You can have a big tent without handing the keys to literal enemies.
Maybe, maybe not. But the conservatives seem completely fucking incapable of walking that line. If it even even slightly works out, it's either because the liberal becomes less liberal on their own, or they're a good enough grifter to not be too overtly liberal. But it's pure luck, and seems to backfire more often than not. If the conservatives could pull it off it might be worth doing, but they've shown they can't. So big tent nonsense is an utter disaster, and needs to be avoided.
I'm talking more the hangers on, the grifters, the conservative-lite "ex-liberals" and the like, not the actual politicians...who are probably scum regardless.
As I said in my other post, Riley Gaines is an excellent current example. She's not a conservative, in fact she's a feminist. And conservatives are falling all over themselves to boost her message, and to agree with her on more liberal ideals, just because she recognizes that men and women are different, and doesn't want men in women's sports. It's sad to see.
I'm talking more the hangers on, the grifters, the conservative-lite "ex-liberals" and the like, not the actual politicians...who are probably scum regardless.
Eh, as far as I can see, they're pretty useful. Also, the difference between conservatives in liberals is that conservatives call everyone a grifter, while liberals create entire institutions with sinecures for people who spout and whitewash the party line (paid with other people's money).
As I said in my other post, Riley Gaines is an excellent current example. She's not a conservative, in fact she's a feminist
Where are you getting that idea? I looked at her Twitter, and it looks basically like Matt Walsh's - not just on troon issues, but also criticizing the media for a hit on Vivek using 'white supremacy'. Basically can't tell her apart from an average conservative.
Now, let's say she's a communist deep down. Does it matter? It shouldn't. The advocacy is decidedly in the correct direction. I don't expect pundits to have opinions to begin with.
Where are you getting that idea? I looked at her Twitter...Basically can't tell her apart from an average conservative.
I was curious and looked it up. I'm not sure how Twitter sorts its stuff now, so this isn't chronological, but these were snippets of the tweets in the order Twitter gave me. I only skipped like two that didn't directly mention women (but were still about trans issues). I want to be clear, this isn't cherry-picking, these were just all the tweets I saw.
"I support women and girls in sports"
Proud to be a strong woman🫶🏼 #SaveWomensSports
Does it not break your heart to see women lose out on these opportunities?
This October 10th (X/X), we're celebrating Real Women's Day...I would be remiss if I didn't specifically say this day should be used to celebrate and honor the girls and women squarely in harms way because of the violence that has broken out in the Middle East...
I hope people have been eye opened to the threat women face when they dare speak out.
I was named 2023 Problematic Woman of the Year...A badge I will wear with honor🥹
I guess it's easier for her to ignore me than to denounce violence against women.
This is proof that women need sex-protected spaces.
He is an arrogant, cheat who STOLE a national title from a hardworking, deserving woman.
Again, not even cherry-picking. Also, I'm not trying to say she doesn't have a point in some of that. It's not about the message, it's about the focus. It's self promotional, it's entirely female-centric, and is often demanding more privileges for women.
Nothing about any of what I saw on her Twitter was what I would classify as conservative.
It's a mixed bag. They can be useful for sure (in fact more useful than I've given them credit for in this thread, I admit), but I'm also seeing a whole lot of ideological capture from the left through these means as well. But, yeah, I'll give you that. Ex/liberals are useful for attracting other questioning people more to the right. But, again, mixed bag, as I'm also seeing a lot of erosion of the right. But, they certainly have their place. But I think are currently being used in a detrimental fashion.
Also, the difference between conservatives in liberals is that conservatives call everyone a grifter, while liberals create entire institutions with sinecures for people who spout and whitewash the party line (paid with other people's money).
That does seem to be the case. But I think it is important to self police. Talk to any moderate to extreme leftist, they hate the grifters and embrace of the grifters on their side too, and view it as stopping any True Leftist (which have of course Never Been Tried) movements. And they're not exactly wrong. The corporatization of the left is hurting the left, even as it gives them power too.
Overly policing the grifters will thin the ranks of any movement, but under policing them will water down the movement as a whole. There has to a balance, and I'd say neither side has it at the moment.
Where are you getting that idea? I looked at her Twitter, and it looks basically like Matt Walsh's - not just on troon issues, but also criticizing the media for a hit on Vivek using 'white supremacy'. Basically can't tell her apart from an average conservative.
I admit I'm not super familiar with Gaines, and maybe she has now tried to seem more rightwing, but whenever I've heard her in the past, it's all focused on Women and Girls™, it's all about protecting women, and it's all appeals to emotion and bad arguments, often coming down to 'I can't compete with men and that's unfair to me.' Which, while true, is also just sort of whiny and self serving. Sure, use your own experience as an example, and it is a good one, but it used to be her entire schtick. She wasn't saying anything conservative, she was basically just asking the conservatives to be her army, while in return...the conservatives took feminist stances. Didn't seem like a fair trade to me.
Now, let's say she's a communist deep down. Does it matter? It shouldn't. The advocacy is decidedly in the correct direction.
Again, I'm not sure I agree. Outside of the very basic 'men shouldn't be in women's sports' she doesn't bring anything outside of her own experience in swimming, and that's hardly conservative, it's just something that happened. She should be held up as an example, not given the reins. And there has, at least in my opinion, been too much of the latter.
Maybe, maybe not. But the conservatives seem completely fucking incapable of walking that line. If it even even slightly works out, it's either because the liberal becomes less liberal on their own, or they're a good enough grifter to not be too overtly liberal. But it's pure luck, and seems to backfire more often than not. If the conservatives could pull it off it might be worth doing, but they've shown they can't. So big tent nonsense is an utter disaster, and needs to be avoided.
Yup, but again, that's not how it ever works.
What cases are you thinking of? People like Romney are more establishment drones than liberals who are included because of a 'big tent'.
I'm talking more the hangers on, the grifters, the conservative-lite "ex-liberals" and the like, not the actual politicians...who are probably scum regardless.
As I said in my other post, Riley Gaines is an excellent current example. She's not a conservative, in fact she's a feminist. And conservatives are falling all over themselves to boost her message, and to agree with her on more liberal ideals, just because she recognizes that men and women are different, and doesn't want men in women's sports. It's sad to see.
Eh, as far as I can see, they're pretty useful. Also, the difference between conservatives in liberals is that conservatives call everyone a grifter, while liberals create entire institutions with sinecures for people who spout and whitewash the party line (paid with other people's money).
Where are you getting that idea? I looked at her Twitter, and it looks basically like Matt Walsh's - not just on troon issues, but also criticizing the media for a hit on Vivek using 'white supremacy'. Basically can't tell her apart from an average conservative.
Now, let's say she's a communist deep down. Does it matter? It shouldn't. The advocacy is decidedly in the correct direction. I don't expect pundits to have opinions to begin with.
I was curious and looked it up. I'm not sure how Twitter sorts its stuff now, so this isn't chronological, but these were snippets of the tweets in the order Twitter gave me. I only skipped like two that didn't directly mention women (but were still about trans issues). I want to be clear, this isn't cherry-picking, these were just all the tweets I saw.
Again, not even cherry-picking. Also, I'm not trying to say she doesn't have a point in some of that. It's not about the message, it's about the focus. It's self promotional, it's entirely female-centric, and is often demanding more privileges for women.
Nothing about any of what I saw on her Twitter was what I would classify as conservative.
It's a mixed bag. They can be useful for sure (in fact more useful than I've given them credit for in this thread, I admit), but I'm also seeing a whole lot of ideological capture from the left through these means as well. But, yeah, I'll give you that. Ex/liberals are useful for attracting other questioning people more to the right. But, again, mixed bag, as I'm also seeing a lot of erosion of the right. But, they certainly have their place. But I think are currently being used in a detrimental fashion.
That does seem to be the case. But I think it is important to self police. Talk to any moderate to extreme leftist, they hate the grifters and embrace of the grifters on their side too, and view it as stopping any True Leftist (which have of course Never Been Tried) movements. And they're not exactly wrong. The corporatization of the left is hurting the left, even as it gives them power too.
Overly policing the grifters will thin the ranks of any movement, but under policing them will water down the movement as a whole. There has to a balance, and I'd say neither side has it at the moment.
I admit I'm not super familiar with Gaines, and maybe she has now tried to seem more rightwing, but whenever I've heard her in the past, it's all focused on Women and Girls™, it's all about protecting women, and it's all appeals to emotion and bad arguments, often coming down to 'I can't compete with men and that's unfair to me.' Which, while true, is also just sort of whiny and self serving. Sure, use your own experience as an example, and it is a good one, but it used to be her entire schtick. She wasn't saying anything conservative, she was basically just asking the conservatives to be her army, while in return...the conservatives took feminist stances. Didn't seem like a fair trade to me.
Again, I'm not sure I agree. Outside of the very basic 'men shouldn't be in women's sports' she doesn't bring anything outside of her own experience in swimming, and that's hardly conservative, it's just something that happened. She should be held up as an example, not given the reins. And there has, at least in my opinion, been too much of the latter.