Shockernet Has Become Politically Polarized

[ShockerPrez]

Remember the Naval Academy grad who got worked over by the unmarked DHS folks (and had his hand get badly broken)? He was there, as a veteran, because he thinks those people have a right to peacefully protest. So it's pretty obvious to me that there are excesses on both sides.

Not only that, seems like the Minneapolis police identified the first looter that started the Floyd riots - a white supremacist carrying an umbrella who broke windows at a auto parts store and helped himself to merchandise. That's also a concern of mine. But i will say, let the peaceful folks protest (even though I am way past tired of it) and jail the lawbreakers. No matter who they are. I'm just not convinced that all of the looters are from one side nor can I quantify how many are left vs. right. It would be interesting if we could get a breakdown of looters arrested and find out exactly who they are. If we had that information, I could get behind what you are saying, though.

Completely agree. I saw no reason why the Navy guy was smacked by the cop. Laws are being broken. I wish that when the feds in Portland witnessed an individual throwing the molotov cocktail, or whatever, they could just maul that individual, haul him inside and detain him. And so on and so on. When they were running outside and just chasing them off, it wasn't doing any good. They need to snag a couple of them at a time and start whittling the numbers down.

But if someone is just standing there among all the rioters, and not partaking in anything other than the shouting and flipping the bird, there is no reason the hassle that person. They need to understand that the situation is out of control and piece by piece bring whoever they can to justice.

[Kung Wu]

Is that how everyone else feels?

I like this a lot. I'd say there are exceptions -- for example Obamacare being voted in using slight of hand without a single Republican voting for it. Wanting to unwind Obamacare wouldn't make you _radically_ right. Certainly would make you centrist or right leaning though. But other than rare exceptions that are pushed through in the dead of night (metaphorically speaking) by a single party, I'd say you have a good thought process underway.

[Walker]

It doesn't seem possible to be a Shocker fan and not support the predominant political opinion out here. I don't support Donald Trump and haven't supported him since the 1980's when I was working in real estate development and looked into how he was doing business because he seemed to be successful. He wasn't. He was technically bankrupt, but he was so deep in debt to American banks that they couldn't allow him to fail.

That knowledge and opinion has ostracized me from the mostly conservative crowd out here. Pretty much everything has become politicized and it's spread to ShockerNet.

I don't wear a mask because I don't respect my rights. I wear a mask because I respect yours.

This forum has produced a loss of respect for the person and for the opinions of persons who have political attitudes that differ from the majority.

The uniting fact that we are all Shocker fans is being overwhelmed by the fact that we may want to vote for candidates that other posters don't want to vote for. Are we going to allow that to polarize Shocker fans?

Divide and conquer is a proven effective strategy and we are seeing that in too many aspects of our lives.

I don't think this phenomenon is exclusive to and definitely didn't start with Shockernet. Sports were once the pressure valve where we could all forget the hardships of life and about stuff like politics and have a good time regardless of race, gender, political affiliation, etc. until the woke mob in the time of Kaepernick inserted themselves into sports.

You can push all of this on Trump supporters on Shockernet if you want, but the reality is that this is a two way street. Our side has had this shoved down our throats for years where we're accused of being racist, sexist, etc. if we support Trump or have a dislike of Kaepernick, BLM etc. And now even the NFL, NBA, MLB, ESPN and NCAA have gone all in on the woke politics train despite alienating at least half, if not more of their fanbases.

You're right though, I hope things can get back to how they used to be, and not so tribal. Hopefully we'll get back to being more than just political ideologies and remember how to disagree without hating each other again.

[ShockTalk]

Remember the Naval Academy grad who got worked over by the unmarked DHS folks (and had his hand get badly broken)? He was there, as a veteran, because he thinks those people have a right to peacefully protest. So it's pretty obvious to me that there are excesses on both sides.

Not only that, seems like the Minneapolis police identified the first looter that started the Floyd riots - a white supremacist carrying an umbrella who broke windows at a auto parts store and helped himself to merchandise. That's also a concern of mine. But i will say, let the peaceful folks protest (even though I am way past tired of it) and jail the lawbreakers. No matter who they are. I'm just not convinced that all of the looters are from one side nor can I quantify how many are left vs. right. It would be interesting if we could get a breakdown of looters arrested and find out exactly who they are. If we had that information, I could get behind what you are saying, though.

We're pretty much in agreement. I don't believe the umbrella man did any looting however. He just got the ball rolling. They had no clue he was their enemy (and ours) and fell right in with what he wanted them to do and look like. Regardless, it is still those protesters' fault for what they did. Also, he didn't start all of it. Pretty sure the black, retired police captain trying to protect his friends pawn shop was shot and killed by blacks. Antifa had a hand in several incidents as well.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

I have been a life-long Republican, totally agree with your position on gun law, and, most of all, totally agree with you on the far right/far left problem. Last election was the first time I remember not voting for the Republican candidate (voted for McMillian as a protest vote). I do not believe any of the right or far rights on this forum would approve of letting the extreme groups on the right run rampant as the left is letting theirs. This is disconcerting to me. I cannot support any candidate whose backers allow what is going on in city streets these days, particularly when that candidate has difficulty making a coherent statement (just who would the puppet masters be) (can I even say puppet "master").

The bolded part is where I start having issues on Shockernet and in our society. Is the left really "letting" "extremist groups" "run rampant"? Really? And the right would never let such a thing happen? Really? Honestly asking, because I think what conservatives tend to criticize liberals for is the same damn thing they do. And vice versa. That's why I don't like either party right now. Everyone points fingers at the other side while thinking their own side is blameless and innocent.

The reality is both sides are right and both sides are wrong. And that little nugget blows the minds of many people today because they are so set in the black and white they have little ability to think in the gray.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

I would say you're not as close to the middle as you think you are.

Why?

[Stickboy46]

The bolded part is where I start having issues on Shockernet and in our society. Is the left really "letting" "extremist groups" "run rampant"? Really? And the right isn't? Really? Honestly asking, because I think what conservatives tend to criticize liberals for is the same damn thing they do. And vice versa. That's why I don't like either party right now. Everyone points fingers at the other side while thinking their own side is blameless and innocent.

The reality is both sides are right and both sides are wrong. And that little nugget blows the minds of many people today because their minds are so set in the black and white they have no room to think in the gray.

This .. 10000% this. Many people have lost the ability to think outside outside of their party and make up their minds for themselves.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

Is that how everyone else feels?

Close. I do agree that it depends on the issue. But there could be issues where current policy is generally viewed as already tilted in one direction. Assuming center is status quo, and only deviations from it define one's politics, ignores ideology and the fact that today's status quo is yesterday's right/left.

Say future gun laws are changed to a current liberal viewpoint. Does that now mean every liberal would suddenly become a centrist on gun policy? And then everyone who was a centrist is suddenly a conservative on that issue? I don't believe that. If that is the case, then I see how this would create a polarized environment as ideologies feel like they would have to take more and more radical positions to define themselves and keep their viewpoints relevant.

[Kung Wu]

Is the left really "letting" "extremist groups" "run rampant"? Really?

Yes, mainstream leftists are absolutely endorsing it.

And the right would never let such a thing happen? Really?

I don't know about "never" but the bar has to be pretty high for a mainstream conservative to endorse violence and/or wanton destruction of private and public property.

[ShockerPrez]

Close. I do agree that it depends on the issue. But there could be issues where current policy is generally viewed as already tilted in one direction. Assuming center is status quo, and only deviations from it define one's politics, ignores ideology and the fact that today's status quo is yesterday's right/left.

Say future gun laws are changed to a current liberal viewpoint. Does that now mean every liberal would suddenly become a centrist on gun policy? And then everyone who was a centrist is suddenly a conservative on that issue? I don't believe that. If that is the case, then I see how this would create a polarized environment as ideologies feel like they would have to take more and more radical positions to define themselves and keep their viewpoints relevant.

If we assume that over time, the laws were passed by the legislature and passed all the court challenges, etc and became law, cut and dried, then yes, I would say that even if the law has moved further and further left, if at the given time you were in favor of keeping the law as is and not moving it, you could consider yourself a centrist on the issue at that time. And I say this under the assumption that along the way of all of the laws being passed that the majority of the population was in agreement with the laws and such, therefore indicating that the centrist opinion of the population, after all of the laws would be for the status quo. I mean, a centrist is logically speaking someone who is in the middle.

Because if you are in the majority of thinking on a certain subject, that is pretty much a centrist, right? But what a centrist is today was not what one might have been in the past. It's all relative to the society at large.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

Yes, mainstream leftists are absolutely endorsing it.

Yes they are. Just one blatant example is Nadler saying that Antifa and violent protesters are a "myth".

[Shockm]

Close. I do agree that it depends on the issue. But there could be issues where current policy is generally viewed as already tilted in one direction. Assuming center is status quo, and only deviations from it define one's politics, ignores ideology and the fact that today's status quo is yesterday's right/left.

Say future gun laws are changed to a current liberal viewpoint. Does that now mean every liberal would suddenly become a centrist on gun policy? And then everyone who was a centrist is suddenly a conservative on that issue? I don't believe that. If that is the case, then I see how this would create a polarized environment as ideologies feel like they would have to take more and more radical positions to define themselves and keep their viewpoints relevant.

I agree with Kung Wu. Violence is much more condoned on the left. I’ve never agreed at all with the far right and the KKK. None the less, we’ve been tossed into the racist camp by the Democrats and the MSM just because I think Trump, McConnell, and Minority leader Mc Carthy is a better choice for our country than Hilary, Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer who I think suck up to the Far left, Bernie, AOC, the squad, and Antifa much more than is healthy for America to succeed.

You Rocky Mountain Shock are probably pretty much in the middle. But we’ve been called racists so long when we are far from it and none of us give the racists any credibility. We’ve always said no to their crap.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

Yes, mainstream leftists are absolutely endorsing it.



I don't know about "never" but the bar has to be pretty high for a mainstream conservative to endorse violence and/or wanton destruction of private and public property.

Mainstream "leftists." Like who?

And what the hell is a "leftist" anyway??? I've seen this term only on Shockernet--but I admit I get most of my information from legitimate bipartisan sources who don't use terms like that. Is a "mainstream leftist" different from a mainstream Democrat? Is there such a thing as a "rightist"? And is that different from a conservative? Does the President's suggestion that he would pay the legal fees of a "rightist" (am I using that correctly????) who hit a protester constitute endorsing violence? Or is the President not a "mainstream rightist"? Biden has called for violent protesters to be arrested, so he must not be a mainstream leftist, huh? Obama has also denounced violence, so he must not be "mainstream" either. Or maybe they're not leftist at all. So confused.

This is silly. Seriously. Leftist. SMH.

[Kung Wu]

Mainstream "leftists." Like who?

And what the hell is a "leftist" anyway??? I've seen this term only on Shockernet--but I admit I get most of my information from legitimate bipartisan sources who don't use terms like that. Is a "mainstream leftist" different from a mainstream Democrat? Is there such a thing as a "rightist"? And is that different from a conservative? Does the President's suggestion that he would pay the legal fees of a "rightist" (am I using that correctly????) who hit a protester constitute endorsing violence? Or is the President not a "mainstream rightist"? Biden has called for violent protesters to be arrested, so he must not be a mainstream leftist, huh? Obama has also denounced violence, so he must not be "mainstream" either. Or maybe they're not leftist at all. So confused.

This is silly. Seriously. Leftist. SMH.

Now you're being disingenuous.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

Mainstream "leftists." Like who?

And what the hell is a "leftist" anyway??? I've seen this term only on Shockernet--but I admit I get most of my information from legitimate bipartisan sources who don't use terms like that. Is a "mainstream leftist" different from a mainstream Democrat? Is there such a thing as a "rightist"? And is that different from a conservative? Does the President's suggestion that he would pay the legal fees of a "rightist" (am I using that correctly????) who hit a protester constitute endorsing violence? Or is the President not a "mainstream rightist"? Biden has called for violent protesters to be arrested, so he must not be a mainstream leftist, huh? Obama has also denounced violence, so he must not be "mainstream" either. Or maybe they're not leftist at all. So confused.

This is silly. Seriously. Leftist. SMH.

Let's see, Jerry Nadler, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Talib, AOC, Omar, and on and on have endorsed or at a minimum not spoken out against violent protests or made idiotic statements where they are willfully burying their heads in the sand.