The left is pissing me off.

Their rhetoric is aimed at conservatives in order to get them riled up. The more pissed off people are the more divided we become, that's the entire point of this political circus, to make people angry at each other instead of the real enemy. People are falling for it hook line and sinker.

Curious that the replies here show the left are the ones being tolerant and the conservative types are the ones being abusive.

TrueBrit also made the point that there is no left in the US, at least as far as the Democrats are concerned they don't even rte s centrrist as far as western politics go. Something I've noticed ince at least the late Eighties.

a reply to: deadlyhope

Yeah, the tantrums from the Left on this one are unprecedented. They are absolutely hysterical that they lost and think that, somehow, their stupid protests and videos by has-been actors actually have an impact on the people who must follow the law and certify Trump.

In my view, they are demonstrating a tremendous immaturity as a whole, which is what they are historically. If you examine their behavior through the years you'll note that they are never happy.

Contrast that with the Right who have, historically, accepted their losses and moved on, making the best of a bad situation.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
The best thing to do with whining children like the democrats is to ignore them. Eventually they will crawl back into the cess pit from which they came until the next election cycle. All they want is to feel like they're important to some mythical cause they made up when they got offended by something.

Keep egging them on and they will consume everything, even by cannibalizing themselves to complete their agendas.

One can only hope . . .

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: ManFromEurope

The problem the OP is bringing up that you are ignoring while attacking him is:

1. The rioting that went on for a week after the election that the Democrats encouraged instead of condemning or even trying to calm down.

2. The fact there was no evidence to meet the State's requirements to have a reason to hold a recount in the states where recounts occurred.

3. The blatant ignoring of the corruption exposed by the hacking of the DNC in favor of generating a boogyman to blame for the hacking then spinning it to claim that the election was hacked instead of a political party.

4. While spouting non stop 24/7 about the hacking of the DNC influencing the election (the votes in election were not hacked) the media completely ignores being caught red handed ATTEMPTING TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTION IN FAVOR OF CLINTON.

5. Clinton won the popular vote by 2.8 million. Almost exclusively because of California, a state with a population of 10 million illegal immigrants who were all but encouraged by the President to vote for Clinton.

I could go on.

So instead of knee jerk attacking the messenger, maybe address the issues he brought up.

^^^^^

THIS

a reply to: TrueBrit

The left-wing person you have described does not exist, as well it should be. The leftist elites are celebrities, and the non-elites are statist, multi-culti socialists who display their virtue by demanding the government be virtuous on their behalf.

a reply to: TheTory

You are telling me, quite literally, that the sort of people I belong to and come from, do not exist.

What a conceited and utterly arrogant thing to say!

a reply to: ManFromEurope

See above. A true point (Clinton won the votes), followed by interpretion as if I said anything about "illegal votes", or that illegal votes would be more valuable than "true american" votes. This is stupid. And boring. If you feel depreciated by a candidate who won the electorials but not the number of people, you should think about that - that the voting system itself is broken.

It's the best voting system there is. It's the only thing stopping a tyranny of the majority, which would leave countries an ochlocracy.

a reply to: TrueBrit

As you've described them, yes, they do not exist. You didn't even provide one example, and arrogantly demand that we believe you.

a reply to: TheTory

Here is an example.

A friend of my family took me in when I was on the street and destitute. They fed me, gave me a place to wash myself, get back on my feet. Years later, that friend of the family has found themselves in a similar situation, with significant mental health problems to boot. The government have placed so many stumbling blocks in the way of getting her what she needs, that we had to step in and have her stay with us, despite having little to no real space for the number of people living in our home. We live day to day, and at times like this our combined earnings leave us wondering whether we will be covering the bare essentials or not this month. I have vowed to only buy a Christmas present for one person this year, my son.

I have not done it yet, because I still do not know where the money is coming from.

When I used to live on the street, I was in work. It was not work that earned me enough to rent a space to live in, but it kept me in food and enough essentials that living on the roundabout I was residing on at the time, was less harsh than it could have been. When I walked down the high street, and saw other homeless, I would nip into the fast food places last thing at night, and buy up their leftovers, the stuff they were about to take out of the hot counter, and deposit into the bin. These I would distribute amongst whoever needed them, keeping a meals worth for myself. I had bugger all back then, but I shared what I had with those around me, because they needed it, but had less ability to pay for it than I did. We were all paddling the same leaky boat, but my oar was broadest, and that put a responsibility on me, as a person with a soul, with a heart, a person whose priorities were not broken all to hell, to do what I could to help those just a little less fortunate than myself.

Nowadays, I live in an apartment. I still have bugger all considering the work I have put in, but again, its better than not having it at all. And I still put food in peoples mouths whenever I have the readies in my pocket to do it. I do my bit, despite scant resources, and always have. My friends who live locally have all been down on their luck at some stage, and we have all got the same attitude. Remember where you are from, where you have been, and look out for those who are less able than ourselves. I AM an example of what I am talking about, and so is my mother, so was my grandfather, and so was his father, and his father before him. So are most of the people I call friends in the world.

We look after one another, we look after those who have less than we have, not because we want a bloody medal, but because we do not want someone to starve because we looked away. We do not want someone to suffer because we could not be bothered, we want to support those who are at the bottom, because for years the government of our country has been trying to prevent people like us, unlucky people, the majority of people, from getting stable foundations under them. We know how hard it is, and demand that no one ought to suffer it alone or without someone helping if they can. That is why when we can, we do.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

I'd refer you to the post by watchitburn.

This isn't about being upset over election results. That's every single election I've witnessed.

Asking the electoral college to not represent the people in their districts, is by definition misrepresentation - we live in a representative democracy, encouraging those electoral votes to represent illegals in California instead of the people in their state districts is unethical and immoral, if you disagree, we don't really have much else to talk about as I believe in a system that's able to represent everyone, represent a huge amount of land mass and diverse people, and not Los Angeles simply due to population.

Large cities really are full of themselves, though. You can have your high crime rate, your anonymity, your pollution and traffic jams, your huge inequality gaps and attraction to, and creation of homelessness - you can keep your liberal ideology that's bankrupting the worst cities in this nation. You can keep your insanely high gun crime in your cities where guns are banned. You can have your safe spaces and call everyone by one of a hundred pronouns else possibly face a lawsuit. Look up the election map and you'll see that the majority of counties and areas are red, only blue when you get to another large city.

Me, I'll stick in the country. I have fresh air, good neighbors, hard times aren't very hard when you have a community pulling for each other. The constitution is held to a very high standard, gun ownership is several guns per house with close to zero gun crime and accidents.

I really do agree cities and rural areas are super different and need different representation.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Your story is a harrowing one, and thanks for sharing it, but none of it is tied to left-wing principles. If anything, what you describe are Christian principles. A right-winger could do the very same. The left and right paradigm represents political principles, not moral ones.

a reply to: TheTory

I maintain that there is no difference between moral principle and political principle, and that if there IS one, then it needs hunting down and shooting in the back of the head, for all our sakes.

Understand me, these are NOT exclusively Christian principles. Atheists, self described Pagans, Wicca practioners, even some of the Satanists I know, as well as agnostics and others have taken up this methodology, because their shared understanding of the sharp end holds that NO ONE survives ANYTHING without some help, and that when all around you are suffering, you have to hold what you can, when you can, or else everything and everyone collapses. That was the case when my grandfather was helping maintain the Welfare State after getting back from the Second World War, and it is the case now.

My political principles are my moral principles, my moral principles are my political principles, because whether we are talking about on the national level or the local, the same fundamental truth remains. We are not islands, we are not JUST individuals. We are part of a collective whole, and we have a responsibility to one another to lend strength to the weak, to give food to the hungry, to shelter those who have no home, to heal the sick regardless of cost, to make life as good as it can be, for as many as possible AS AN OVERRIDING PRIORITY! These are my principles entire, political and moral, and though I may be a Christian, there are those who are not who feel the same regardless. We ARE an existent movement, we just have no power, and have to do for ourselves, out of public view, without fanfare. I do not care for glorification anyway, but I will not have our existence denied just because it is not loud, or doubted just because it is not easily visible. We are difficult to spot because no one is looking, that is all.

a reply to: TrueBrit

My only point was to show you that they are not strictly left-wing principles.

So why don't you just do that? Feed the hungry, house the homeless, whatever. What I don't understand is the desire for the government to do it for us. That sounds to me immoral.

a reply to: TheTory

We do what we do, precisely because these people have fallen through a net that my forefathers worked damned hard to create, and has been cut at, broken, torn down without our permission for DECADES. We have to do these things because our government refuses to tighten this net that was supposed to catch us when we fell, and instead allowed us to hit rock bottom without any useful support of any kind. We have to do what we can, because otherwise people die. The fact is, that we pay our taxes, and we pay enough taxes that the people less well off than myself, should not still be concerned with living on the street, but be supported with EXTENSIVE and WIDELY available accomodation, the psychiatric care that they need. We pay enough tax that the government can afford to get ripped off to the tune of hundreds of percent, by virtually every one of its major suppliers of goods and services, including those who supply the HMRC with everything from copier paper to desks and chairs, and who maintain the buildings that department runs out of. That company, whichever name it is under now, also stores its earnings off shore and pays a scandalously small amount of tax, as do most of the other major government contract holders.

If that can stand, then the people, the lifeblood, the actual physical embodiment of our nation, should damned well be supported by the same hand which props up failing banks, which misspends our funds on bad contracts, and which causes as many problems as it solves or more. The fact that we, at the sharp end, are having to share our resources to the point where we are haggard and tired, wondering what the point of it all is, to the point where I, personally, feel like my life was better when I had no fabric in my life, only a tree to sleep under, is a bloody disgrace! This should not be our lot as Britons, because great people fought hard to ensure that destitution would never claim another life in these isles, and we should damned well honour that effort by making it a reality in this country.

In short, the government has the broadest back, and is failing to hold the greatest weight, preferring to fill the pockets of its satellites, the friends and families of MPs, cabinet ministers, and high level Civil Servants (who obviously do not understand what it means to be servile in the least), instead. That is not what we pay them to do. I pay them to provide adequate funding for mental health resources, medical centres, to maintain libraries, the roads, schools, and the tuition of the bright and capable at higher learning levels without placing a debt burden around the necks of geniuses. I pay my taxes so that they can be spent on improving this country from the bottom up, not the top down. As I said, my political principles do not deviate in the least from my moral principles, because the separation of these two is what allows harrowing and terrifying lives to be lived by good people, rather than freeing the hardest working people in the country to actually see some fruit from their labours, in the knowledge that those less fortunate are being well cared for by a system which has genuine love built into it as a necessity.

There is none though. Despite our taxes going Westminster bound every year, this place just becomes colder and harsher, its government less prepared to do anything other than feather its own nest and that of its friends, in order to gain a stability that the rest of us would not even know what to do with, so alien a concept it has become.

a reply to: TrueBrit

That is the very reason why we do not let the government supplement human compassion. It is incapable of caring for others. Political systems cannot be benevolent, no matter how much 'love' is built into it. It turns individuals into statistics and receipts. It treats those in need and those who take advantage as one and the same. It treats individuals like wards of the state. It dehumanizes. It dilutes and stagnates the real safety nets: that of the community and the family.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I've had similar interactions with staunch conservatives.

I think the main political difference, between average people, is not the end goal of a successful, thriving society but how we actually get there.

As a liberal, I am astonished and disappointed with what "liberal" has come to mean. Almost pure nonsense in many areas, and hysterical conversion attempts round out the rest. Of course, I am essentially a heretic and blasphemer..

Conversations about things like social nets and justice, climate change, and.. well.. that's pretty much it! These conversations take the tone of zealous conversion attempts instead of trying to find solutions that everyone involved can agree upon. What we say and how we say it has become imminently more important than what we do, and the overall priority seems to be smugness and superiority complexes tempered with schadenfreude.

I am a heretic because I do not think conservatives are somehow lesser beings. I am a blasphemer because I think our social nets should be reformed to foster self sufficiency and independence. But above all, I am these things because I think its more important to actually move forward together rather than convert the non-believers.

Of course, I am talking in a bit of extremes, but its a rant of my own. I see modern liberals saying something good, but then constantly contradicting it in action. Calling out the rights hypocrisy, bias, echo chambers, and cognitive dissonance while frequently committing the same things the very next sentence.

Its turned into something like sports teams, where ones team can do no wrong and must be defended and cheered on in any and all circumstances.

I firmly believe this is the intentional result of social programming and psychological operations, but that doesn't absolve any and all personal responsibility.

The modern failings of the left fall entirely on the left ourselves. Instead of even considering this, the left doubles down on what is causing the failure in the first place.

For things like climate change, we should be focusing on technology that everyone can get behind instead of peoples motivations for using said technology.

For social nets, we should be focusing on designing systems and technology that the right can actually agree upon. Because maybe, just maybe, giving more and more money into systems that create rampant dependency isn't the way to create that successful, thriving society. We see absolutely nothing of the sort. If someone veers from the narrative, they are firmly brought back into place or minimized and discarded as "the opposition." Just as will likely happen with me and this post, deflecting back to the inferiority of the other team (if its even read at all).

So, instead of being the side of the spectrum that drives innovation and progress, we see a group that is more concerned with conversion attempts and arrogance. We see a group more interested in their teams perceived superiority than actually trying different approaches that could lead to very real advancement and innovation.

And that is an absolute tragedy.

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: GodEmperor

The Democrats keep saying that Russia hacked the elections, but what actually happened was they influenced the elections by hacking into DNC e-mails and releasing them through Wikileaks. This still counts as influencing the election through hacking even though the actual results weren't manipulated.

Also, although there is proof that Russia "hacked" the U.S. elections, there is no proof that Democrats resorted to massive fraud tactics to gain the popular vote. In fact, people who have investigated this have found little evidence of this when they checked.

There is absolutely no proof that millions of illegal immigrants voted for Clinton, and I don't believe that statement to begin with.

Maybe I missed it but I have not seen any proof that Russia hacked the DNC. I have seen anonymous leaks that suggest such but until I see some facts to me it's just a knee jerk reaction to try to undermine the election results or at a minimum make Trumps installation as our POTUS tainted with doubt. I have not seen anything from the NSA to suggest Russian hacked the DNC and the FBI has also said they have no such proof. I understand Obama and his peeps believe in the Alinksy principle of telling big lies over and over and some actually will believe it. Ends justifies the means! Remember "if you like your Doctor you can keep your doctor and you will save $2,500"? Ends justifies the means!

originally posted by: deadlyhope
Seriously. I'm not a right wing person, nor an alt right nor even a Republican - I'm mostly libertarian and lean left on some social issues.

That being said, people that identify as Democrat, liberal and such are really starting to get to me. I've always tried to advocate tolerance and acceptance and embracing others and realizing they are human beings too.. But sometimes people just go to far.

To try to reject the election results, to do all they can to get electoral votes to change sides, to ruin Sanders campaign when he was the only genuinely decent person running, to have sketchy meetings with people in high positions while dealing with legal processes, to ignore huge amounts of data showing rampant corruption spreading through their party...

These are not just common every day errors, these really require a lack of brain power joined with a self righteous mentality.

Now, don't get me wrong. Far right people make me mad just as much, those that think trickle down economics is a principle that is true and works, those that hold their religious belief so high they believe it should be law - I'm not okay with these things.

But, that's not whats currently happening. The left is being shown as insanely corrupt, immoral, above the law, currently attempting to change who becomes president because a hissy fit is more important than our representative democracy - and the citizens themselves shut their eyes and ignore all crimes and all manner of immoral, unethical, unacceptable actions of those that represent their party while actively rejecting the will of the huge amount of Americans who practiced their freedom to vote for the president they wanted to represent them.

Anyways, I could go on but I will stop here. As a reminder I am not pretending that those on the right are any better in some cases, this post is more just addressing the current ongoing situations more than anything.

-deadlyhope

Just about the worst rant I have heard for someone in effect and indeed even by the title, is taking sides.
So, dishonest. Some people just don't get it. America has a serious economic problem that will not be solved beating up American manufacturers for instance who build/also build elsewhere, many of whom have done that for many decades past. Politicians of any persuasion will not be able to cure that, and in a free world market, debatedly not a good idea. In my own opinion, America needs a whole new ethos for itself and the world, just as dynamic as Wall street, but more so with people, everybody, in mind. Same goes for many countries these days, who seem to see the need to assert themselves in excessive authoritarian ways.

a reply to: watchitburn

Almost exclusively because of California, a state with a population of 10 million illegal immigrants

And? They're not voting.

Snopes - California Passed a Law Allowing Undocumented Immigrants To Vote. Verdict: False. It's not legal for undocumented immigrants to vote. Nor is there strong evidence to suggest that's been the case.