Do you think the constant Leftward drift is a good thing in light of the lack of restraint?
Why do you keep dodging my critiques, my questions, and just asking more leading questions of your own?
Is it because you don't want to have to defend your own fringe definitions, and want to instead try to force me to meet your continuously shifting and limiting evidentiary standards?
I know the 'rules for radicals' too, this shit won't fly with me.
Is that enough evidence for you that it was religiously motivated? It really isn't for me.
I've presented what happend; people do not tend to become teachers at religious schools unless they share those beliefs and are willing to try to use them in the schooling itself.
What you consider fringe isn't even a unique idea to you. It's informed by Leftist schools, Leftist ideas, you're letting your opponents set the frame and set the goals. Do you even consider yourself part of the Right? If not then why do you think you have skin in the game at all?
No, I know what the fringe looks like, and you are the one insisting I do not understand.
But there is nothing to push back against except for ghosts of past centuries...
But if both left and right agree on the merit of shadowboxing these ghosts, such behavior from real, living people may actually convince someone that there is something material to this ghost.
Well, the problem here is thinking of these things as 'ghosts' to begin with; the legacy of the Salem Witch Trials and the Scopes Monkey Trial, along with some other issues (anti-evolution rhetoric in general, hindering geology due to contest the flood myth, religious folks losing their shit over Halloween) is stil very much alive.
The issue of religious authoritarian tendencies is part of why the US enshrined Freedom or Religion into the Constitution, so as to avoid the sectarian religious wars that had riddled Europe for centuries.
Actually, the Halloween example is a great one, with a good pop culture example; you know what King of the Hill is right?
The sort of religious nuttery that Hank goes against here, with Bible Thumpers trying to ruin Halloween, is a great example of the reason people fear religious authoritarians gaining power.
As i said, the only solution to this problem is to have some very, very stern words with those who decide what are centrists/moderates hearing of, and explain themselves publicly why are they hearing of such things instead of far more relevant topics.
Well I agree with the general idea of this, I just don't think calling people like Rowling 'shitlibs' will make it easier to open moderate/centrist minds.
What? By not constantly self-flagellating about religious hardliners from centuries ago and the barely noticeable shadows of politics of 100 years ago? No, that's not an error, that's common sense.
You might be surprised how much good political/social self-reflection can do for PR, in the US.
Yeah, it won't change the minds of hardcore Leftists, but those aren't the target audience, the center is.
Dude, they are leftist by UK's standards... Blue Dogs of times past would be considered closer to the Tories.
Yes, they aren't commies, but no, they are not liberals either, because they are just plain ol' socialists, closer to Sanders and AOC than any classical liberal.
Socialists are not classical liberals, and if you think they are, you need to start from zero in your political knowledge.
I'd say that there needs to be a discussion about the difference between 'supports workers right to organize and bargain' types vs 'men can be women' types.
Both get labeled 'socialist' on this board, but only one of them usually is.
Part of the problem is this boards idea of what is 'Leftist' usually is anyone to the Left of Rand Paul, which is just as much BS as anyone to the Right of Sanders being a Nazi.
Unfortunately... But pulling off victories by the skin of their teeth should not be the main way to win elections long term for the right, and that's what it entails. The big victories mean pulling good few percent at least out of the middle for good. Winning battles is nice, but in long term it's more about winning the war.
Right now the GOP in the US doesn't have the ability to do more than win by the skin of it's teeth, as the Red Ripple showed. It cannot afford to lose any of the center at this point, or the Dems will get all 3 branches sown up again and start on SCOTUS.
The Right cannot win the long term, till it stops shooting itself in the foot in the short term, never mind the rolling back Leftists actions against it.
The electoral college and first past the post system is not likely to change, and swing voters/districts are not all that variable in location, cycle to cycle.