1 2,858]

58 minutes ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Southern Democrats began drifting to the Republican party as early as the 1940s as they found themselves disgusted with growing civil rights and unionization, and changes that have taken place since the 1960s have fanned those flames, driving them farther right.

That fat blob of hot air known as Rush Limbaugh galvanized and pushed them even further right, with his fear mongering and catastrophizing, and then you had the Grassroots moving of the 2010s, inching even farther right. 

Trump not only carried the torch for all that and gave rural white people even more to stew about, but he smartly appealed to the evangelical Christians, which played a huge role in winning the 2016 elections, plus the disgust for Hillary and the Russian interference in that election. 

The basic law of physics is that for every action, you have an equal and opposite reaction, which means Democrats getting pushed farther left and more extreme liberalism and thirst for socialism.

Both extremes suck, but MAGAturds represent this country's most divisive issue today.

This opinion piece does a good job of explaining it.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/01/opinions/james-comey-donald-trump-zelizer/index.html

 

Trump!!! 

What a focking loser. 

[wiffleball 4,789]

Newt Gingrich. 

[seafoam1 2,858]

53 minutes ago, wiffleball said:

Newt Gingrich. 

wiffle ball sack.

[peenie 1,906]

Imo, with the Obama presidency and the rise of the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. Kneeling at football games, Trayvon Martin shooting, police shootings and the protests that followed and BLM, Trump, The Proud Boys, Capital Riot…

[SUXBNME 1,465]

1 hour ago, wiffleball said:

Newt Gingrich. 

The man, the myth, the legend.  
Love that guy. 

[weepaws 3,159]

This has nothing to do with man Vs man, this is a spiritual war the devil Vs Jesus.  

Amen. 

[thegeneral 3,065]

2 hours ago, JustinCharge said:

if you want to go back to the dawn of history, there has always been a general struggle between a legislature and a king.  in todays politics, the democrats seek to crown a king and the republicans seek to have a legislature.

Trump wants to be a king, he did all he could not to leave up to getting a bunch of nuts to attack the Capitol…and he’s likely the Republicans nom again…just sayin. 

[SUXBNME 1,465]

4 minutes ago, peenie said:

Imo, with the Obama presidency and the rise of the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News.

Troof. Obama wasn't called The Great Divider for nothing.  

Also, welcome back

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

Trust in media is at an all-time low and it has everything to do with their own biased choices. It’s ridiculous that almost every major outlet spreads false stories repeatedly and these always seem to go in one direction. Sh!tlibs like Tim blame people like Rush Limbaugh and Fox News instead of the fact we now have widespread availability of credible refutations of his beloved partisan activist corporate media who are responsible along with the Democratic Party for our division. It’s why the left thinks thousands of unarmed blacks are shot by police every year and why they thought children were dying from Covid. We can go down the list. They get everything wrong every time. 

[BuckSwope 654]

10 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

It began with Rush Limbaugh. He told conservatives to stop trusting the mainstream media and they did. Distrust of the MSM is the root of our division. Now as a result each side has their own set of facts. 

There is a bit to this.   I am getting laughed at in the climate thread because I am advocating for looking at data and deciding for yourself.  

There is damn near nothing left we haven't split up into political parties now.   What it boils down to is we as a country spend way too much time looking for things that agree with our position and go from there, not attempt to look for the data and go from there.   

[avoiding injuries 1,545]

The “Beer Summit” between the Harvard professor, police officer and Obama. That opened up the racial gate wider than the southern border. 

[Engorgeous George 2,236]

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

[Hawkeye21 2,388]

8 hours ago, weepaws said:

This has nothing to do with man Vs man, this is a spiritual war the devil Vs Jesus.  

Amen. 

No... It's not.

[tubby_mcgee 700]

9 hours ago, thegeneral said:

Trump wants to be a king, he did all he could not to leave up to getting a bunch of nuts to attack the Capitol…and he’s likely the Republicans nom again…just sayin. 

Saying "he got" people to attack the capitol is like saying  Obama and Biden got/get people to loot Targets, grocery stores, do drive by shootings and kill little kids at birthday parties and shoot up schools.  As well as kill each other daily in Chicago, Jersey, Baltimore, DC, etc.

Trumps folks were a one and done.

Why do Obama and Biden's people KEEP murdering people day after day after day after day? 

 

[RLLD 4,179]

I might suggest there have always been divisions, and they have ebbed and flowed. 

What does seem to be arising is that our ability to access information, and each other, has been enhanced.  And those in power are all manipulating people to serve their desires. Whether it be political players, CEO's or even hucksters preying on people's fear and sense of despair.

And people just eat it up.

[TBayXXXVII 2,500]

12 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

It began with Rush Limbaugh. He told conservatives to stop trusting the mainstream media and they did. Distrust of the MSM is the root of our division. Now as a result each side has their own set of facts. 

If that's true ("It began with Rush Limbaugh"), then him being right (even though he was a pompous azz), means that it started before him.

[Mike Honcho 5,225]

1619

[tubby_mcgee 700]

12 hours ago, Bier Meister said:

Tubby, do you have your actual quote?

My actual quote is gone.  The person deleted their post, and it took mine with.

It started with someone saying "Tragic" that some Native american girl was killed in a senseless manner" 
I then said 'It's no more tragic than anyone of any race or ethnic group getting killed"

He then said something (i forget what it was)

It then led me to say (and this is very close) "So who's to blame that, alcohol use is higher on reservations, crime is higher on reservations,  and life expectancy on reservations is about 45 years old?  Go ahead. I'll be tapping my fingers waiting for your answer"

Folks responded pissed off, citing that I had skewed stats etc.  OP asked me "What rock have you been living under"

I then looked up the OPs criminal record, they had a recent DUI. I then wrote back with "So...you made the great decision to drink and drive and now, you think your words of wisdom on here should be taken with any sort of validity?" (And I posted their record, which showed the DUI).   That musta been when they deleted.

My point is, folks don't like facts that shine a negative light on ANY group ....and CERTAINLY not a minority group. 

For natives by example, you're supposed to only talk about their great heritage and their taking care of the land and reference "mother earth" etc. 

 

If you say "males rape people more than women do" --very few will cry foul. If you say black men are more likely to rape a woman folks will cry racism.

Why do people not like facts (based on statistics)? 

[avoiding injuries 1,545]

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,500]

1 hour ago, BuckSwope said:

There is a bit to this.   I am getting laughed at in the climate thread because I am advocating for looking at data and deciding for yourself.  

There is damn near nothing left we haven't split up into political parties now.   What it boils down to is we as a country spend way too much time looking for things that agree with our position and go from there, not attempt to look for the data and go from there.   

The reason for this is because it's what the politicians do.  It's a trickle down affect.  It's the reason why NO ONE should trust the government or the media on anything.  Each side might have the right course of action on certain items... the problem is that we can't vote for specifics, just the person.

For example, I'm fine with making abortion 100% up to the woman as long as she's going to a doctor (not some government agency like Planned Parenthood), and paying for it herself... or having her insurance cover it.  BUT, the Democrats won't go for that because they have to keep the women dependent on the government to fund this because they need women to be victims of the patriarchy, and so that they keep them voting for Democrats.  Republican's won't go for it either, because they want to take the approach of "faux moral superiority".  There's a legit middle ground on the subject, but neither side wants to give in because they don't want to lose their base.

When someone like Tim says that it's bad to distrust the media, he's helping the problem.  Every media outlet picks sides.  They're going to give you their side of the issue and demonize the other.  There is no such thing as a impartial/unbias media outlet anymore.   People are a more interactive than passive... they're almost forced to be.  People don't always have a chance to read a bunch of things out there, so they listen or watch.  When they listen or watch, they're getting bias information.

[Mike Hunt 266]

12 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

It began with Rush Limbaugh. He told conservatives to stop trusting the mainstream media and they did. Distrust of the MSM is the root of our division. Now as a result each side has their own set of facts. 

Not only conservatives, many libs have lost trust too. 

Actually, Limbaugh love him or hate him exposed the MSM for what they are.  Before that they were never called out.

It is not always just about facts either, it is about slants, pushing agendas, making sure some stories are highlighted, others swept under rug.  Give a shaded view of the facts. In a few of the mass shootings we never knew the shooter was black or Mexican until we see the photo of the person.  Right away they say "White male" is the shooter Why?

 

[seafoam1 2,858]

It started with obama.

[Hawkeye21 2,388]

3 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

It started with obama.

No it didn't.

[seafoam1 2,858]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

No it didn't.

And you are wrong again.

[Hawkeye21 2,388]

2 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

And you are wrong again.

Nope.  It started before Obama.  It's been there a long time.  Maybe Obama increased it and Trump did as well but it didn't start with them.