Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Healing And Moving Forward - Thoughts?


Recommended Posts

@Ministry of Pain  wrote this in another thread: 

Quote

My biggest question or when I try and make connections is the stark difference in the urban cities where I have lived most of my life to the rural areas which is 80-90% of the country. Someone has to figure out a way to make these folks feel a little more connected. 

Agreed. 

We've quoted it a ton here but this is still essay ironically (or not) from cracked.com is one of the best illustrations of the Trump voter I've seen. I think it's spot on and I know lots of people who would fully identify with this. 

How we handle these folks will be the difference I think in how it goes forward. Although my expectation is most people won't agree.

What are your thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Trump should be impeached again. If he's not impeached again, he must be prosecuted. The penalty for attempting to remain in power by corruptly overturning an election cannot simply be that it di

I agree 100%.   This is the slam dunk unity moment.   Everyone show that you readily recognize insanity and sedition.  Everyone show that you put country over party.  There is no world in wh

If the republicans want healing, they can vote the right way on impeachment, a vote ensuring this kind of monstrosity of a presidency never happens again, and work their way to being a civilized party

The main problem is we’re getting our news from different sources. Yes I’ve written this over and over but it remains #1. 

20 years ago, if a liberal and a conservative had an argument, it would usually be about issues: the role of government in society, should abortion be legal, what to do about racial issues, etc. etc. 

These days, if a liberal and a conservative argue it’s usually about facts: is man made climate change actually happening? Was the Russian interference real or a hoax? And now, did Biden win the election fairly or was it stolen? 

We shouldn’t be arguing about issues of fact. If I get my news from the New York Times and somebody else gets their news from Breitbart these shouldn’t be treated as equally respectable sources of news. And that’s the problem. I have no idea how to fix it. 

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

That article you linked pretty much nailed it. There is a pretty deep divide based pretty much solely on where people live, and I don't know how to effectively address it. Rural areas tend to lag behind, and the distances between them and the cities doesn't help matters, because logistics of connecting everyone become very complex.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the article goes, after Trump got elected in 2016 I was told that I have to try and understand his supporters better, and respect their concerns. And thats fine. Now after Trump has been defeated, I’m being told once again that I have to try and understand his supporters better, and respect their concerns: and that’s fine too. It’s always good to try to understand everyone better, especially those you disagree with. 
But perhaps Trump supporters might try to spend some time trying to understand the rest of us as well.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

@Ministry of Pain  wrote this in another thread: 

Agreed. 

We've quoted it a ton here but this is still essay ironically (or not) from cracked.com is one of the best illustrations of the Trump voter I've seen. I think it's spot on and I know lots of people who would fully identify with this. 

How we handle these folks will be the difference I think in how it goes forward. Although my expectation is most people won't agree.

What are your thoughts?

I hadn’t seen this article before you posted it today, and I read the entire thing. It is a long but worthy read. In addition to living overseas, I’ve lived in an incredibly wide range of American communities - rural, urban and suburban, the West Coast, the South, the Midwest and the Northeast. Being completely objective, I know few people who have been exposed to more diverse American communities than I have in my lifetime. And I can say that while this article doesn’t necessarily break any new ground on the topic it covers, it does so in a way that is remarkably accurate, at least based on my experience living in blood red rural areas. Thanks for linking the article - it was a really good read and I hope people are open to its message. 

Edited by bigbottom
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

As far as the article goes, after Trump got elected in 2016 I was told that I have to try and understand his supporters better, and respect their concerns. And thats fine. Now after Trump has been defeated, I’m being told once again that I have to try and understand his supporters better, and respect their concerns: and that’s fine too. It’s always good to try to understand everyone better, especially those you disagree with. 
But perhaps Trump supporters might try to spend some time trying to understand the rest of us as well.

I think it has very little to do with Brietbart vs NYT. The article doesn't go anywhere near that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

As far as the article goes, after Trump got elected in 2016 I was told that I have to try and understand his supporters better, and respect their concerns. And thats fine. Now after Trump has been defeated, I’m being told once again that I have to try and understand his supporters better, and respect their concerns: and that’s fine too. It’s always good to try to understand everyone better, especially those you disagree with. 
But perhaps Trump supporters might try to spend some time trying to understand the rest of us as well.

Sure, but you’re not a Trump supporter. This article was written for you, not them. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, timschochet said:


But perhaps Trump supporters might try to spend some time trying to understand the rest of us as well.

Of course. But focusing on extending empathy with conditions is why this likely won't ever work. 

Your post is exactly why it likely won't work. We'll likely never get away from "whataboutism".

Edited by Joe Bryant
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, timschochet said:

The main problem is we’re getting our news from different sources. Yes I’ve written this over and over but it remains #1. 

20 years ago, if a liberal and a conservative had an argument, it would usually be about issues: the role of government in society, should abortion be legal, what to do about racial issues, etc. etc. 

These days, if a liberal and a conservative argue it’s usually about facts: is man made climate change actually happening? Was the Russian interference real or a hoax? And now, did Biden win the election fairly or was it stolen? 

We shouldn’t be arguing about issues of fact. If I get my news from the New York Times and somebody else gets their news from Breitbart these shouldn’t be treated as equally respectable sources of news. And that’s the problem. I have no idea how to fix it. 

This is the first entry into a healing thread? :lmao: 

Almost every word you wrote was biased. It's like anyone that doesn't agree with your view is not meeting the benchmark for what you ID as credible. 

I'm just rewording what you are basically saying, I'm not gonna argue with you but I don't see where that post allows for much healing or even open discussion. Most of the 67M Trump voters were apparently nowhere to be found by the pollsters. 

I know you want ot believe the entire country voted for Biden or that your platform is infinitely better than everybody else but that's not really the theme. 

Cheers!

Edited by Ministry of Pain
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kal El said:

That article you linked pretty much nailed it. There is a pretty deep divide based pretty much solely on where people live, and I don't know how to effectively address it. Rural areas tend to lag behind, and the distances between them and the cities doesn't help matters, because logistics of connecting everyone become very complex.

It’s funny- in terms of politics I obviously am a city guy and have little in common with rural voters. I also find cities more vibrant and far more exciting and preferable places to be. 
 

But in terms of social relations rural people are far more courteous, patient, and welcoming- they just tend to be nicer people in general. I prefer being around them, if that makes any sense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, timschochet said:

The main problem is we’re getting our news from different sources. Yes I’ve written this over and over but it remains #1. 

20 years ago, if a liberal and a conservative had an argument, it would usually be about issues: the role of government in society, should abortion be legal, what to do about racial issues, etc. etc. 

These days, if a liberal and a conservative argue it’s usually about facts: is man made climate change actually happening? Was the Russian interference real or a hoax? And now, did Biden win the election fairly or was it stolen? 

We shouldn’t be arguing about issues of fact. If I get my news from the New York Times and somebody else gets their news from Breitbart these shouldn’t be treated as equally respectable sources of news. And that’s the problem. I have no idea how to fix it. 

Posted in election thread this morning but when there examples over and over of dishonest media then they are creating that environment where people like you can’t dictate what is and isn’t a credible source.  Stop arguing the source and argue the point. 
 

Truth is none of us really have enough information to know Trumps involvement with Russia or if there was election fraud on Biden’s behalf.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Joe Bryant said:

Of course. But focusing on extending empathy with conditions is why this likely won't ever work. 

Your post is exactly why it likely won't work. 

I wasn’t extending conditions. I was adding something I thought was important. But it’s not a condition on my trying to understand Trump supporters. I need to do that regardless of what they ever try to do with me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

I hadn’t seen this article before you posted it today, and I read the entire thing. It is a long but worthy read. In addition to living overseas, I’ve lived in an incredibly wide range of American communities - rural, urban and suburban, the West Coast, the South, the Midwest and the Northeast. Being perfectly objective, I know few people who have been exposed to more diverse communities than I have in my lifetime. And I can say that while this article doesn’t necessarily break any new ground on the topic it covers, it does so in a way that is remarkably accurate, at least based on my experience living in blood red rural areas. Thanks for linking the article - it was a really good read and I hope people are open to its message. 

Trump Voters from urban areas(there's more than you think), we've(The Urban) never had a lot in common with the folks who show up in RVs or what amounts to their home at these rallies. I cannot have a discussion with Trump voters any more than I can Democrats typically. Sure, we go in the booth and punch the same ticket but these rural Trumpers are not usually folks I want to sit down and eat with. I'm sorry how offensive that sounds to some folks. 

I live in Palm Beach, not really an Urban area when you think big cities but this is far from rural. I know the places we are talking about and I don't live there for a reason. 

Nice post BB

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I think it has very little to do with Brietbart vs NYT. The article doesn't go anywhere near that. 

It doesn’t but I think it’s the central issue behind the divide. 
50 years ago everything that article describes existed in society. And we had issues that divided us even more than we do now: civil rights, the Vietnam War. Yet we were more unified because we all got our news from the same trusted sources. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I wasn’t extending conditions. I was adding something I thought was important. But it’s not a condition on my trying to understand Trump supporters. I need to do that regardless of what they ever try to do with me. 

:sigh: 

The "I WAS TOLD I have to be empathetic. And that's fine".

"But whatabout them not trying to understand ME"

It's why this will likely never work. It's incredibly discouraging. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

This is the first entry into a healing thread? :lmao: 

Almost every word you write was biased. It's like anyone that doesn't agree with your view is not meeting the benchmark for what you ID as credible. 

I'm just rewording what you are basically saying, I'm not gonna argue with you but I don't see where that post allows for much healing or even open discussion. Most of the 67M Trump voters were apparently nowhere to be found by the pollsters. 

I know you want ot believe the entire country voted for Biden or that your platform is infinitely better than everybody else but that's not really the theme. 

Cheers!

Of course I’m biased. Of course I believe my ideas are better. That wasn’t the point of my post. My point was we are getting our news from different, opposing sources. We cannot heal until this issue is somehow resolved. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Joe Bryant said:

:sigh: 

The "I WAS TOLD I have to be empathetic. And that's fine".

"But whatabout them not trying to understand ME"

It's why this will likely never work. It's incredibly discouraging. 

I’m not discouraged. I would have tried to understand them better whether I was told to do so or not. But that doesn’t change the fact that I have been continually told to do so. 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, timschochet said:

It doesn’t but I think it’s the central issue behind the divide. 
50 years ago everything that article describes existed in society. And we had issues that divided us even more than we do now: civil rights, the Vietnam War. Yet we were more unified because we all got our news from the same trusted sources. 

I have to agree with Tim here. It's really hard to try and understand the "other side" when we are dealing with different sets of facts.

I can't try to understand a different perspective of how to deal with Covid when the other person doesn't believe Covid exists. I'm not saying that's all Trump supporters, but it's an example.  It's not dissimilar to the anti-vaxx stance that I'm all too familiar with. When one side is using falsehoods as a basis of discussion, you can't move forward until you resolve those untruths.

There has to be a common basis of truth and facts in order to move forward and discuss. 

This era of disinformation and rejection of truth can't be reconciled until it's fixed.

Edited by gianmarco
  • Like 3
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Of course I’m biased. Of course I believe my ideas are better. That wasn’t the point of my post. My point was we are getting our news from different, opposing sources. We cannot heal until this issue is somehow resolved. 

Which to you means forcing your sources (and opinions) down the other guys throat.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Posted in election thread this morning but when there examples over and over of dishonest media then they are creating that environment where people like you can’t dictate what is and isn’t a credible source.  Stop arguing the source and argue the point. 
 

Truth is none of us really have enough information to know Trumps involvement with Russia or if there was election fraud on Biden’s behalf.  

You’re correct; I can’t dictate to you what is and what isn’t a credible source. I can offer my opinion, and argue it, and you can disagree. Nonetheless that disagreement prevents us from healing more than any other issue,  and I don’t know how to resolve it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Posted in election thread this morning but when there examples over and over of dishonest media then they are creating that environment where people like you can’t dictate what is and isn’t a credible source.  Stop arguing the source and argue the point. 
 

Truth is none of us really have enough information to know Trumps involvement with Russia or if there was election fraud on Biden’s behalf.  

The media is flawed, I will wholeheartedly agree with that. However, there is a difference between simply reporting facts about a news event and putting some type of spin on said event, which is where I feel a disconnect happens. When a media agency chooses to report from a slanted viewpoint, their credibility as a news source should rightly be questioned, more so if they are reporting events that lack sources deemed to be credible, like cases of election fraud when no evidence of such has been verified. Having shows dedicated to dispensing opinion as fact by commentators instead of sticking to the bare bones of the story is another problem that shouldn't happen as well, because too many take those opinions as fact, and behave accordingly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Of course I’m biased. Of course I believe my ideas are better. That wasn’t the point of my post. My point was we are getting our news from different, opposing sources. We cannot heal until this issue is somehow resolved. 

The fact you refuse to acknowledge the issue of empathy without the whatabout is why it won't move forward. Keep hanging on to the idea it's NYT vs Brietbart and we'll stay right where we are. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said before this country has a cultural difference that can't be voted out. Maybe having 50 states trying to work together under one government isn't sure a good idea. Maybe setting up 3 to 5 governments would be better. Look at the current 2020 election blue and red map. It could easily be split into 3 to 4 government groups. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Joe Bryant said:

The fact you refuse to acknowledge the issue of empathy without the whatabout is why it won't move forward. Keep hanging on to the idea it's NYT vs Brietbart and we'll stay right where we are. 

Joe let me repeat now for the third time in this thread: I acknowledge the issue of empathy. It is extremely important that I and others like me are empathetic to the concerns and desires of Trump supporters. I need to do this without conditions, without caveats. Fair enough? 
 

That being said, (and this is NOT a condition or a caveat or an argument against empathy), I don’t believe that empathy by itself is going to help much cause healing so long as people get their news and facts from different, opposing sources. Of course it will help, but it won’t get us to where both you and I would like to be. Not by itself. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, timschochet said:

You’re correct; I can’t dictate to you what is and what isn’t a credible source. I can offer my opinion, and argue it, and you can disagree. Nonetheless that disagreement prevents us from healing more than any other issue,  and I don’t know how to resolve it. 

If this is your position, you must pretty much disagree with the entire premise of the article.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Where I AM optimistic is Biden seems like maybe the person best suited among possible Democrats to build the bridge back. 

If the assumption is it's the old white guys who are the problem, Biden at least is an old white guy. 

I think he'll bring a different attitude than what we're seeing from others and sincerely try to reach out and bring in the Trump voters like the ones described in the article. Hopefully he can do it without conditions and do it with class and grace. We'll see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Joe Bryant said:

Where I AM optimistic is Biden seems like maybe the person best suited among possible Democrats to build the bridge back. 

If the assumption is it's the old white guys who are the problem, Biden at least is an old white guy. 

I think he'll bring a different attitude than what we're seeing from others and sincerely try to reach out and bring in the Trump voters like the ones described in the article. Hopefully he can do it without conditions and do it with class and grace. We'll see.

100% agree with this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

@Ministry of Pain  wrote this in another thread: 

Agreed. 

We've quoted it a ton here but this is still essay ironically (or not) from cracked.com is one of the best illustrations of the Trump voter I've seen. I think it's spot on and I know lots of people who would fully identify with this. 

How we handle these folks will be the difference I think in how it goes forward. Although my expectation is most people won't agree.

What are your thoughts?

While I posted above, I will say that's a fantastic article, well written.

I will say, while I understand why "they" supported Trump, it's unfortunate that he wasn't supporting them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

The fact you refuse to acknowledge the issue of empathy without the whatabout is why it won't move forward. Keep hanging on to the idea it's NYT vs Brietbart and we'll stay right where we are. 

Exactly.

Interesting to note that Tim and I grew up likely within 5 miles of each other.  That probably remained that way for 50 years.   Ten years ago, I moved away to Idaho.  Pretty much all the rural areas outside Boise are exactly like the article described.

Really good, hard working, decent folks.  I've helped dozens and dozens of them buy homes, quite often squeaking out every last available extra cent for them do so.  Many times where each person make $13-15/hr. I consider it some of the work I'm most proud of in my life.

Tim wants to blame it all on trusted news sources.  :wall:

What it's really about is having empathy for every single person we come across in this life.  If you don't have that, IMO, you're the one that's lost.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think there's some self awareness that needs to be in effect here too.

I have a friend who had been a very strong Biden supporter. He posted something yesterday on his social media about how he hoped he could be an asset for reaching across the aisle to Trump voters and calmly discussing the future. In a vacuum, that's awesome. 

I scrolled back a couple of weeks and he had another post in basically the exact same template that was "Trump voters disgust me and Trumpers suck".

:wall: 

He has to realize where he's put the other side up this point as he moves forward. Then maybe it can move forward. And it's not about me shaming him for being ugly earlier. That doesn't help either. But he has to understand the temperature of the room. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, timschochet said:

The main problem is we’re getting our news from different sources. Yes I’ve written this over and over but it remains #1. 

20 years ago, if a liberal and a conservative had an argument, it would usually be about issues: the role of government in society, should abortion be legal, what to do about racial issues, etc. etc. 

These days, if a liberal and a conservative argue it’s usually about facts: is man made climate change actually happening? Was the Russian interference real or a hoax? And now, did Biden win the election fairly or was it stolen? 

We shouldn’t be arguing about issues of fact. If I get my news from the New York Times and somebody else gets their news from Breitbart these shouldn’t be treated as equally respectable sources of news. And that’s the problem. I have no idea how to fix it. 

So much this.  Great post.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I do think there's some self awareness that needs to be in effect here too.

I have a friend who had been a very strong Biden supporter. He posted something yesterday on his social media about how he hoped he could be an asset for reaching across the aisle to Trump voters and calmly discussing the future. In a vacuum, that's awesome. 

I scrolled back a couple of weeks and he had another post in basically the exact same template that was "Trump voters disgust me and Trumpers suck".

:wall: 

He has to realize where he's put the other side up this point as he moves forward. Then maybe it can move forward. And it's not about me shaming him for being ugly earlier. That doesn't help either. But he has to understand the temperature of the room. 

I hope you don’t put me in that category. I have never written or said that Trumpers disgust me because they certainly don’t. How could they? Far too many of my loved ones and those very close to me voted for Trump. I love them all. 
By the way, it’s important to note that there are plenty of city dwellers who are huge Donald Trump fans. 

Edited by timschochet
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I don’t think I do. In what way? 

Have you read the article from start to finish?  If so, and you conclude that the single most important impediment to healing is that you read The NY Times and rural folks read Breitbart, I think you either disagree with the central message or you’re missing it. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im hopeful...but discouraged as well from the rhetoric out there. Even messages of hope and positive things are met with vitriol.

Its a give and take where people are talking past each other rather than trying to understand.  Those in cities towards the rural areas and vice versa.

And I get Tim’s sentiment...its a tough ask right now because people cant even agree on fact vs falsehood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Posted in election thread this morning but when there examples over and over of dishonest media then they are creating that environment where people like you can’t dictate what is and isn’t a credible source.  Stop arguing the source and argue the point. 
 

Truth is none of us really have enough information to know Trumps involvement with Russia or if there was election fraud on Biden’s behalf.  

Honest question - when you see examples of dishonest media are you going right to the source and noticing it from their website?  Or are you getting that from another source that is saying that is the case?

Example - I see a lot of links around here from fox about "this is what the left is doing or thinking", or from CNN saying "this right is up to this".   Or worse - links to Twitter, FB, youtube.  That's the crap that needs to go.  I rarely see us arguing over BBC, NPR, Rueters being dishonest and distorting facts.  That is what we are talking about.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Joe let me repeat now for the third time in this thread: I acknowledge the issue of empathy. It is extremely important that I and others like me are empathetic to the concerns and desires of Trump supporters. I need to do this without conditions, without caveats. Fair enough? 
 

That being said, (and this is NOT a condition or a caveat or an argument against empathy), I don’t believe that empathy by itself is going to help much cause healing so long as people get their news and facts from different, opposing sources. Of course it will help, but it won’t get us to where both you and I would like to be. Not by itself. 

You say you are empathetic, but your central point in this thread appears to be “we can’t heal until the rural folks get themselves educated on the facts and stop relying on biased misinformation.” That seems like a completely unproductive approach. 

Edited by bigbottom
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bigbottom said:

Have you read the article from start to finish?  If so, and you conclude that the single most important impediment to healing is that you read The NY Times and rural folks read Breitbart, I think you either disagree with the central message or you’re missing it. 

I used The NY Times vs Breitbart as an example but that’s all it was. My point was a wider one about different sources. 
I don’t think there’s any conflict between the article and my point. The article wants the reader to understand and empathize with the concerns of rural supporters of Donald Trump. @Joe Bryant believes this is important to do in order to bring about healing. I agree with him, but I don’t think it’s enough by itself. Even more important, in terms of healing, than trying to understand the other side is to somehow deal with the issue of facts from different sources. That’s my position. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

I don’t. 
To me it’s the central issue. But it’s certainly not the only issue. It just stands in the way, IMO, of being able to resolve all of the others. 

Yeah, I should not have said all.   It's only a small part of it.  Not remotely the central issue. 

No one ever reached out to these folks for decades and decades until Trump did.

I was going to post a year ago in the PSF, that I thought Trump was going to get significantly more votes this time.  But I didn't because I just didn't want to hear all the push back from the elites in this thread.  It was my estimate that the 2016 vote was going to encourage millions of more people just like them to vote that also had not voted in decades. And it did.

I don't like Trump. Didn't vote for him either time.  But we do have to thank him for making millions and millions of all types of people on both sides more engaged in the political process. That's an incredibly good thing going forward.   His actions, no matter how horrible they can be at times, have opened up the dialog on so many issues that needed to be opened up and talked about.     But maybe, that's just me. I try to find the good in everything, no matter what.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

You say you are empathetic, but your central point in this thread appears to be “we can’t heal until the rural folks get themselves educated and stop relying on biased misinformation.” That seems like a completely unproductive approach. 

Nope. You read me wrong. I never wrote that this is what they need to do and I hope I never implied it. 
This is what we ALL need to do. We need to be on the same page in terms of facts. Most conservatives seem to believe that the mainstream media is a flawed source of facts due to liberal bias. I’ve never accepted that but perhaps I’m wrong. I’m open to that. Maybe I need to adjust my own sources as well. We have to be on the same page. 
To your larger point, sources of news and fact have nothing to do with what rural people are facing in their personal lives and that’s what I need to be empathetic to and I like to think I am. But different sources of news makes it so hard for us to communicate, and reach common solutions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

I used The NY Times vs Breitbart as an example but that’s all it was. My point was a wider one about different sources. 
I don’t think there’s any conflict between the article and my point. The article wants the reader to understand and empathize with the concerns of rural supporters of Donald Trump. @Joe Bryant believes this is important to do in order to bring about healing. I agree with him, but I don’t think it’s enough by itself. Even more important, in terms of healing, than trying to understand the other side is to somehow deal with the issue of facts from different sources. That’s my position. 

I think you completely overestimate the extent to which rural folks (urban folks too) consume news from the sources you reference.  Most people are too busy trying to get by to read the Times or Politico, or Breitbart or Newsmax. You are viewing this issue completely through the lens of pet political issues (climate change, Russian interference, election fraud) and the political junkies who argue on the Internet rather than the much broader cultural divide which is the topic of the article. And to be perfectly honest, and I don’t mean this to be mean or hurt your feelings so please don’t take it that way, but if I were asked to think of an FFA poster who condescends to rural voters, I would probably think of you. That’s not to say you aren’t a good person who is intelligent and informed and with whom I largely agree on many topics. But I sort of feel that you are the target audience for this article. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Getzlaf15 said:

Yeah, I should not have said all.   It's only a small part of it.  Not remotely the central issue. 

No one ever reached out to these folks for decades and decades until Trump did.

I was going to post a year ago in the PSF, that I thought Trump was going to get significantly more votes this time.  But I didn't because I just didn't want to hear all the push back from the elites in this thread.  It was my estimate that the 2016 vote was going to encourage millions of more people just like them to vote that also had not voted in decades. And it did.

I don't like Trump. Didn't vote for him either time.  But we do have to thank him for making millions and millions of all types of people on both sides more engaged in the political process. That's an incredibly good thing going forward.   His actions, no matter how horrible they can be at times, have opened up the dialog on so many issues that needed to be opened up and talked about.     But maybe, that's just me. I try to find the good in everything, no matter what.

Getzalf’s posts nail the point of the article. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Getzlaf15 said:



No one ever reached out to these folks for decades and decades until Trump did.

 

I agree. But he did so in such a negative, angry, divisive way. He reached out to them and said, “You are the real America, the rest of these folks are not.” 
What we need is someone who reaches out to these folks in a positive way, who will say “you guys are an important part of all of us; together we are ALL the real America.” 
 

Thats what I think Biden is trying to do right now .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Nope. You read me wrong. I never wrote that this is what they need to do and I hope I never implied it.
This is what we ALL need to do. We need to be on the same page in terms of facts. Most conservatives seem to believe that the mainstream media is a flawed source of facts due to liberal bias. I’ve never accepted that but perhaps I’m wrong. I’m open to that. Maybe I need to adjust my own sources as well. We have to be on the same page. 

Re: The bolded, you not only implied it, you made the point in your very first post in this thread:

These days, if a liberal and a conservative argue it’s usually about facts: is man made climate change actually happening? Was the Russian interference real or a hoax? And now, did Biden win the election fairly or was it stolen? 

We shouldn’t be arguing about issues of fact. If I get my news from the New York Times and somebody else gets their news from Breitbart these shouldn’t be treated as equally respectable sources of news.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

I think you completely overestimate the extent to which rural folks (urban folks too) consume news from the sources you reference.  Most people are too busy trying to get by to read the Times or Politico, or Breitbart or Newsmax. You are viewing this issue completely through the lens of pet political issues (climate change, Russian interference, election fraud) and the political junkies who argue on the Internet rather than the much broader cultural divide which is the topic of the article. And to be perfectly honest, and I don’t mean this to be mean or hurt your feelings so please don’t take it that way, but if I were asked to think of an FFA poster who condescends to rural voters, I would probably think of you. That’s not to say you aren’t a good person who is intelligent and informed and with whom I largely agree on many topics. But I sort of feel that you are the target audience for this article. 

Oh I certainly agree that I condescend to people. Huge flaw of mine. Doesn’t hurt my feelings at all to recognize it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bigbottom said:

Re: The bolded, you not only implied it, you made the point in your very first post in this thread:

These days, if a liberal and a conservative argue it’s usually about facts: is man made climate change actually happening? Was the Russian interference real or a hoax? And now, did Biden win the election fairly or was it stolen? 

We shouldn’t be arguing about issues of fact. If I get my news from the New York Times and somebody else gets their news from Breitbart these shouldn’t be treated as equally respectable sources of news.

And I stand by that. But I also acknowledge that my own sources of news might not be free from bias as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...