[scarface_74]

If (the royal) you turn a blind eye and making excuses to someone who is systemically putting policies in place and demonizing people of different races and sexuality, you are part of the problem. There is a huge difference between deporting people who are here illegally (something Obama did more than Trump) and demonizing them and saying they are eating pets.

No I don’t agree with the chucking and jiving Davis. Just like if you belong to a church that spews racist non sense or defend Liberty University that until very recently made interracial dating against the rules, (again the royal “you”) are not someone that I can be friends with.

Yes you did have two bad choices and I know people who didn’t vote for Trump as much as they voted against Kamala and the entire vomit inducing DEI, allyship indoctrination that I had to endure during my stint at BigTech.

And stop blaming the politicians. We have seen time and time again that when conservative outlets veered even slightly toward not agreeing with Trump, people abandoned them.

Even today 40% of the population agree what Trump is doing. This gets back to the naive belief that liberals have that you can change the hearts and minds of rural evangelical Christians who have been all about grievances since before my parents were born even if you have a “some good ones”, they are still supporting the system and not speaking out.

[anonymars]

I don't consider it turning a blind eye, quite the opposite. I don't think that not interacting with "bad people" will make the problem go away. Just telling people they are wrong for thinking something doesn't generally change one's mind (https://pbfcomics.com/comics/deeply-held-beliefs/)

I'm not saying kumbaya, why can't we all get along, let bygones be bygones. I'm not naive, I am saying a very simple truth: folks will go where they are accepted and listened to. You may not agree with them and they may think stupid and bad things. Too bad! Those are the facts on the ground and we must deal with them. If we just plug our ears and shun them, guess who are the only people who will listen to and accept them (very basic human needs, after all)?

Again, this is not a value judgment, and no one is saying everyone should go proselytize in the lion's den. But given that people do exist with beliefs we don't like, what then, do we just skip to "civil war" to solve the problem?

I'm also not so naive to think that we can just empathize our way out of this. It's not a fair fight, so to speak, there is a ton of money flowing the opposite way, amplifying falsehoods and exaggerations. In fact I do think it's a losing battle. But when the opportunity presents itself in the right circumstances I cannot turn away

And so then, why the hell shouldn't we blame those who are cynically and stoking feeding this hate, knowingly trafficking in falsehoods? (As in your example of eating the pets)

[scarface_74]

And now you seem to minimize “disagreement”. We aren’t talking about disagreeing on policy. We are talking about them disagreeing on someone’s fundamental right to exist as an individual and to be treated with respect. My son went to high school and still lives in a majority White suburb of Atlanta (we moved). He’s dates exclusively White girls. Not because of racism. That’s just who is in his circle. It’s never been an issue with relatives.

But there are people who still would think that interracial dating is a “sin”. He knows that and I told him to ignore those people. They don’t affect his life and don’t let them affect his happiness.

[anonymars]

It wasn't at all my intent to reduce or equate bigotry to policy disagreements. I was only saying that it is inaccurate to conclude people are irredeemably bigoted solely based on their votes

Politicians won by listening to the discarded and disaffected, though many did so with lies and/or spreading/stoking racist nonsense

I am also in no way saying this explains everyone, just "most x are y" doesn't mean "most y are x"