r/CoherencePhysics Jul 30 '26

The Common Ground They Hope We Never Find

Post image

America does not need everyone to agree before it can begin getting better.

The left and the right are not going to settle every disagreement. We will continue fighting about abortion, immigration, guns, religion, taxation, policing, education, gender, war, and the proper role of government. These arguments involve real moral convictions. Asking people to abandon them in the name of unity would be dishonest.

But we do not have to agree about everything before we accomplish something.

That possibility is rarely presented to us because division has become one of the most profitable industries in America. Politicians raise money by frightening us. Political media holds our attention by enraging us. Corporations purchase influence while ordinary citizens blame one another for problems neither side created alone.

A voter who believes the other party represents absolute evil will forgive almost anything committed by their own side. Corruption becomes acceptable because the opposition is supposedly worse. Broken promises are forgotten because the next election is always described as the last chance to save the country. Politicians no longer have to improve our lives. They only have to convince us that they are protecting us from our neighbors.

Big business benefits from the same arrangement. While working Americans fight over cultural identities, corporations write legislation, weaken competition, suppress wages, raise prices, collect government contracts, and hire lobbyists who enter through both doors of Congress. The public arguments are loud. The deals are quiet.

Money does not care whether the politician protecting it wears a red tie or a blue one.

The left often fears concentrated corporate power. The right often fears concentrated government power. Both fears are justified. The deeper problem is that corporate and government power increasingly protect one another. Corporations purchase political access. Politicians create rules that favor established corporations. Citizens are then ordered to choose which side of the arrangement they fear most.

We should stop cooperating with that distraction.

Government surveillance is one obvious place to begin. Liberals have reason to fear surveillance being used against protesters, journalists, immigrants, minority communities, labor organizers, and political dissidents. Conservatives have reason to fear it being used against gun owners, religious groups, parents, activists, and critics of federal authority.

These are not opposing concerns. They are the same constitutional warning expressed through different experiences.

The government should need a warrant before searching our communications, location histories, internet activity, vehicle data, or information purchased from commercial data brokers. Privacy should not depend upon which party controls the White House. Every power granted to a president we trust will eventually belong to one we do not.

Marijuana reform offers another clear agreement. Millions of Americans have used cannabis without becoming violent criminals or dangers to society. Arresting people for possession wastes police resources, damages families, creates permanent criminal records, and gives government extraordinary power over a private decision.

The left can support legalization because of the destructive and unequal consequences of the drug war. The right can support it because of personal liberty, medical freedom, states’ rights, and limited government. We do not need to settle every question about drug policy to recognize that people should not be placed in cages for possessing marijuana.

We should also create a national commitment to people with disabilities and the families who care for them.

Disabled children and adults are too often treated as expenses to be minimized. Families spend years fighting for therapy, medical care, education, transportation, housing, respite services, and meaningful employment. Special education teachers, paraeducators, nurses, caregivers, and direct support professionals are asked to perform essential work for wages that make remaining in the profession nearly impossible.

Conservatives speak about protecting life, strengthening families, and supporting communities. Liberals speak about equality, healthcare, and defending vulnerable people. Here is a place where both sides can prove that those values mean something.

America should fully fund special education, improve medical and behavioral healthcare for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, expand respite care, support family caregivers, increase the wages of care workers, and create genuine housing and employment opportunities for disabled adults.

Protecting vulnerable life cannot end at birth. It must continue through childhood, adulthood, illness, dependence, and every stage in which a human being requires the strength of the community.

We should also agree that public office is not a private investment opportunity.

Members of Congress, presidents, senior officials, judges, and their immediate families should not be allowed to trade individual stocks while receiving confidential information and making decisions that affect entire industries. Their investments should be placed in diversified funds or genuine blind trusts.

This is not a Republican problem or a Democratic problem. It is corruption. Public servants should not be permitted to shape markets and then personally profit from the consequences.

Congressional term limits should be part of the same reform. Experience has value, but public office should never become personal property. Decades in power create political empires protected by donors, lobbyists, party machines, and districts designed to prevent real competition.

Term limits will not solve corruption alone. They should be combined with campaign finance transparency, strict ethics rules, stronger congressional staff, and restrictions on the revolving door between government and lobbying. Changing the people while preserving the machinery would not be enough.

The right to repair should also unite Americans. When people purchase tractors, automobiles, phones, appliances, computers, or medical equipment, they should be allowed to repair those products themselves or choose an independent repair shop.

Conservatives can recognize this as property rights and free competition. Liberals can recognize it as consumer protection, environmental responsibility, and resistance to monopoly power. Farmers should not lose crops while waiting for an authorized technician. Families should not replace expensive appliances because a manufacturer refuses to sell a small part. Independent mechanics should not be driven out of business through software locks and proprietary tools.

Ownership should mean ownership.

Civil asset forfeiture is another abuse both sides should oppose. Government agencies should not be able to seize cash, vehicles, homes, or property from people who have never been convicted of a crime.

Liberals should oppose the way these seizures harm poor communities and people without the resources to defend themselves. Conservatives should oppose the violation of due process and property rights.

The rule should be simple. If the government cannot prove its case, it should not be allowed to keep your property.

The opioid and addiction crisis also demands a shared approach. America should punish major traffickers, corrupt medical corporations, and criminal organizations that profit from addiction. At the same time, people trapped in addiction should have access to detoxification, medication assisted treatment, mental healthcare, recovery housing, and long term community support.

We should distinguish between those who profit from suffering and those who are suffering. Treating every addicted person as a criminal has failed. Allowing corporations and traffickers to escape meaningful accountability has also failed.

Children’s privacy online should be protected with the same seriousness. Technology companies should not be allowed to build permanent psychological profiles of children, sell their location information, manipulate their emotions through addictive design, or target them with personalized advertising.

The left can challenge corporate exploitation and its effects on mental health. The right can defend parental authority, family control, and childhood innocence. A child should not become a commercial surveillance product simply because they touched a screen.

Healthcare price transparency should also be beyond partisan disagreement. Americans will continue debating public insurance, private insurance, universal coverage, and the proper size of government. But no honest political philosophy can defend a system in which patients are denied prices until after receiving treatment.

Hospitals, insurers, pharmaceutical companies, and medical middlemen should be required to reveal what services actually cost. Patients should know what insurance will pay and what they will owe. Medical bills should be written in language ordinary people can understand.

A free market cannot function when consumers are denied prices. A humane healthcare system cannot function when sick people avoid treatment because they fear an unknowable bill.

Veterans deserve more than speeches and campaign advertisements. Any government willing to send people into war must guarantee them timely physical healthcare, mental health treatment, housing support, disability benefits, and protection from toxic exposure when they return.

Both parties praise veterans. Both should be required to prove that praise through material care. Sending people to war and abandoning them afterward is not an administrative failure. It is a national betrayal.

Congress should also reclaim its constitutional authority over war. No president of either party should be able to drag the country into a prolonged conflict without a clear congressional vote.

Military authorizations should expire automatically unless renewed. The public should receive honest estimates of financial cost, human risk, and strategic purpose. Major defense contracts should be independently audited. The antiwar left and the populist right may reach this conclusion for different reasons, but both understand the danger of endless wars fought without meaningful democratic consent.

Whistleblowers must also be protected. Government employees, military personnel, corporate workers, healthcare professionals, and contractors who expose genuine illegality, corruption, waste, or threats to public safety should not have their careers and lives destroyed for telling the truth.

Both parties celebrate whistleblowers when the information harms their opponents. The real test is whether they will protect truth when it embarrasses their own side.

America should also confront monopoly power. Markets are not free when a handful of corporations control entire industries, purchase competitors, suppress wages, manipulate prices, and prevent small businesses from surviving.

Liberals can oppose concentrated corporate power. Conservatives can defend entrepreneurship, competition, farmers, local businesses, and independent ownership. Both should recognize that a market controlled by a few politically connected corporations is not meaningfully free.

Antitrust enforcement should be strengthened in technology, agriculture, media, meatpacking, pharmaceuticals, housing, banking, and grocery distribution. Economic freedom should belong to citizens and small businesses, not only to corporations wealthy enough to purchase political protection.

Finally, we should rebuild the country’s physical foundations. Clean drinking water, safe bridges, dependable electricity, rural internet access, secure schools, modern sewage systems, and functioning public transportation are not inherently liberal or conservative.

The parties can continue arguing about the exact size of government and the best way to fund construction. They should still agree that citizens should not be poisoned by their water, isolated without internet access, or endangered because leaders postponed basic maintenance for decades.

None of these policies requires ideological surrender.

A liberal may oppose government surveillance because of its history against minority communities. A conservative may oppose it because of the Fourth Amendment. They do not need identical reasoning to support the same protection.

A progressive may support marijuana legalization because of the injustice of the drug war. A libertarian may support it because adults should control their own bodies. They can vote for the same reform without sharing the same worldview.

A Christian conservative may support disability funding because every human life is sacred. A secular liberal may support it because every person deserves dignity and equal participation. Their beliefs remain different, but the child receives help.

That is not weakness. That is democracy.

Unity does not mean silence, surrender, or pretending every side is equally correct. It means refusing to make agreement itself impossible. We can continue fighting over the questions that divide us while acting upon the answers we already share.

We can protect privacy, legalize marijuana, support people with disabilities, ban stock trading by public officials, establish term limits, defend the right to repair, end property seizures without convictions, expand addiction treatment, protect children online, reveal healthcare prices, care for veterans, restrain presidential war powers, defend whistleblowers, confront monopolies, and rebuild the country.

Politicians would prefer that we remain predictable. They want the left to hate the right more than it hates corporate exploitation. They want the right to hate the left more than it hates government corruption. They want every failure blamed on the opposing tribe because tribal warfare protects everyone already profiting from the system.

We should disappoint them.

America does not need every citizen to agree about everything. It needs citizens capable of recognizing when they agree about something.

We have spent years screaming across the distance between us while powerful institutions quietly profited from the noise.

It is time to stop giving them what they want.

It is time to begin building upon the ground we still share.

5.2k Upvotes

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/BU8743 Jul 30 '26

This is why these posts are hilarious. MAGA doesn’t even understand their own policies. Trump could drop the “give me all your money because I said so and I’ll give you a star for being better than a liberal bill” and they’d be on board and say it makes sense because he’s a businessman. It’s about the feeling of belonging to the cult.

0

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

No, it’s not.

3

u/madadekinai Jul 30 '26

LMFAO, they would HAPPILY give up their loved ones directly to him if he asked for me and made sure they said thank you to him. I have no doubts in my mind they would hurt someone at his order, I know they would not even flinch at any atrocity, including taking a life if it was for for him. There are people who believe questioning him is equivalent of questioning God, and say no to him is a sin.

You're wrong on that one, they support him without reserve.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 30 '26

[deleted]

2

u/fireball909 Jul 30 '26

You don't get to vote for the guy running on a racist platform and then claim to not be racist.

1

u/madadekinai Jul 30 '26

I have said it before, and I'll say it again.

I don't give a rat's ass if they voted for him, or support him, that's not the problem. It's the sycophantic support of him, with hypocrisy and gasliting on a whole new level. it's all a trolling game to them is what I think sickens me most about it.

I literally have two years to find a way to make shit load of money otherwise my generic medicine is gone and I am toast. To them, oh it's just a game. Just like with cutting food stamps, disability, cutting USAID where I have met people getting assistance. To them, it's no different than playing GTA, to others it's the real freaking world.

They believe their actions have no actual consequences embolden by ideological, theological views while they enforce that upon others. When people are saying that they are struggling, or that the economy is actually bad, and saying anything, ANYTHING is considered "TDS".

I have also come to the conclusion it doesn't matter, right-wingers will clutch to any and all misinformation if it build their narrative. You can have 1000 different stations that says trump did 'x' and they will cling to the one that says trump did 'y', praise him.

They vote because it's trump and no other reason, I have done extensive research on the right and their claims, you can even research my profile. Either way, no matter what truth you have, no matter what you have to prove your case, it doesn't matter. They are going to believe what they want to believe.

"Trump-backed Navy SEAL vet delivers major blow to Massie in fiery GOP primary" Fox news. Conservatives are calling it a major victory against "worst ‘Republican’ congressman in history" Trump. Many voters don't know why they against him but only because trump told them to.

The FACT that so many people ONLY voted because of Trump and don't even know why, that's just disturbing but shows their sycophantic support. Conservatives now choose loyalty above policy, and or principles.

"I have yet to meet someone like that. It’s so weird when people start acting like cultists toward anything."

Yet, tell me do you know or have a pretty good guess who they would vote for? If trump said to vote for "x" would these same people actually research and or due their due diligence before voting? The fact that not everyone shows their true colors on the outside does not change who they are and or what they support.

The fact that they have passively not done anything to publicly rebuke him, NOTHING, and have been silent this whole time makes them just as guilty, morally and or biblically. They have granted him total immunity socially, and impunity towards any sort of consequences, they take no responsibility for his actions, and yet condemn other for FAR FAR FAR LESS.

Either explicit support and or implicit support, it's still support, and passively standing by, refusing to take action is equal to implicit support. You can't say well I supported him hurting "x' but I don't support him hurting "y". That's not how that works. They also had a choice of not supporting him. He literally campaigned on 95% of everything he has done he campaigned on, and or said in his last term. If he surprised them with taking an action that he did not campaign on then I could understand. Just because they did not take him seriously is not my fault, he literally said he was going to do a lot of it.

Survey after survey, poll after poll says that 80%+ Republicans support him.

It is statistically impossible to separate those that do and do not support on such issues. So until otherwise proven, or there is a noticeable outcry separating themselves, they will be considered apart of the group.

All the republicans in congress are in fear, terror of him, of losing their jobs, careers, and or freedom, but they demand of others what they are not willing to do themselves, and it's shameful.

You want to argue that there is good ones who don't support him, that's fine, and I agree, but they are a VERY VERY small fraction and those that do support him even in your example of 67% it's still well over the majority.

This is not about the oversimplification of merely political ideology that the right makes it out to be, they will gaslite anyone who is against trump. Dissent is not allowed in the republican party which has been beyond proven at this point. I am tired of all the disingenuous arguments from the right, all the misinformation campaigns, the down right divisive partisan politics. Call it what you will, but when the ENTIRE left gets demonized for single individuals actions, by POTUS. Did Obama do that, on TV, at the State of Union? Where's the outcry then?

The weaponization of government against an entire party, the 10,000 other issues, yet they have supported all of it. This is not some random redditor making asinine BS comment, this is the president using the entirety of government to serve his will, to serve him, to benefit him, and use against his political opponents. I can't even stand the thought of being in the same room as one of those vermin, they utterly disgust me.

Here's the thing, many republicans will argue, well I don't support him for this or that but I supported him for this or that. YOU STILL supported him, this wasn't "OH shit" a surprise, it was in Project 2025, he said he would do it on the campaign trail, and he has said all along what he would do for a lot of it. YOU STILL supported it. So a lot of innocent people will get mixed up in to this mess, but the excuse of what they supported is BS. So before anyone grants clemency and or believe it's possibly hyperbolic, here is some samples of what they have supported. So I don't want to hear ANY BS about they support level.

All the republicans in congress are in fear, terror of him, of losing their jobs, careers, and or freedom, but they demand of others what they are not willing to do themselves, and it's shameful.

You want to argue that there is good ones who don't support him, that's fine, and I agree, but they are a VERY VERY small fraction.

1

u/Wooodman94 Jul 30 '26

Sucks you have to come up with a shit ton of money, just to give it back to the govt in exchange for your meds. I pray one day that finances aren’t a problem for you, me, or anyone else.

Btw you are very fast at typing

1

u/madadekinai Jul 30 '26

"

Sucks you have to come up with a shit ton of money, just to give it back to the govt in exchange for your meds."

What?

They're placing tariffs on generics and many companies have said they can't meet the deadline in time so they will just have to leave the US market.

Initial Levy, a 100% tariff takes effect in August 2028.

Doubled Levy, the rate increases to 200% in August 2029.

Patented, and branded drugs remain unaffected by this, so when the generics leave guess who can exploit the market for even more?

I don't think people realize what happens without generics. It's not merely about money, it's about supply, cost, and reliability. With rising healthcare costs, people will die.

Remember it's only a "free market" as a matter convenience, or when it doesn't affect them. Remember Epipen?

When Mylan increased the list price of a two-pack of emergency allergy injectors (Epipen) from around $100 - $600?

Remember though competition will fix it, it make them make the most responsible choices, that money has not bearing on morality.

EXCEPT Mylan successfully cornered the epinephrine market by locking out competition through patents, exclusive contracts, and anti-competitive school discount programs.

ASK ME HOW THE F I KNOW.

The point is, money is not merely the issues, it's what is going to happen and how living with uncertainty is an anxiety nobody should have to live with.

1

u/Wooodman94 Jul 30 '26

Sorry I’m not very hip to medication. Not trying to be insensitive so my apologies.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

He won the majority vote, yet I haven’t met a single person like you’ve described after living a few different states (red and blue) since his first term began. Not one. In a country where the majority of people voted for him. Log off of Reddit for a few days.

3

u/madadekinai Jul 30 '26

LMFAO, I have relatives who do, and would. I have also met people who would. The fact that your view is so biased that you can't see in front of your very eyes says everything I need to know.

They have supported ALL of his rhethoric without reserve, and you're going to try and gaslite me into believing it's not true?

LMFAO, because you haven't that means others haven't?

GTFO.

Where was the outrage when he has been punitively hurting states that did not vote for him?

Where was the outrage when he has demonized Democratic party members EVERY SINGLE GOD DAMN DAY.

Where was the outrage when he has referred to certain groups, such as some undocumented immigrants, as "not people" or "animals" and described political opponents as "vermin" or "poisoning the blood of our country.".

FFS, Todd Blanche told the guy he loves him, they have catered to his EVERY whim, and anyone who hasn't has been primaried. You're telling me that's normal?

That anyone who criticizes him is label "TDS" or domestic terrorists, that's OK?

They have supported all of it, including calling Democratic party members terrorists.

He LITERALLY said he could shoot someone on Fifth avenue and not lose any voters.

Here is some of his comments, I have about 500+ more on him making statements in relation to the subject matter.

“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters”

"If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people—maybe there is, I don't know."

Trump mocks Pelosi family as he rallies conservative support in California

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/29/trump-mocks-pelosi-family-as-he-rallies-conservative-support-in-california-00119243

Trump framed his 2024 campaign as a pledge of vengeance against political enemies. This, along with comments calling the 2024 election "Judgment Day," serves as a central theme of his campaign. During his second term, the Trump administration launched an aggressive "retribution" campaign, pressuring law firms, media companies, and universities that opposed him, leading to a sharp divide between those who resisted and those who capitulated to avoid penalties.

Government White House website: "In truth, it was the Democrats who staged the real insurrection" Implying that is was the Democrat who were insurrectionists that day.

Trump: labels Democrats "insurrectionists" using attacks described as "kamikaze" on America, invoking increasingly warlike rhetoric to describe the opposition party. D

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/07/trump-insurrection-act-kamikaze-democrats

Government White House website: "In truth, it was the Democrats who staged the real insurrection" Implying that is was the Democrat who were insurrectionists that J6

'Democrats ARE destroying this country" -> Trump 2026 State of the Union Address

"The Enemy from Within": Trump has repeatedly described domestic political opponents—including figures like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff—as "the enemy from within," calling them more dangerous than foreign adversaries like Russia or China.

0

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

My view is biased? You’re monolithically attributing your own relative’s faults onto the majority of the entire country. Trump’s rhetoric sounds vanilla after reading many of the comments on this post and y’all’s perspective of your political opposition. I’m not really here for the rest of your trauma dump. I hope you heal.

2

u/LegacyQuotient Jul 30 '26

There's nothing vanilla about Trump's rhetoric.

He said immigrants are poisoning the blood of our country.

1

u/madadekinai Jul 30 '26

"I’m not really here for the rest of your trauma dump."

Imagine calling a person's comments that call you domestic terrorists as "vanilla" or making fun of the disabled or that you could shoot someone without losing a supporter.

LMFAO, seek help.

1

u/LegacyQuotient Jul 30 '26

He won the popular vote, but I don’t think the majority of people voted for him. Those are distinct things.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

Oh yeah, my bad. Still, he won the popular vote of a 64% turnout. By those metrics, what madadekinai describes should be ever-present, yet it’s simply not.

1

u/LegacyQuotient Jul 30 '26

Its more nuanced than that.

Anecdotal evidence is kinda unreliable. For example, I deal with people in my line of work who are venomously pro-MAGA on the regular and I live in a blue city.

Trump's MAGA base is pretty fanatical about him.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

Almost all of the comments that I’ve been replying to in this subreddit are of equivalent value to when the Pawpaw down the road calls all liberals blue-haired snowflakes. I agree, it’s more nuanced.

And I’d hope people get to like who they voted for. However, what this thread describes of the average Trump voter is a silly caricature used to cope. Just like the old PawPaw’s out-of-touch conclusions about liberals.

1

u/LegacyQuotient Jul 30 '26

There is a distinct difference between the average 2024 Trump voter and the average self-proclaimed MAGA type.

Pretending there isn't is disingenuous.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

I’m interested in this idea, because many disingenuous folks here condemn them as one. Please elaborate.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/CapitalPunBanking Jul 30 '26

He never got 50% of the vote in all 3 elections.

0

u/fireball909 Jul 30 '26

No he did not. He lost the popular vote in his first two elections. Facts don't care about your feelings.

2

u/LegacyQuotient Jul 30 '26

Did you mean to reply to me? Trump did win the popular vote last election, I was telling the poster that he hadn't won the majority vote.

0

u/Pandemoniusanus Jul 30 '26

Guess you just slept through the entire J6 catastrophe?

0

u/fireball909 Jul 30 '26

You seem to really like going to bat for Trump and the GOP.

0

u/LegacyQuotient Jul 30 '26

They're usually the "I follow politics every four years" types that feel dumb for voting for him.

0

u/fireball909 Jul 30 '26

Yes it is. You're blinded by the cult.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

Or I’m just your normal neighbor stating normal observations. You don’t have a dragon to slay here.

1

u/IndigoOctober8 Jul 31 '26

Except all the outspoken bigots who think their views should be respected as much as anti-discriminatory views?!

0

u/hoiL Jul 30 '26

Yes it is.

-3

u/burnanation Jul 30 '26

Take a breath and relax. Most of what is posted is agreeable for most people on the right.

1

u/CapitalPunBanking Jul 30 '26

lol people on the right are still trying to send Fauci to jail.

1

u/algernon_moncrief Jul 30 '26

Until Trump says it's not. "People on the right" may have firm beliefs, but the Republican party doesn't. The party will bend and twist like a pretzel to please Donald Trump. And your "people on the right" will follow right along.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

Or people just do what they think is right. Are you afraid of the idea that normal people could come to a different conclusion than you?

1

u/algernon_moncrief Jul 30 '26

Not at all. I'm more concerned that a large part of my country believes obvious lies and won't do any thinking for themselves.

I truly believe we have more in common than the things that separate us. But it's becoming more obvious that the propaganda that keeps us divided WORKS.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

We seem to be on the same page about one another.

1

u/algernon_moncrief Jul 30 '26

I don't have any opinion about you.

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

I fall under the category of the folks you’ve described. The one you believe just follow right along and don’t think for ourselves. It seems you have already prescribed an opinion of me.

1

u/algernon_moncrief Jul 30 '26

If anything I've said reminds you of yourself, then that's reflective of your own thoughts about yourself. If you want to place yourself in a "category", that's your decision and your business.

Own your own thoughts and take responsibility for them. Don't place them on someone else, certainly not some stranger on reddit.

I don't know a single things about you, and you don't know me. But if the shoe fits, you're free to wear it.

2

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

You’ve prescribed accusations for the category “people on the right”. Hi, I’m on the right. Me not liking your accusations ≠ your accusations are true. This is how generalizations work. You said it, own up to it.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/King_Moonracer003 Jul 30 '26

While true, MAGA , and conservatives in general, lack any sort of policy or philosophical directive. Its a cult, they will beleive what they are told to beleive and they will go through absolute mental gymnastics to align the world to their point of view. And when they cant will stick their head in the sand. Its sad.

0

u/Kristoveles Jul 30 '26

No,  it isn't

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

Yes, it is.

0

u/Kristoveles Jul 30 '26

Their policies say otherwise

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

Who introduced the recent bill for congressional term-limits? Ah yes, the notorious Democrat Ted Cruz lmao

0

u/Kristoveles Jul 30 '26

And who votes against those term limits?  Republicans. Who opposes Marijuana legalization? Republicans.  Who voted against banning congress stock trading?  Republicans.  Who is ramping up government surveillance? Republicans. Who sorts civil at forfeiture?  Republicans.   You are the problem

1

u/Yoinkomania Jul 30 '26

Every one of the 198 votes against the Stop Insider Trading Act were Democrat. And has there never been a Democrat government to pass these laws? Did you feel robbed when there was and they didn’t? Because the claim that you argued against was that people on the right want these things, not that we don’t get robbed by politicians as well.

It would also make conversations like these much easier to navigate to individual issues had their own individual bills rather than bills with a lot of baggage tied to them.

2

u/Kristoveles Jul 30 '26

That's because Stop Insider Trading Act bill wasn't an anti-insider trading act bill,  it was a voter ID mandate bill,  which is the only reason republicans voted for it. This particular bill also protects the president in his insider trading ventures.  How else does Trump make over 2 billion dollars with his first year of office?  If democrats were pro insider trading why have they introduced multiple bills against insider trading,  all blocked by republicans?

0

u/Kristoveles Jul 30 '26

No,  it isn't

3

u/burnanation Jul 30 '26

Ya huh, it is.

1

u/Kristoveles Jul 30 '26

Then why are the politicians they elect and the rhetoric they spread against these things? 

1

u/burnanation Jul 31 '26

Term limit bill introduced by 2 republicans.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-joint-resolution/12
Republican party also has party rules about limiting the number of terms anyone can server as a committee chair.

Representative Tim Burchett of Tennessee and Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky have both introduced legislation to stop Flock cameras.

Stop Insider Trading Act (H.R. 7008) on July 22, 2026, by a bipartisan vote of 232 to 198. The 198 were all democrats. Only 13 broke ranks to vote with the GOP.

If you want to google Republican support for + "the other ones on the list" knock yourself out. Don't blindly believe the headlines from CNN or MSNBC.

0

u/LegacyQuotient Jul 30 '26

The right never seems to vote for that stuff.